SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda February 22, 2010; 10:30 AM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info 1 Call to Order
2 Approval of Agenda
3 Committee Reports and Recommendations
3.1 Committee of the Whole Recommendations of January 26, 2010: n/a
2010 – 2014 Draft Financial Plan:
1. Treaty Advisory PLTAC (1600) THAT the PLTAC Treaty Advisory budget be approved as circulated.
2. Treaty Advisory LMTAC (1601) THAT the LMTAC Treaty Advisory budget be approved as circulated.
3. Gold Bridge Community Complex (2107) THAT the Gold Bridge Community Complex budget be approved as circulated.
4. Sea to Sky Economic Development (3101) THAT the Sea to Sky Economic Development cost centre be renamed to Economic Development; and that $5000 be included in the Economic Development budget.
THAT up to $5000 be allocated from the Feasibility Studies fund to facilitate discussions concerning feasibility of a regional economic development service.
5. General Government Services (1000) THAT the General Government budget be approved as circulated.
6. Regional Growth Strategy (1201) THAT the Regional Growth Strategy budget be approved as circulated. SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 2 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info 7. Solid Waste Management Planning (1300) THAT the Solid Waste Management Planning budget be approved as circulated.
3.2 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee n/a Recommendations of January 21, 2010:
1. Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Pemberton Festival THAT the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Pemberton Festival with revisions to Sections 7, 10, 11 and 12 be recommended to the board for approval.
2. 2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review
Recreation Commission – Pemberton (2100) THAT the Pemberton Recreation Commission budget be recommended for approval as presented.
Economic Development – Pemberton/Area C (3103). THAT the Pemberton/Area C Economic Development budget be recommended for approval as presented.
3.3 Electoral Area Directors Committee Recommendations of n/a February 8, 2010:
1. 2010 – 2014 Draft Financial Plan:
Emergency Planning (1761)
THAT the Emergency Planning budget be approved in principle;
AND THAT the SLRD explore salaries of other Emergency Programme Managers, capable of filling in as an Emergency Operation Centre Director, in similar Regional Districts.
2. Managing Forest Fuels in the Wildland Urban Interface Report THAT the Managing Forest Fuels in the Wildland Urban Interface Report be referred to Staff for comment, and report to
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 2 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 3 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info the Board at the March 22, 2010 Board meeting.
3. Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan THAT the Board attend the March 8th Electoral Area Directors Committee meeting or schedule a Committee of the Whole meeting before the end of March, to meet with Zbeetnoff Agro- Environmental Consulting and Quadra Planning Consultants to discuss implications of the draft Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan.
3.4 Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Recommendations of n/a January 20, 2010:
1. OCP Amendment / Rezoning for Copperdome Lodge THAT the Regional Board oppose the application for an OCP Amendment / Rezoning for the Copperdome Lodge, given: - The incompatibility of the proposed use and adjacent active farm operations; - The lack of oversight and the lack of (and insufficient room for) an acceptable buffer between a proposed tourist commercial use and the adjacent surrounding farm operations; - a history and continued risk of confrontation, complaints and litigation; - a perceived bio-security risk that could negatively impact surrounding farm operations; and - the change would not result in a net benefit to agriculture
2. Update on Farm Home Plate Bylaw THAT an extra-ordinary meeting to further explore the wording of the bylaw be arranged with Staff for February 2010; and that all members of the 2009 Committee be also invited to join the discussion
3. Application to Modify Crown Land Lease – Geoff & Brenda McLeod THAT the Board support the amendment to the grazing license provided that fencing can be installed that does not negatively impact the integrity of the dyke.
4 Bylaws
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 3 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 4 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info 4.1 Unweighted Corporate Vote
4.1.1 Bylaw 1073 - Electoral Area B Official Community Plan 14 Adoption Bylaw No. 1073, 2008 - Electoral Area B Official Community Plan
THAT Bylaw No. 1073, 2008, cited as ‘Electoral Area B Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 1073, 2008’ be adopted.
4.1.2 Bylaw 1141 - Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas 89 A &B Zoning Bylaw No.670, 1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1141, 2009 - Industrial Rezoning, Wayside Avenue, Gold Bridge, Electoral Area A
1. THAT Bylaw No. 1141, cited as ‘Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A & B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1141, 2009’ be read a second time, as amended.
2. THAT the Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District delegate the holding of a public hearing for consideration of Bylaw 1141 to Area “A” Director Russ Oakley with Director Mickey Macri as alternate, pursuant to Section 891 of the Local Government Act.
3. THAT the public hearing for consideration of Bylaw No. 1141 be scheduled for Wednesday, April 21, 2010 at 7 PM at the Gold Bridge Community Club.
4.1.3 Bylaw 1161 - Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw 98 No. 689, Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010 - Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan, Electoral Area C
1. THAT Bylaw No. 1161, cited as ‘Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010’ be introduced and read a first time.
2. THAT Bylaw No. 1161 be referred to the Village of Pemberton, Lower Stl'atl'imx Land and Resource Authority, Lil’wat Nation, and provincial and federal agencies for comment.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 4 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 5 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info 4.1.4 Bylaw 1162- Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw 132 No. 689, 1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1162, 2009 - Official Community Plan Amendment at Copperdome Lodge, Electoral Area C
1. THAT the Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee comments be received with respect to the Copperdome Lodge OCP and rezoning application.
2. THAT Bylaw No. 1162, 2009, cited as “Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, 1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1162, 2009” (Copperdome Lodge) be read a second time.
3. THAT a public hearing for consideration of Bylaw No. 1162 be scheduled for Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 7 PM at the Pemberton Community Centre.
4. THAT the Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District delegate the holding of a public hearing for consideration of Bylaws 1162 to Area “C” Director Susie Gimse with Director Jordan Sturdy as alternate, pursuant to Section 891 of the Local Government Act.
4.1.5 Bylaw No. 1163 - Electoral Area C Zoning Bylaw 765, 2002, 132 Amendment Bylaw No. 1163, 2009 – Rezoning at Copperdome Lodge, Electoral Area C
1. THAT the Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee comments be received with respect to the Copperdome Lodge OCP and rezoning application.
2. THAT Bylaw No. 1163, 2009, cited as “Electoral Area C Zoning Bylaw 765, 2002, Amendment Bylaw No. 1163, 2009” (Copperdome Lodge) be introduced and read a first time and second time.
3. THAT a public hearing for consideration of Bylaw No. 1163 be scheduled for Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 7 PM at the Pemberton Community Centre.
4. THAT the Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District delegate the holding of a public hearing for consideration of Bylaw 1163 to Area “C” Director Susie Gimse with Director
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 5 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 6 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info Jordan Sturdy as alternate, pursuant to Section 891 of the Local Government Act.
4.1.6 Bylaw 1179 - Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Bylaw No. 863, 145 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1179, 2010 - Building Bylaw – Climatic Data
1. THAT Bylaw No. 1179, cited as “Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Bylaw No. 863, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1179, 2010” be introduced, and read a first, second and third time.
2. THAT Bylaw No. 1179, cited as “Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Bylaw No. 863, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1179, 2010” be adopted.
4.1.7 Bylaw 1184 – Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area 150 C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1184, 2010 - Amendments to Bylaw 848 Agricultural Advisory Committee Establishment Bylaw
1. THAT Bylaw No. 1184, cited as ‘Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1184, 2010’ be introduced and read a first, second, and third time.
2. THAT Bylaw No. 1184, cited as ‘Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1184, 2010’ be adopted.
5 Staff Reports and Other Business
5.1 Unweighted Corporate Vote
5.1.1 Amendments to the Tier 2 RSP (“Regionally Significant 155 Projects”) Gas Tax Grant Agreement
THAT the SLRD Board support amendments to the SLRD Tier 2 RSP (Gas Tax) Grant agreement with UBCM in accordance with the following particulars:
A. The portion of the Tier 2 Grant Funds attributable to the Squamish Commuter Corridor Trail is to be administered directly between UBCM and the District of Squamish;
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 6 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 7 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info
B. UBCM shall payout directly to the District of Squamish, in accordance with the payment guidelines, the designated Squamish Commuter Corridor Trail grant funds of $540,000.00 and the District of Squamish shall provide all requisite reports directly to UBCM with respect to these funds;
C. The District of Squamish shall also undertake the improvements for the Squamish Bus Pullouts and Shelters and shall report directly to UBCM with respect thereto;
D. UBCM shall payout directly to the District of Squamish, in accordance with the payment guidelines, the designated grant funds for these bus pullouts and shelters totalling $115,000;
E. The balance of the Tier 2 grant funds totalling $536,531 payable to the SLRD pursuant to its application shall be administered between UBCM and the SLRD, supported by an amended agreement with respect thereto, specifying completion date of December 12, 2012, the details of which are as follows:
3(b) The balance of bus pullouts and shelters under clause 3(b) not transferred to the District of Squamish totalling $126,531:
(vii) SLRD - Highway 99 North & South @ Black Tusk: • Shelter - $10,000 • Lighting - $6,531
(viii) Whistler - Highway 99 Northbound @ Function Junction: • Shelter - $25,000 • Lighting - $10,000
(ix) Whistler – Highway 99 Southbound @ Function Junction: • Pullout - $20,000 • Shelter - $25,000 • Lighting - $10,000
(x) SLRD – Highway 99 North & South @ Furry Creek • Shelters - $20,000
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 7 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 8 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info
3(c) Whistler to Pemberton Commuter Bus Pullouts and Shelters totalling $380,000:
(i) Highway 99 Northbound @ Spruce Grove/Nesters: • Pullout - $10,000
(ii) Whistler – Highway 99 Southbound @ Spruce Grove/ Nesters: • Pullout - $20,000 • Shelter - $15,000 • Lighting - $10,000
(iii) Whistler - Highway 99 Northbound Alpine Meadows: • Pullout - $10,000 • Shelter - $15,000 • Lighting - $10,000
(iv) Whistler- Highway 99 Northbound @ Emerald Estates: • Pullout - $20,000 • Shelter - $15,000
(v) Whistler - Highway 99 Southbound @ Emerald Estates: • Pullout - $20,000
(vi) Pemberton – Highway 99 Northbound @ Creekside: • Pullout - $10,000
(vii) Pemberton – Highway 99 Southbound @ Creekside: • Pullout - $10,000 • Shelter - $10,000 • Lighting - $25,000
(viii) Pemberton- Highway 99 Northbound @ Harrow Rd: • Pullout - $10,000 • Shelters - $10,000 • Lighting - $5,000
(ix) Pemberton – Highway 99 Southbound @ Harrow Rd: • Pullout - $10,000 • Shelters - $10,000 • Lighting - $5,000
(x) Pemberton – Highway 99 Southbound @ Petrocan:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 8 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 9 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info • Shelter - $10,000 • Lighting - $5,000
(xi) Pemberton - Highway 99 Northbound @ Visitor Info. Centre, Pemberton: • Pullout - $20,000
(xii) Pemberton - Portage Rd. Northbound at the Pemberton Health Care Centre: • Pullout - $20,000 • Shelter - $10,000
(xiii) Mt.Currie – Main St. @ 10 Rd: • Pullout - $10,000 • Shelter - $10,000 • Lighting - $5,000
(xiv) Xit’olacw – General Store: • Pullout - $10,000 • Shelter - $10,000 • Lighting - $5,000
(xv) Xit’olacw – Creekside @ School Rd: • Shelter - $10,000 • Lighting - $5,000
3(d) Pemberton - Mt.Currie Hwy. 99 Connector Trail Lighting: 1.5kms @ $20,000/km = $30,000.
5.1.2 Celebrate Canada Funding Application 159
THAT the Board approve that Linda Brown be authorized to submit a funding request to the Department of Canadian Heritage in relation to the Celebrate Canada Program for organizing activities to celebrate Canada Day.
5.1.3 Request for a Meeting with the Regional Board from CAO, 168 Metro Vancouver Regional District
5.1.4 School District No. 48 Policy Impact Forms 169
THAT the SLRD advise School District No. 48 that it has no objections to Policy 601.4 Environmental Sustainability; Policy
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 9 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 10 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info and Regulations 905.1 and R905.1 Permanent School Closure /905.2 and R905.2 Disposal and Acquisition of Land or Improvements; and Policy and Regulations 903.4 Emergency Preparedness.
5.1.5 Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to 188 Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) Recommendations
THAT the Regional Board pass the following motion with respect to the proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area:
“THAT the Ministry of Environment be requested to consider including a member of the SLRD’s Agricultural Advisory Committee (or another representative of the Pemberton Valley farming community) for appointment to the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Plan Management Committee, if established.”
5.1.6 Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge Neighbourhood 197 Concept Plan Official Community Plan (OCP) Amendment / Rezoning process
THAT the Regional Board endorse the attached Terms of Reference for processing the Sunstone Ridge Neighbourhood Concept Plan Official Community Plan Amendment / Rezoning Applications.
5.1.7 Future Growth Context - Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment 207 / Rezoning For information
5.1.8 Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist for development 213 review For information
5.1.9 Regional Growth Strategy Final Proposal Arbitration - Electoral 221 Area Directors’ Participation For information
5.1.10 Climate and Energy Action Plan February 2010 Progress Update 225 For information
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 10 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 11 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info 5.1.11 Pavilion Lake Bylaw Enforcement Issue 257 For information
5.1.12 Indian Band Taxation Certificate Squamish Nation 259 For information
6 Correspondence Requesting Action
6.1 Kerry Ness – Scout Lodge on Kwontlenemo (Fountain) Lake – 271 Request for Funding Referred from January Regular Board Meeting
6.2 Local Government Elections Task Force Forum 273
7 Confirmation and Receipt of Minutes
7.1 Regular Board Meeting Minutes – January 25, 2010 275 For confirmation as circulated or as corrected.
7.2 Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes – January 26, 2010 288 For confirmation as circulated or as corrected.
7.3 Electoral Area Directors Committee Meeting Minutes – February 8, 292 2010 For information
7.4 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Meeting Minutes – 296 January 12, and 21, 2010 For information
7.5 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 303 – January 26, 2010 For information
7.6 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission 307 Meeting Minutes – January 18, 2010 For information
7.7 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission 309 Meeting Minutes – January 25, 2010 For information
7.8 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission 311
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 11 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 12 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2010 For information
7.9 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission 312 Meeting Minutes – February 9, 2010 For information
7.10 Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – January 20, 314 2010 For Information
8 Business Arising from the Minutes
9 Correspondence for Information
9.1 RMCP Contract Renewal Negotiations – Update 317
9.2 St’át’imc Nxekmenlhkálha New Years Memorial Powwow 329
9.3 UBCM Membership 330
9.4 Southern Stl’atl’imx Communities Grid Connection Project 331
9.5 Federation of Canadian Municipalities - SLRD Climate and Energy 333 Action Plan
9.6 Fraser Basin Council – Thompson Regional Committee Meetings 334
9.7 Local Government Elections Task Force 356
9.8 Provincial Response to 2009 UBCM Resolution 359
10 Delegations and Petitions
10.1 Andrew Beaird, EABB Planning Services - Sunstone Ridge Consultant
11 Decision on Late Business (only if required)
THAT the late items be considered at this meeting. (requires 2/3 majority vote)
12 Late Business
13 Directors’ Reports (matters of information, not requiring action)
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 12 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda - 13 - February 22, 2010
Item Item of Business and Recommended Action Page Action Info
14 Board In-Camera Meeting
Resolution to move In-Camera
THAT the Board move In-Camera under the authority of Section 90 (1) (a) of the Community Charter.
15 Termination
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 13 of 361 Request for Decision
Bylaw 1073 – Electoral Area B Official Community Plan
Date: February 9, 2010
Recommendation: THAT Bylaw No. 1073, 2008, cited as ‘Electoral Area B Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 1073, 2008’ be adopted.
CAO Comments: I concur with the recommendation. PRE
Who Votes: All
Recommendation Report/Document: Attached __ Available __ Nil __ X
Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined: As per the terms of reference for the project, the following issues are addressed in Bylaw 1073:
protection of water quality and fish habitat (implementing the Riparian Area Regulations through a development permit area); wildfire protection (also implemented through a development permit area); an assessment of how growing families are accommodated in rural areas, including a review of the number of houses permitted per parcel and minimum parcel sizes; highway maintenance and other recommendations for provincial agencies; preservation of ALR lands and support for the agricultural community; parks; future community growth; recreational opportunities and access management; recommended revisions to the zoning bylaw; First Nations’ land use plans; community input regarding independent power projects; appropriate scale and density of development on Pavilion Lake; and, updated policies for the Duffy Lake Corridor.
In October 2009, Bylaw 1073 was sent to the Ministry of Community and Rural Development for approval. The bylaw was approved in early February 2010.
Relevant Policy: • Local Government Act • SLRD Electoral Areas A & B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999; • Pavilion Lake OCP Bylaw No. 770, 2002; • Seton Portage OCP Bylaw No. 922, 2004; • Duffey Lake Corridor OCP Bylaw No. 479, 1992
Strategic Relevance: Developing the Electoral Area B OCP was a 2009 strategic priority of the Board.
Desired Outcome(s): 1. Compliance with provincial legislation, 2. an Official Community Plan that leads to informed land use decisions that balance the values of the community.
Response Options: 1. Adopt the bylaw.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 14 of 361 Preferred Strategy: 1. Adopt the bylaw. Implications Of Recommendation
General: The Local Government Act states that OCPs should be reviewed every five years. There are three OCPs that will be consolidated and updated as part of the new Electoral Area B OCP: the Seton Portage – Shalalth OCP (completed in 2004), the Pavilion Lake OCP (completed in 2002), and the Duffy Lake Corridor OCP (completed in 1992).
Organizational: The Electoral Area B OCP was a major project scheduled for completion in 2009.
Financial: The project budget was $5000, of which approximately $1500 was spent.
Legal: The new Riparian Development Permit Area will bring the SLRD into compliance with provincial regulations for the protection of streamside areas.
Follow Up Action: February 2010 – Complete administrative work for the bylaw (filing, update website, etc.)
Communication: February 2010 – Staff will be informed of the status of the bylaw.
Other Comments: n/a
Submitted by: Planner, Amica Antonelli Reviewed by: Director of Planning and Development, Steven Olmstead Approved by: CAO, Paul Edgington
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 15 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area B Official Community Plan
0
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 16 of 361 AUGUST 2009
SQUAMISH LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NO. 1073, 2008
A bylaw of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District to adopt an Official Community Plan for Electoral Area B.
WHEREAS the Board of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District wishes to adopt a new Electoral Area B Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Regional Board of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. This bylaw may be cited for all purposes as ‘Electoral Area B Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 1073, 2008.’
2. Schedule A to Electoral Area B Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 1073, 2008 is attached to and forms part of this bylaw.
3. The Duffey Lake Corridor Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 479, 1992 is rescinded.
4. The Seton Portage and Anderson/Seton Lakes Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 922, 2004 is rescinded.
5. The Pavilion Lake Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 770, 2002 is rescinded.
READ A FIRST TIME this 26th day of January , 2009.
READ A SECOND TIME this 27th day of April , 2009.
PUBLIC HEARING held on the 13th day of May , 2009.
READ A SECOND TIME as amended this 24th day of August , 2009.
SECOND PUBLIC HEARING held on the 9th day of September , 2009.
READ A THIRD TIME this day of , 2009.
APPROVED BY THE MINISTER OF COMMUNITY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT on this day of , 2009.
ADOPTED this day of , 2009.
______Russ Oakley Paul R. Edgington Chair Chief Administrative Officer
I hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of Bylaw No. 1073 cited as ‘Electoral Area B Official Community Plan Adoption Bylaw No. 1073, 2008’ as read a third time.
1
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 17 of 361 AUGUST 2009
______Paul R. Edgington Chief Administrative Officer
2
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 18 of 361 AUGUST 2009
SCHEDULE A
ELECTORAL AREA B OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 4
PLANNING PROCESS...... 4 AMENDING THE PLAN ...... 5 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREAS...... 5 COMMUNITY ...... 5
1. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ...... 5 2. CULTURAL HERITAGE ...... 8 3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ...... 9 4. GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION STRATEGY ...... 12 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 14
5. BIODIVERSITY ...... 14 6. NATURAL HAZARDS ...... 18 SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 22
7. SERVICES &UTILITIES ...... 22 8. TRANSPORTATION ...... 23 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ...... 25
9. RESIDENTIAL AND RURAL RESIDENTIAL ...... 25 10. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ...... 27 11. AGRICULTURE ...... 32 12. COMMERCIAL AND RESORT COMMERCIAL ...... 34 13. INDUSTRIAL ...... 35 14. INSTITUTIONAL ...... 36 15. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREA ...... 36 16. PARK ...... 37 PAVILION LAKE SUB-AREA PLAN ...... 39
SETON PORTAGE SUB-AREA PLAN ...... 45
YALAKOM VALLEY SUB-AREA PLAN ...... 53
MAPS:
Map 1: Electoral Area B Overview Map 7: Seton Portage Sub-area Plan Map 2: Critical Wildlife Habitats Map 8: Seton Portage Land Use Map 3: Riparian Assessment Areas Map 9: Yalakom Valley Land Use Map 4: Terrain Stability Map 10: Recreation Sites & Trails Map 5: Electoral Area B Land Use Map 6: Pavilion Lake Land Use
3
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 19 of 361 AUGUST 2009
INTRODUCTION
The Electoral Area B Official Community Plan (OCP) contains objectives, policies, and land use designations adopted by the Squamish Lillooet Regional District Board of Directors. The purpose of these objectives, policies, and designations is to provide direction for land use and development that are consistent with the community values of the electoral area. The policies of the plan are meant to balance the demands placed on the land base in order to ensure an equitable, comprehensive, and logical distribution of land uses. Policies are often implemented on a long-term basis, generally over a 10 to 15 year period.
The OCP provides a basis for the following actions:
a) The adoption or amendment of land use regulations, such as the zoning bylaw; b) The direction of public and private investment; c) The guidance of elected officials, and others having statutory approval authority, in the evaluation of proposals, referrals, and amendment of bylaws; and, d) Bringing the SLRD into compliance with provincial regulations, such as the Riparian Area Regulation and the greenhouse gas management requirements of the Local Government Act.
The Electoral Area B OCP updates and consolidates three previously written OCPs, and provides new policy direction for the electoral area as a whole. The following OCPs are consolidated into the Electoral Area B OCP:
1. Pavilion Lake (originally written in 2002), 2. Seton Portage (originally written in 2004), and, 3. Duffey Lake Corridor (originally written in 1992).
Six communities are addressed in the Electoral Area B OCP. These six communities are Seton Portage- Shalalth, Yalakom Valley, Bridge River/West Pavilion, Texas Creek, Fountain, and Pavilion Lake. Policies are provided to address community planning, economic development, cultural heritage, biodiversity, natural hazards, utilities, transportation, and land use. Policy direction is also provided for the Duffey Lake Corridor.
This OCP also has three sub-area plans for the following communities:
1. Pavilion Lake, 2. Seton Portage, and, 3. Yalakom Valley.
PLANNING PROCESS
The development of the Electoral Area B OCP was initiated in 2007. Invitations for early participation in the review process were sent to adjacent local governments, First Nations, School District #74, and provincial agencies.
Consultation and discussions with the District of Lillooet, the St'át'imc Nation, the Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Forests and Range, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of
4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 20 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Tourism, Sport and the Arts, the Integrated Land Management Bureau, the Agricultural Land Commission, BC Parks, and School District #74 occurred throughout the development of the OCP.
A series of public open houses and meetings were held in Lillooet and the Yalakom Valley during the course of the plan review. Following first reading of the bylaw, a public hearing was held to provide an opportunity for formal comment on the plan in bylaw form.
AMENDING THE PLAN
An OCP is not intended to be a static document. Rather, it is intended to be adaptable to new trends within society and responsive to changing circumstances within the community. As such, following careful consideration by the SLRD Board, policies and land use designations in this OCP may be revised by an amending bylaw pursuant to provisions outlined within the Local Government Act. A comprehensive review of the OCP should occur every five to ten years.
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREAS
Two Development Permit Areas (DPA) are designated within Electoral Area B:
Development Permit Area 1: Riparian Assessment Area This DPA regulates any alteration of the land or construction adjacent to waterbodies for the purposes of maintaining water quality and protecting fish habitat. Essentially, it governs all lands within 30 meters of a waterbody. See policies 5.6 to 5.13 for more information.
Development Permit Area 2: Wildfire Protection This DPA regulates construction on all property within Electoral Area B for the purposes of ensuring wildfire mitigation measures are in place. See policies 6.12 to 6.19 for more information.
COMMUNITY
1. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Context
Within Electoral Area B there are seven communities or neighbourhoods: Seton Portage – Shalalth, the Yalakom Valley, Bridge River/West Pavilion, Texas Creek, Fountain, Pavilion Lake, and the Duffey Lake Corridor. These communities and the surrounding area encompass 3,461 square kilometres of land. Electoral Area B surrounds one incorporated municipality, the District of Lillooet, which is not covered by this OCP. Neighbouring jurisdictions include the Thompson Nicola Regional District to the north and the east, and the Cariboo Regional District to the north.
Electoral Area B is home to approximately 1750 people. 2006 Statistics Canada data reports that approximately 600 of those people are living outside of Indian Reserves (IR), and 1100 are living within IRs. The census data shows a great deal of variation between census periods, likely as a result of boundary shifts and changes in data collection methods, rather than actual population change. The census data shows a decrease in population of 16 per cent between the 1996 and 2001, and an increase of 36 per
5
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 21 of 361 AUGUST 2009 cent between 2001 and 2006. IR populations are also shown as fluctuating quite widely. The total population of the District of Lillooet, the closest service centre for residents of Electoral Area B, was 2,324 in 2006. Lillooet’s population in 2001 was 2,741, representing a decline of 15.2 per cent between 2001 and 2006.
Populations of individual communities within Electoral Area B are not always known. The following provides a brief summary of each of the seven communities within Electoral Area B:
Seton Portage – Shalalth - Seton Portage is a small community of approximately 300 residents located between Anderson and Seton Lakes. Adjacent to Seton Portage and situated on the north- western shore of Seton Lake is Shalalth, home to approximately 500 members of the Seton Lake Band. The IRs in this community are named Slosh, Seton Lake, Whitecap, Mission and Necait. Along the shore of Anderson Lake, between Seton Portage and D’Arcy, there are also some small recreational and farming communities.
Yalakom Valley - The Yalakom Valley is home to a small rural community. There are approximately thirty large parcels of land in the valley with an average size of fifty hectares. Moha is the name given to the lands located at the confluence of the Yalakom and Bridge Rivers. There are no IRs in the Yalakom Valley.
Bridge River and West Pavilion - For the purposes of the OCP, Bridge River is considered to be those lands along Highway 40 between the Yalakom and Fraser Rivers. The bulk of this area is encompassed by the Bridge River IR, which has a population of approximately 200 people. The confluence of the Bridge and Fraser Rivers is the location of the Bridge River Fishing Grounds, known as Six Mile or Setl.
West Pavilion is home to several ranching families. There are approximately 50 parcels in West Pavilion ranging in size from twenty hectares to 260 hectares. These parcels are accessed via Highway 40 and the West Pavilion Road (west of Lillooet).
Texas Creek - Texas Creek, located on the western shore of the Fraser River where it runs between Lillooet and Lytton, has approximately sixty-five parcels of land and a number of IRs (Pashilqua, Kilchult, Riley Creek, Towinock, and Nesikep).
Fountain - There are approximately forty parcels of land in the Fountain area, as well as several IRs (Fountain, Quatlenemo, Chilhil, Fish Lake, and Nesikep). The parcels range in size from 0.2 hectare lots lining Fountain Lake to sixty hectare parcels.
Pavilion Lake - There are approximately fifty small parcels of land surrounding Pavilion Lake. On neighboring lands west of Highway 99 but east of the Fraser River, including the Pear Lake area and the Pavilion-Clinton Road, there are approximately forty parcels. Many of these parcels are consolidated into a single large ranch. The Ts’kw’aylaxw Nation’s traditional territory is centered on the Pavilion IR, located near the western end of Pavilion Lake.
Duffey Lake Corridor - The Duffey Lake Corridor has only a few parcels of private land and no significant areas of residential development. It is an important recreation corridor for residents of the Sea to Sky Corridor, as well as Vancouver and beyond. Land use and resource management is largely governed by the Sea to Sky Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP), which was completed in 2008, and the draft Lillooet LRMP, which was completed in 2004.
6
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 22 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Significant growth is not anticipated for Electoral Area B, although the increased provision of services is desired in some areas. The following objectives and policies provide general direction for community growth and development within Electoral Area B as a whole. More specific details on community growth and character are addressed in the sub-area plans for Pavilion Lake, Seton Portage, and the Yalakom Valley.
Objectives
To recognize existing long-standing land uses within the area. To ensure the development of the community progresses in a way that is responsive to the needs and values of the residents, and consistent with provincial legislation.
Policies
1.1. Priority shall be given to the preservation of rural character and ecological integrity when planning for community growth and development. 1.2. Seton Portage and the District of Lillooet are recognized as the ‘service centres’ for Electoral Area B, where institutional and larger-scale commercial uses are encouraged to locate. 1.3. The objectives, policies, and land use designations within this plan are adopted with the understanding that existing long-standing land and subsurface uses may continue. 1.4. The Regional District encourages coordination among the municipal, provincial, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over land use planning and resource management within and surrounding the plan area. 1.5. In planning for developments of regional significance, consideration shall be given to the interests of the St'át'imc and Lil’wat Nations. 1.6. The Regional District encourages the development of community advisory groups and other committees to allow for increased participation and influence by residents of Electoral Area B on future planning and development. 1.7. The Regional District supports additional sub-area planning for those affected by intensive recreation or development. 1.8. The Regional District endorses Smart Growth principles as a framework for sustainable community development, including the following: a) distinct, attractive, economically sustainable communities with a strong sense of place; b) urban development should be directed toward existing communities (avoiding urban and rural sprawl); c) compact, complete, and mixed-use1 neighbourhoods; d) walkable communities; e) a variety of low impact transportation options; f) a range of affordable housing options; g) responsible stewardship of green spaces and sensitive areas;
1 Mixed use neighbourhoods are those neighbourhoods where residents can live, recreate, shop, and work. The land use zoning should allow for a mix of commercial, residential, industrial, institutional, etc cetera.
7
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 23 of 361 AUGUST 2009
h) integrity of a productive agricultural and forestry land base; i) energy efficient infrastructure; j) early and ongoing public involvement that respects community values and visions; k) a culture of cooperation, coordination, and collaboration between local governments, provincial agencies, federal agencies, and First Nations.
Governance
1.9. The 2008 District of Lillooet OCP does not identify any non-IR lands within Electoral Area B as being needed to accommodate future growth. Where future growth nodes are identified on the boundaries of Lillooet, and a comprehensive servicing analysis demonstrates the feasibility of urban expansion, the land to be developed should be included at an appropriate time within the District. 1.10.The planning process for boundary expansion should be undertaken as a collaborative effort by the District of Lillooet, the SLRD, the St'át'imc Nation, landowners, residents, and provincial agencies. The planning process should reflect the objectives and policies of this plan, the policies of the District of Lillooet, and the values and economic aspirations of the St'át'imc Nation and other members of the community.
2. CULTURAL HERITAGE
Context
Electoral Area B is the traditional territory of the St'át'imc and Lil’wat Nations. Large hunter-gatherer winter villages of 500 to 1000 people historically existed alongside the region’s lakes and rivers. Rich salmon stocks supported the aboriginal economy.
Europeans first came to the area in 1808, which was the year of Simon Fraser's journey through the region as he sought a passage to the Pacific Ocean. Hudson Bay Company employees began to arrive in the 1820s and 1840s. This was followed by the gold rush of 1858. Settlers began farming along the fertile river bottoms and benches in the mid 1850s. Lillooet was the terminus of the Douglas/Harrison trail and Mile 0 of the Cariboo Road. At the peak of the gold rush, Lillooet had a population of 16,000 people. The railway arrived in 1912.
For the majority of time that people have lived within Electoral Area B, no written records were made. Archaeological sites and oral tradition are the only vestiges of the area’s rich history, which extends back many thousands of years. Archaeological sites contain unique information about the region’s past and are protected under the Heritage Conservation Act on both private and Crown land, and whether the sites are known or unrecorded.
Data from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and the Arts’ Archaeology Branch indicates that within the plan area there are a large number of St'át'imc and Lil’wat historical sites and artefacts dating from the pre-European contact era. These historical sites and artefacts include village sites, pictographs, pit houses, storage and cooking pits, stone tools, burial sites, culturally modified trees, and historic trails. For example, the Anderson Lake pack trail and Douglas Trail were used as major trade and transportation routes prior to the arrival of Europeans. There are old village sites and the remains of pit houses scattered throughout Electoral Area B, such as at Tiffin, several kilometres south of the Ts'kw'aylaxw Band
8
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 24 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Office, and on Anderson Lake in Seton Portage. Other archaeological resources within Electoral Area B include old mining cabins and remains of early non-native settlements and mining operations. The Seton Portage Historic Provincial Park commemorates the location of the first railway in British Columbia.
Through the Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and the Arts’ Archaeology Branch, archaeological potential mapping is available to identify areas where unrecorded archaeological sites are likely to occur.
Objective
To support the identification, protection, and conservation of heritage resources, including historical buildings, pre-contact archaeological sites, and historic trails.
Policies
2.1. Development proponents shall consider the significance of heritage resources during all phases of project planning, design, implementation, and operation. 2.2. Where a development overlaps with a known archaeological site, a qualified archaeologist shall be engaged by the developer to determine the appropriate measures for managing impacts to the archaeological resources. 2.3. As per Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and the Arts requirements, developers shall have a heritage permit to alter or develop within an archaeological site. 2.4. The Regional District encourages the development of a heritage inventory and designation of heritage trails by interested parties. 2.5. The Regional District shall promote the use of St'át'imc and Lil’wat place names.
3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Context
Statistics Canada reports that within Electoral Area B, an equal share of jobs is provided by the following five sectors: agriculture and resource based industries, manufacturing and construction, health and education, business services, including tourism, and ‘other services’, which includes wholesale and retail trade. This employment mix reflects the current shift away from a resource-based economy, and also, that the service centre of Lillooet provides much of the employment to Electoral Area B residents.
A number of economic development plans and studies have been carried out for the District of Lillooet and the surrounding areas, including Electoral Area B. Many of these studies emphasize building on the existing tourism industry to bolster the local economy. Existing tourism operations within Electoral Area B include rafting tours, heliskiing, snowmobiling, guest ranches, and golf. New tourism operations developed in a locally responsive manner are reported to have support from the community. The 2008 Tourism Development Plan developed for the District of Lillooet lists resorts, touring products, adventure products, cultural heritage interpretation, and agritourism as providing the best opportunity for tourism development in the region. There has also been First Nation interest in developing cultural tourism products featuring dancing, storytelling, carving, and aboriginal art. Agriculture, and agritourism in particular, have potential to grow within Electoral Area B. In 2007, provincial government funding was allocated to a feasibility assessment of growing wine grapes in the Lillooet area.
9
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 25 of 361 AUGUST 2009
A significant factor limiting tourism and other economic development within Electoral Area B is the remoteness of the area from major centres, and the rough condition of regional transportation routes into the area. These factors affect the number of tourists coming to the area, the ability of local merchants to access supplies, and the number of permanent residents that support local businesses year round. The Enhanced Economic Direction for the Squamish Lillooet Regional District (October 2001) study identified improved transportation linkages to Electoral Areas A and B, and sustained and expanded passenger rail service to Lillooet, as important priorities. The SLRD’s Regional Growth Strategy also emphasizes the need for improved transportation linkages.
A second explanation for the relatively slow growth of the tourism industry within Lillooet and Electoral Area B suggested in the 2005 Lillooet-Lytton Tourism Diversification Project is the lack of an established destination resort and accommodation. This is seen as an obstacle to developing other tourism offerings. A multi-season, larger scale resort related to golf or downhill skiing was suggested in the study as the needed magnet to attract tourists into the area. Boutique lodges are another concept promoted for building on tourism in Electoral Area B.
Sites that have been suggested for boutique lodges, similar to the Tyax Resort in Electoral Area A, include various locations along the main stem of the Fraser River, the confluence of the Bridge and Fraser Rivers, on Seton Lake, on local ranches, and in the Upper Yalakom Valley and Shulaps area. In the 1990s a large-scale resort was proposed for Electoral Area B, namely the Cayoosh Ski Resort in the Duffey Lake Corridor. This proposal had broad community support, but failed to proceed due to unresolved issues associated with aboriginal interests and potential environmental impacts.
Several of the areas suggested as suitable for golf resort development fall within the ALR: the current Sheep Pasture golf Course in Texas Creek, and the Diamond S. Ranch. A potentially more suitable location for golf-related development may be the Kamenka Lands, which are within the District of Lillooet, and are not in the ALR.
Relocation to rural centres, including Lillooet and Electoral Area B, is anticipated to be a significant demographic phenomenon over the next two decades. Economic development within Electoral Area B can be expected to grow in relation to this population growth. Other areas of British Columbia featuring similar climates, beautiful scenery, and reasonable real estate prices, for example, Merritt and the Nicola valley, have been experiencing steady population growth due to an increasing number of retirees and knowledge workers. The ability of knowledge workers to relocate to rural areas is contingent on the availability of suitable communications systems, such as high-speed internet. High-speed internet is available in Lillooet, but is lacking from much of Electoral Area B. Similarly with home based business, one of the limiting factors to growth in home-based businesses is the limited amount of business services available locally.
While the majority of the community is in support of some economic growth and development in Electoral Area B, support for a ‘steady state’ economy has also been voiced. The steady state economy provides an alternative to the traditional economic goal of promoting a constantly growing economy, and has the aim of eliminating the fundamental conflict between economic growth, biodiversity conservation, and maintenance of ecological services. The Lillooet Naturalists Society advocates for a steady state economy, where the economy is established at a size that does not breach the ecological capacity of the region.
10
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 26 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Objective
To foster a diversified economy that meets local and visitor needs, that contributes to the rural character of the area, and stimulates healthy ecological and social conditions.
Policies
3.1. The District of Lillooet and Seton Portage are supported as the primary centres for commercial activity and community services. 3.2. Pursuant to section 920.2 of the Local Government Act, all lands within the plan area are designated as areas where temporary commercial or industrial uses may be permitted through an application to the Regional District. 3.3. Future rezonings, subdivisions, and building permits for commercial properties should promote the use of the land by small- and medium-format businesses that are locally responsive and preserve the character of the area. 3.4. The Regional District encourages the provincial government and private businesses to assist in providing the best and most current communication systems. 3.5. The Regional District encourages provincial agencies, particularly the BC Transmission Corporation, BC Hydro, and the Ministry of Forests and Range, to protect the scenic values along all major highway corridors.
Tourism 3.6. The development of small- and medium-scale tourism operations is supported, including agritourism operations associated with farms. 3.7. Large-scale tourism proposals shall be considered where they reflect policies contained in the SLRD Regional Growth Strategy regarding major resort development. 3.8. The development of Agricultural Land Reserve, or other lands with agricultural potential, for non- farm uses, including golf courses, is not supported. 3.9. The Regional District supports the development of a joint comprehensive tourism strategy for Electoral Area B and the District of Lillooet.
Home-based Business 3.10.Home-based business and home industry are supported in the Residential, Rural Residential, Agriculture, and Resource Management designations, subject to zoning regulations to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. 3.11.The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District to ensure the bylaw facilitates and supports home-based business as a means of growing the local economy. 3.12.Where a home industry involves food intended for human consumption approval from the Interior Health Authority shall be obtained.
11
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 27 of 361 AUGUST 2009
4. GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION STRATEGY
Context
Greenhouse gases are a natural part of the atmosphere. They trap the sun's warmth, and maintain the earth's surface temperature at a level necessary to support life. However, due to human activities, progressively concentrated levels of greenhouse gases are now found in the atmosphere. As the accumulation of greenhouse gases increases, the amount of heat trapped in the atmosphere also increases, leading to climate change. There is general consensus in the scientific community that the projected changes in climate will result in significant, often adverse, impacts on many ecological systems and socio-economic sectors, including food supply, water resources, and human health.
In response to climate change projections and the predicted impacts, as of 2008 the Local Government Act requires that official community plans include targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the area covered by the plan, and policies and actions proposed for achieving those targets.
Detailed information on the release of greenhouse gases within Electoral Area B is not currently available. Based on general emissions and climate change information, the most significant contributors to green house gas emissions in Electoral Area B are likely 1) the use of energy to provide personal transportation and heat buildings, 2) the disposal of solid waste, 3) deforestation, and 4) agricultural operations.
A wide variety of greenhouse gas reduction targets are already in place in Canada, addressing federal, provincial, municipal, and corporate mandates. For example, Canada is signatory to the Kyoto Protocol which came into force in 2005. It is an agreement whereby Canada has committed to reducing its total emissions of greenhouse gases to 6% below 1990 levels by the year 2012. The Government of British Columbia has committed to ensuring the B.C. public sector is carbon neutral by 2010. The province-wide target set by the Government of BC, is to reduce total provincial emissions to 80% of 2007 levels by 2050. Another example is the Resort Municipality of Whistler, which through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities’ Partners for Climate Protection Program, has also committed to a minimum 6% reduction from 1990 levels.
Since the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997, additional studies have suggested that deeper reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are required to maintain appropriate atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and global temperatures.2 Science-based climate change plans suggest that global greenhouse gas emissions should fall to at least 50% below the 1990 level by 2050. Considering the proportionately larger emission produced by developed countries such as Canada, an equitable way to share the global effort in reducing green house gases for developed countries has been suggested as: 25-30% below 1990 levels by 2020, and 85-90% below 1990 levels by 2050.
The next steps in addressing the issue of climate change within Electoral Area B include a detailed inventory of the local sources of greenhouse gases, and a community-specific emissions reductions strategy that takes into account local social, economic, and environmental conditions. However, without detailed information on the local sources of greenhouse gas emissions, general climate change information can still be used to inform a generalized emissions reductions strategy, including policies on
2 Source: The Case for Deep Reductions: Canada’s Role in Preventing Dangerous Climate Change. 2005. The David Suzuki Foundation & the Pembina Institute
12
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 28 of 361 AUGUST 2009 the energy efficiency of buildings, land use planning, local government operations, energy supply, and waste reduction and management.
Some of the challenges in mitigating climate change that are specific to the rural communities of Electoral Area B are as follows:
1. Population densities are often not sufficient to achieve economies of scale and support energy efficient systems, such as public transit, district energy supplies, and capture of landfill gases. 2. Promoting tourism as a way of bolstering the local economy is often at odds with greenhouse gas reduction targets. For example, the Resort Municipality of Whistler reports that ‘inter- community’ transportation (i.e. the movement of tourists to and from Whistler) results in fossil fuel consumption that is seven times higher than the in-community consumption. 3. Rural populations are often very dependent on travel in single occupancy vehicles due to dispersed housing and remote resource-based employment. 4. Hydroelectric power projects have already resulted in significant environmental and social impacts, making further ‘green’ energy generation from local waterbodies a contentious issue. 5. A small economy generally means a lack of financial resources to implement new technologies or programs.
Objectives
To develop an appropriate greenhouse gas emissions reductions strategy for Electoral Area B that takes into account local social, economic, and environmental conditions. To achieve carbon neutral local government operations by 2020.
Policies
4.1. The target of reducing green house gas emissions by 30 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020, and 90 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050 for the entire community, is supported in principle. 4.2. The Regional District shall work toward a comprehensive regional greenhouse gas reduction strategy, including action plans for: a) increasing local renewable energy generation in a sustainable manner, b) improving public transit and rail service, c) improving the energy efficiency of buildings, d) development of clean industries to augment the local economy, e) implementing Smart Growth principles, f) improving recycling and waste management, and, g) enhancing urban and rural forests. 4.3. As per the Climate Change Action Charter, the Regional District shall work toward a corporate greenhouse gas reduction strategy to achieve carbon neutral local government operations by 2012.
As initial steps toward completing a comprehensive greenhouse gas reduction strategy and ultimately reducing emissions, the following policies are incorporated into this OCP:
Policy 1.7 – Endorsement of Smart Growth principles
13
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 29 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Policy 3.10 – Support for home based businesses Policy 7.2 and 7.3 – Support for improved waste management and community recycling Policy 8.6 – Support for improved passenger rail service Policy 8.8 – Support for a regional transit service Policy 9.8 – Promote energy efficiency of residential buildings Policy 10.15 – Advocate for a regional energy plan Policy 11.2 and 11.3 – Preserve local agriculture Policy 11.15 – Promote Environmental Farm Plans Policy 12.5 – Promote energy efficiency of residential buildings Policy 14.2 – Promote energy efficiency of institutional buildings
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
5. BIODIVERSITY
Context
Much of the land within the plan area is Crown land and is governed by the draft Lillooet Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) prepared by the former Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management in 2004. The draft LRMP, in addition to other data provided by the provincial government and the St'át'imc and Lil’wat Nations, is used to inform the SLRD’s response to development and resource use proposals.
Electoral Area B provides important wildlife habitat for a variety of species (see Map 2). Wildlife reported to live within Electoral Area B includes cougar, bobcat, lynx, wolf, coyote, grizzly bear, black bear, beaver, moose, mountain goat, mule deer, sheep, and other small mammals, birds, and amphibians. Potential habitat for endangered and threatened species, such as the northern spotted owl, tailed frogs, fisher, bighorn sheep, and grizzly bear, is also found in the region. Bighorn sheep have migration corridors in and out of the north end of the Yalakom Valley. Known northern spotted owl long-term activity centres are located near Seton Portage, the Duffey Lake Corridor, and Texas Creek. The plan area encompasses some of the most threatened grizzly bear population units (GBPU’s) in the province, including the Stein-Nahatlatch GBPU. Most of Electoral Area B west of the Fraser River is designated as a grizzly bear recovery area. These habitats are key areas to protect from future development and disturbance. Minimizing road construction is a key directive in the recovery of disturbance sensitive species such as the grizzly bear.
Electoral Area B is located within the Fraser River watershed. Smaller tributaries to the Fraser River found within Electoral Area B include the Bridge, Seton, and Yalakom Rivers, as well as Cayoosh Creek. Local fish species include four species of pacific salmon (chinook, coho, pink, and sockeye), steelhead, bull trout, white sturgeon, rainbow trout, kokanee, white fish, sucker, Dolly Varden, brown trout, and brook trout. The Duffey Lake Corridor and Seton Lake area are recognized as regionally significant bull trout habitat.
Fishing, and the locations where fishing occur, are considered to be of fundamental cultural importance to the St'át'imc Nation. The St’át’imc Land Use Plan recommends that a fifty metre buffer on either side of all fish bearing streams be provided where development or resource use is proposed.
14
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 30 of 361 AUGUST 2009
The Province requires that local governments protect fish habitat from disturbance arising from residential, commercial, and industrial development by implementing the Riparian Area Regulation (RAR). RAR, enacted under Section 12 of the Fish Protection Act in July 2004, applies to all waterbodies within Electoral Area B. The development permit designation described below is intended to address water quality protection throughout the plan area and satisfy the requirements of the Riparian Area Regulation. The following definitions apply:
‘natural boundary’ means the visible high water mark of a stream where the presence and action of the water are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark on the soil of the bed of the stream a character distinct from that of its banks, in vegetation, as well as in the nature of the soil itself, and includes the active floodplain; ‘Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP)’ means an applied scientist or technologist, acting alone or together with another qualified environmental professional, where (a) the individual is registered and in good standing in British Columbia with an appropriate professional organization constituted under an Act, acting under that association’s code of ethics and subject to disciplinary action by that association, (b) the individual’s area of expertise is recognized in the assessment methods as one that is acceptable for the purpose of providing all or part of an assessment report in respect of that development proposal, and (c) the individual is acting within that individual’s area of expertise; ‘ravine’ means a narrow, steep-sided valley that is commonly eroded by running water and has a slope grade greater than 3:1; ‘top of the ravine bank’ means the first significant break in a ravine slope where the break occurs such that the grade beyond the break is flatter than 3:1 for a minimum distance of 15 metres measured perpendicularly from the break, and the break does not include a bench within the ravine that could be developed; ‘waterbody’ means any area that in a normal year has water flowing or standing above ground to the extent that evidence of an ordinary high water mark is established.
Objectives
To support protection of environmentally significant areas, avoid loss of key habitats, and maintain biological diversity. To recognize the importance of water resources and protect and improve the quality and quantity of those resources for future generations.
Policies
5.1. In order to maintain biodiversity and support intact ecosystems, intensive recreation, subdivision, and rezoning of lands shall be discouraged in critical wildlife habitats, including those indicated on Map 2. Motorized vehicles should be limited to traversing these areas using the most direct route.
Water Resources 5.2. The Regional District considers environmental protection of all natural waterbodies to be of high importance, and is therefore a primary consideration in the evaluation of any new development.
15
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 31 of 361 AUGUST 2009
5.3. The cumulative impact of development on water quality should be considered in the evaluation of any new development. 5.4. Land use developments requiring the disposal of waste materials, including sewage, garbage, industrial effluent, waste construction materials, animal waste, or soil is prohibited where it would reduce the present quality of surface or groundwater resources. 5.5. The hardening of shorelines through retaining walls or the use of rip-rap is discouraged.
Development Permit Area 1: Riparian Assessment Areas 5.6. Pursuant to Section 919.1(a) of the Local Government Act, Development Permit Area 1 (DPA 1) is designated as a development permit area for protection of the natural environment, its ecosystems, and biological diversity. Justification: The purpose of DPA 1 is to implement the Riparian Areas Regulation enacted under Section 12 of the Fish Protection Act, as required by the provincial government. Implementation of DPA 1 will provide protection for the features, functions, and conditions that are vital in the natural maintenance of stream health and productivity.
5.7. DPA 1 includes fish bearing streams, lakes, wetlands, and the associated riparian habitat, approximately as indicated on Map 3, including the following areas within and adjacent to all waterbodies that provide fish habitat or flow into a waterbody that provides fish habitat: a) A 30 metre strip on both sides of the waterbody, measured from the natural boundary; b) For a ravine less than 60 metres wide, a strip on both sides of the stream measured from the natural boundary to a point that is 30 metres beyond the top of the ravine bank; and c) For a ravine 60 metres wide or greater, a strip on both sides of the stream measured from the natural boundary to a point that is 10 metres beyond the top of the ravine bank. 5.8. Within DPA 1, land must not be altered and building permits will not be issued unless a development permit is issued by the Squamish Lillooet Regional District, or unless otherwise exempted in this plan. 5.9. Within DPA 1, a development permit shall be issued if a qualified environmental professional carries out an assessment and certifies in the assessment report for that proposal that he or she is qualified to carry out the assessment, that the assessment methods required by provincial regulations have been followed, and provides their professional opinion that: a) If the development is implemented as proposed there will be no harmful alteration, disruption, or destruction of natural features, functions, and conditions that support fish life processes in the riparian assessment area; or, b) If streamside protection and enhancement areas identified in the report are protected from development and the measures identified in the report as necessary to protect the integrity of those areas from the effects of the development are implemented by the developer, there will be no harmful alteration, disruption, or destruction of natural features, functions, and conditions that support fish life processes in the riparian assessment area. 5.10.Development permits issued may require that: a) Areas of land, specified in the permit, must remain free of development, except in accordance with any conditions contained in the permit;
16
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 32 of 361 AUGUST 2009
b) Specified natural features or areas be preserved, protected, restored, or enhanced in accordance with the permit; c) Natural watercourses be dedicated; d) Works be constructed to preserve, protect, restore, or enhance watercourses, or other specified natural features of the environment; e) Protection measures be implemented, including that trees or other vegetation be planted or retained in order to preserve, protect, restore or enhance fish habitat or riparian areas, control drainage, or control erosion or protect banks; f) An explanatory plan or reference plan prepared by a BC Land Surveyor delineate the identified streamside protection and enhancement area; and, g) Development comply with the Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat, published by Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Ministry of Environment, Land and Parks, May 1992. 5.11.Development permits are not required: a) For works approved by Fisheries and Oceans Canada and/or Ministry of Environment with respect to trail construction, stream enhancement, and fish and wildlife restoration; b) To resolve emergency situations that present an immediate danger related to flooding, erosion, or other immediate threats to life or property, including removal of hazardous trees; and, c) For the repair of a permanent structure, agricultural and institutional development, and mining activities; however, federal and provincial legislation still apply. 5.12.Established buildings and other previously approved uses in DPA 1 are permitted to continue. Expansion of non-conforming uses requires a development permit. 5.13.The Board delegates the authority to issue development permits to the Director of Planning and Development within DPA 1. 5.14.Where a conflict arises between DPA 1 (riparian assessment area) and DPA 2 (wildfire protection), the requirements of DPA 1 shall be given priority. (Generally, DPA 2 can be satisfied by applying two out of four possible measures: 1) fire resistant exterior siding, 2) fire resistant roofing, 3) fire resistant landscaping within 10 m of structures, or 4) vegetation reduction within 30 m of structures. However, unless recommended by a QEP, vegetation in the riparian assessment area may not be cleared for fire safety purposes. See Policy 6.10 to 6.18 for more information.)
Referrals 5.15.Pertaining to commercial recreation referrals, applications for subdivision or development, or proposed resource management plans, the SLRD shall not support proposals unless they demonstrate the following (as applicable): a) Disturbance of wildlife by motorized vehicles is minimized; b) Wildlife movement between key habitat areas is ensured; c) Intensive recreation is located outside of key wildlife habitats, as shown in Map 2; d) Information on areas adjacent to or within the application area that support rare, threatened, or culturally important plant and animal species is provided, and access to these areas is discouraged;
17
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 33 of 361 AUGUST 2009
e) Information on the sensitivity of specific areas and appropriate conduct is provided to the appropriate stakeholders; f) Old growth forest stands are protected to the greatest extent possible; and, g) Smart Growth principles are adhered to.
Bear Smart 5.16.Residents and visitors are encouraged to follow the recommendations developed by the BC ‘Bear Smart’ program. Specifically, residents and visitors are encouraged to: a) Dispose of household garbage in bear-proof containers, or store indoors until it can be properly disposed of; b) Keep doors and windows closed and locked to prevent food smells from luring bears inside the home; c) Do not store food of any kind outside, even if it is inside a locked refrigerator or freezer; d) Do not leave garbage, groceries, animal feed, coolers, or any odorous item in a vehicle; e) Do not use birdfeeders that act as bear-attractants during bear season; f) Where appropriate, replace fruit-bearing trees or bushes with non-fruit-bearing varieties; g) Where appropriate, use electric fencing to protect fruit-bearing trees or bushes and livestock; h) Harvest fruits and vegetables as they ripen and remove fallen fruit from the ground; i) Burn barbeques clean immediately after use; j) Wash and store barbeques covered and out of the wind – preferably indoors; k) Feed pets indoors and store their food indoors; l) Keep composts clean; and, m) Support the development and use of a community waste management system.
6. NATURAL HAZARDS
Context
Natural hazards within Electoral Area B include geotechnical hazard, flood hazard, wildfire, extreme weather events, and avalanches. The plan area is not subject to high earthquake hazard.
Electoral Area B has areas of high geotechnical activity resulting from unstable ground and rock fall. The landslide that formed Seton Portage, which split the early Seton Lake in two, occurred some time between 8,000 and 20,000 years ago. Historical records show that along the Fraser River aboriginal communities peaked and declined approximately 1,000 years ago, likely due to seasonal failure of the salmon runs caused by catastrophic landslides that dammed the Fraser River. Terrain stability mapping (see Map 4) is available through Lillooet Timber Supply Area mapping; however it was compiled for forestry purposes at a 1:20,000 scale and is not intended to inform fine-scale development planning.
There is flood hazard associated with many creeks and rivers throughout the plan area. Floods and debris flows are typically associated with the spring snowmelt, which peaks between May and mid-July.
18
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 34 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Floodplain mapping is not available for Electoral Area B, however, Zoning Bylaw 670, 2000 provides flood construction levels for Seton and Anderson Lakes, the Fraser River, and other waterbodies.
Wildfire management and emergency preparedness are key concerns for residents of Electoral Area B. Communities are involved in volunteer fire fighting efforts, wildfire awareness, and implementing Fire Smart guidelines. Fire protection capability varies from location to location within the plan area. Volunteer services supported by the SLRD include the Lillooet Fire Protection Area, Seton Portage – Shalalth Fire Protection Area , the Lillooet Area Rescue Service, and the 911 Interior Service. IRs within Electoral Area B have their own fire protection services funded thorough Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
The recommendations of the SLRD’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) are reflected in the policies below. The primary aim of the CWPP is to inform government agencies and private land owners of the wildfire risk and appropriate actions to take to reduce that risk. The CWPP identifies areas of high wildfire hazard, which include the Yalakom Valley, West Pavilion, Pavilion Lake, Bridge River, Texas Creek, the Fountain area, and the Duffey Lake Corridor.
While efforts to support wildfire suppression are recognized as critical to the safety of the community, the importance of the natural role of fire in the ecosystem is also acknowledged. Many of the native plant species are dependent on fire to maintain their natural process. Fire supports ecosystem succession, helps to prepare seed beds, recycles nutrients, maintains a diversity of seral stages across the landscape, controls insect and disease outbreaks, and reduces fuel accumulation. The current mountain pine beetle outbreak in the interior of British Columbia, which is exacerbated by fire suppression, has extended through Electoral Area B and south to the Whistler area. In areas supporting pine trees, it is likely that there will be high tree mortality. The resulting fuel accumulations will pose a significant wildfire threat to existing developments, pointing to a need to find a balance between fire suppression, community safety, and ecosystem integrity.
The SLRD’s Emergency Planning Coordinator is working toward programs to address the natural hazards that occur in Electoral Area B. The programs will primarily target public education, community workshops, engaging volunteers, and developing evacuation and emergency preparedness plans.
Objectives
To protect life and property by mitigating natural hazards where feasible, and discouraging development in areas subject to immitigable natural hazards To ensure that appropriate measures are in place for emergency prevention, response, and mitigation.
Policies
Geotechnical Policies 6.1. A professional geotechnical report shall be required prior to development: a. Where a slope of 30% or greater exists (as determined in the field); or, b. Where requested by the building inspector. This report must identify hazards present, areas that are suitable and unsuitable for development, mitigation measures for hazards that can be mitigated, and certify that land may be safely used for
19
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 35 of 361 AUGUST 2009
the use intended. The development plans shall comply with all of the recommendations found in the report. 6.2. The requirement for a professional geotechnical report may be waived by the building inspector. 6.3. On slopes exceeding 30%, grading and vegetation removal should be minimized. 6.4. Where a geotechnical report concludes that development may occur on slopes exceeding 30%, the owner shall provide the Regional District with a save harmless covenant, and development must proceed in strict compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report.
Wildfire Protection 6.5. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Forests and Range to reduce wildfire hazard by creating and maintaining appropriate fire defense improvements on Crown lands, particularly in areas affected by the mountain pine beetle. 6.6. Homeowners are urged to carry out annual wildfire threat assessments and to reduce wildfire hazard by measures described in the Home Owner’s FireSmart Manual, recognizing that the community desires a balance between retaining the visual character of the rural setting with fire protection objectives. (The FireSmart Manual is available from the B.C. Ministry of Forests and Range website.) 6.7. The SLRD Emergency Planning Coordinator shall work toward: a) Establishing and maintaining a plan that identifies hazards and risks, recommends mitigation measures, and ensures emergency response plans are in place for existing and future communities; b) Identifying low risk fire safety areas where community members can evacuate to and wait until emergency service providers can reach them in case of an emergency; c) Annually reviewing the adequacy of the fire protection infrastructure relative to growth and development; d) Establishing a public information program to educate the public on evacuation routes and fire safety; e) Pursuing funding for fuel management projects; f) Engaging the Ministry of Forests and Range to address wildfire risk and fuel management on Crown lands; and, g) Engaging BC Hydro and the BC Transmission Corporation to ensure slash hazard on transmission line corridors is mitigated. 6.8. Volunteer fire protection services shall be supported. 6.9. The design of new community water systems shall take into consideration the water volumes required for adequate fire protection.
Development Permit Area 2: Wildfire Protection Area 6.10.Pursuant to Section 919.1(b) of the Local Government Act, Development Permit Area 2 (DPA 2) is designated as a development permit area for protection of development from hazardous conditions. DPA 2 includes all lands within the plan area, as shown on Map 1. Justification: The SLRD Community Wildfire Protection Plan (2006) indicates that within Electoral Area B, the vast majority of private and Crown lands in the vicinity of forests are
20
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 36 of 361 AUGUST 2009
subject to moderate to high wildfire hazard. The purpose of DPA 2 is to ensure new developments in Electoral Area B are designed and constructed to minimize wildfire hazard, and are contributing to the fire safety of the neighbourhood. Implementation of DPA 2 will limit damage to property, should wildfires occur.
6.11.Within DPA 2, building permits shall not be issued unless a development permit is issued by the Squamish Lillooet Regional District, or unless otherwise exempted in this plan. 6.12.Every application for a development permit shall be accompanied by plans indicating the following: a) Location of all existing and proposed structures, parking areas, and driveways; b) Extent and nature of existing and proposed landscaping, including details of trees and ground cover; and, c) The exterior materials of existing and proposed structures. 6.13.Within DPA 2, a development permit shall be issued if two or more of the following measures are indicated in the application: a) Fire resistant construction materials3 for exterior siding; b) Fire resistant construction materials for roofing; c) Fire resistant landscaping4 ensuring minimal fuel loading within 10 m of structures and projections (to the extent possible considering the size of the parcel); and, d) Fuel removal and reduction5 within 30 m from structures and projections (to the extent possible considering the size of the parcel). 6.14.Development Permits issued may require that landscape plans be prepared in consultation with a Registered Professional Biologist, Forester, or Landscape Architect that provide recommendations for ensuring minimal fuel loading within landscaped areas, ongoing protection from interface fire hazard, and the type and density of fire resistive plantings that may be incorporated within landscaped areas to help mitigate the interface fire hazard. 6.15.Development Permits are not required: a) Where the total area of additions to an existing building is less than 50 m2; b) For renovations within an existing building; c) Where a covenant is registered on title requiring property owners to comply with the DPA 2 guidelines; or, d) Where exempted by the building inspector. 6.16.Established buildings and other previously approved uses in DPA 2 are permitted to continue.
3 ‘Fire resistant construction materials’ are materials that have high resistance to combustion, including Class-A asphalt shingles, slate, clay tile, metal, cement, plaster, stucco, and other concrete products. 4 ‘Fire resistant landscaping’ is landscaping that features trees planted a minimum of 3 metres apart (preferably deciduous and trimmed of branches below 3 metres in height), low-growing non-resinous shrubs, lawn, and hard surfaces. 5 ‘Fuel removal and reduction’ means ground fuels are removed, trees are thinned to a minimum of 3 metres apart and trimmed of branches below 3 metres in height. Clusters of trees are permitted where a hard surface, lawn, or area of low vegetation (1 meter high or less), or other suitable fire break surrounds those clusters.
21
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 37 of 361 AUGUST 2009
6.17.The Board delegates the authority to issue development permits to the Director of Planning and Development within DPA 2. 6.18.Where a conflict arises between DPA 1 (riparian assessment area) and DPA 2 (wildfire protection), the requirements of DPA 1 shall be given priority. (Generally, DPA 2 can be satisfied by applying two out of four possible measures: 1) fire resistant exterior siding, 2) fire resistant roofing, 3) fire resistant landscaping within 10 m of structures, or 4) vegetation reduction within 30 m of structures. However, unless recommended by a QEP, vegetation in the riparian assessment area may not be cleared for fire safety purposes. See Policy 5.6 to 5.14 for more information.)
SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
7. SERVICES &UTILITIES
Context
The SLRD provides funding for the following Electoral Area B services: Lillooet Fire Protection Area, Seton Portage – Shalalth Fire Protection Area, Lillooet Area Rescue Service, 911 Interior Service, recreation facilities (Lillooet Recreation Centre, Lillooet Recreation Commission, and the Lillooet Library), and utilities and services (Seton Portage street lighting, Lillooet Camelsfoot TV, and Lillooet area refuse grounds).
Solid waste generated within Electoral Area B, with the exception of the Seton and Bridge River Band, is diverted to the landfill and Re-Use-It Centre6 near Lillooet. A separate landfill services the Seton and Bridge River Bands with support from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. The Lillooet landfill has approximately 80 years of service left. There are some indications that the Seton landfill may have a limited lifespan remaining.
Residents of Electoral Area B have shown a great deal of enthusiasm for recycling, however, opportunities for recycling are currently limited. Efforts are underway to develop an economical recycling system for the electoral area. However, the relatively small volume of recyclable materials generated and the high cost of transporting those materials are challenges still to be addressed.
Throughout the plan area liquid waste is disposed of by individual septic system. Domestic water is also provided through private systems. There are no community water or sewer systems funded or administered by the SLRD within Electoral Area B. New SLRD-supported utility services have not been requested by the community.
Most communities within Electoral Area B are supplied with electricity from BC Hydro and with phone service from Telus or other service providers. There are some areas without these services, such as the Yalakom Valley, which does not have phone service.
6 The Re-Use-It Centre is a building used to store useful items that have been diverted from the landfill. Residents are welcome to take home items from the Re-Use-It Centre for free.
22
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 38 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Objective
To facilitate the safe and cost effective provision and maintenance of water, sewer, and solid waste services, as appropriate to the community.
Policies
7.1. The Regional District supports the following process for the administration of future service areas: a) Request by residents to establish a service area; b) Feasibility analysis funded by the proponents or grants; c) Referendum by affected property owners.
Solid Waste Management 7.2. The Regional District supports the three R’s of waste management: reduce, reuse, and recycle. 7.3. The Regional District supports the development and maintenance of a community recycling center in Lillooet.
Liquid Waste Management 7.4. The Regional District considers environmental protection of all natural waterbodies to be of high importance, and is therefore a primary consideration in the evaluation of any new development, including the development or expansion of sewer and water systems. 7.5. All building permit applications shall be subject to provincial regulations regarding sewage disposal. 7.6. The Regional District encourages the Interior Health Authority to monitor the effects of sewage disposal throughout the plan area, to ensure that the appropriate standards are maintained, and to ensure inadequate septic systems are upgraded. 7.7. The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District, particularly around Fountain Lake and Pavilion Lake, to ensure the minimum allowable parcel size permitted in areas without a community sewer system allow for the setbacks between septic fields and watercourses required by provincial legislation. 7.8. The Regional District encourages property owners to maintain their septic systems in accordance with best management practices and provincial regulations.
8. TRANSPORTATION
Context
Transportation to and from communities within Electoral Area B is largely by car or truck via Highways 12, 40 and 99. The poor repair of these highways is seen as being one of the key factors limiting economic growth in the area. All three highways are narrow and in need of upgrades. Highway 12 and 40 require significant structural work to limit rock fall onto the road and stabilize steep slopes. In particular, ‘the Big Slide’ on Highway 12, between Lillooet and Lytton, poses a significant safety hazard to motorists. There is a strong desire expressed by the community to prioritize upgrades to Highway 12, however, the Ministry of Transportation has indicated the funds for major upgrades to this highway, or
23
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 39 of 361 AUGUST 2009 others within Electoral Area B, will not be available in the near future. Work to limit rock fall on Highway 12 and 40 with mesh barriers is underway.
There are no routes specifically designated for commuter cycling within Electoral Area B, or specially designated cycling trails. The community has not voiced a need for specially designed commuter cycling infrastructure, likely as a result of the rural nature of the plan area, the low traffic volumes, and long distances between destinations.
The McGillivray Creek Trail between Anderson Lake and Gold Bridge is a locally significant recreation trail that connects Electoral Areas A and B. While it is currently not open to vehicle traffic, it is used by snowmobiles and mountain bikes. Support has been expressed for keeping this trail open to the public for recreation and emergency use.
A small airstrip within the District of Lillooet services Electoral Area B. It is managed by the District of Lillooet. While there are no scheduled flights, the airport is viewed as important to future economic development of the area. Airport noise is not known to negatively impact residents of Electoral Area B. Extending the runway to 1500 meters and adding lighting are possibilities for future development.
Public transit is largely absent from Electoral Area B. There is no passenger rail service to Lillooet from southern communities, and there is no Greyhound bus service. There is a passenger train that runs between Lillooet and Seton Portage - Shalalth, which is administered by the Seton Band.
Section 877(3) of the Local Government Act states that an official community plan must include targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the area covered by the plan, and policies and actions of the local government proposed with respect to achieving those targets. The strategy for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions within Electoral Area B is in part based on creating an economical public transit system.
Objectives
To support a safe and efficient road network and air transport facilities that allow year round transportation to and within the area. To establish a cost effective regional public transit service and decrease green house gas emissions by limiting car travel.
Policies
8.1. Road improvement is supported where it is compatible with the social, environmental, and economic goals of the community. 8.2. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Transportation to: a) continue improvements to Highways 12, 40, and 99 to ensure safe and efficient primary travel corridors throughout the year; b) designate and maintain emergency evacuation routes from existing neighbourhoods and future developments; c) improve maintenance to the West Pavilion Forest Service Road and Douglas Tail/Highline. d) Establish a unified road signing system to facilitate emergency access and 911 services. 8.3. During the construction and maintenance of roads, the Regional District encourages the Ministry of Forests and Range and the Ministry of Transportation to ensure:
24
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 40 of 361 AUGUST 2009
a) bridge spans are adequate to permit and encourage the movement of wildlife, particularly along the Duffey Lake Road; b) wildlife movement corridors are documented and protected; and, c) no roadside pullouts are created at sites that will promote human-wildlife conflicts and wildlife habituation. 8.4. The Regional District supports the maintenance of high visual quality along Highway 99 by requiring a 20 metre vegetated buffer to be retained on lands that abut the highway right of way. 8.5. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Forests and Range, the Ministry of Environment, and the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources to develop coordinated access management plans to regulate access on forestry and mining roads in and around the plan area. 8.6. The Regional District encourages CN Rail to improve its freight and passenger rail service to Lillooet and Seton Portage - Shalalth. 8.7. The Regional District supports the development of a railway station in Seton Portage, including tourist accommodation and limited commercial, on a site specific rezoning basis. 8.8. The Regional District supports the creation of a regional transit system that connects communities throughout the SLRD.
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
Within the plan area there are eight land use designations:
1. Residential 5. Resort Commercial 2. Rural Residential 6. Agriculture 3. Resource Management 7. Community Watershed 4. Commercial 8. Park
In the following sections, general policies are described for each land use designation. The sub-are plans contain additional community-specific policies addressing these same land use designations. There are no lands within Electoral Area B designated as Industrial, however, policy direction is provided for industrial proposals that come forward in the future.
9. RESIDENTIAL AND RURAL RESIDENTIAL
Context
The District of Lillooet is the main service centre for residents of Electoral Area B, and is the preferred location for small lot and urban-style residential development. The District of Lillooet updated its OCP in 2008. The OCP states that vacant lands found within the District are sufficient to meet the projected housing demand for both the short term and the long term (e.g. for 50 years at 10 units/year). The OCP emphasizes infill and the intensification of land use in order to make efficient use of existing infrastructure and to reduce the environmental and financial costs of growth.
There are three communities within Electoral Area B that have lands designated as Residential: Pavilion Lake, Fountain, and Seton Portage. There are approximately fifty small parcels of land (0.1 to 1.4 hectares) on two bays of Pavilion Lake. The majority of these parcels are roughly 0.3 hectares in size and
25
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 41 of 361 AUGUST 2009 developed with seasonal-use cottages. There are also approximately ten full time residents on Pavilion Lake. Fountain has fourteen smaller parcels (0.3 to two hectares) adjacent to Fountain Lake. These residential lots have been developed with small homes very close to the lake, which has caused some concern over impacts to water quality and the riparian area. In Seton Portage, there are 70 small lots (0.1 to 0.7 hectares) and a dozen larger parcels (4 hectares on average) within the village area. Community specific policies addressing the Residential land use designation are contained in the Pavilion Lake and Seton Portage sub-area plans.
There is one community within Electoral Area B that has lands designated as Rural Residential, and that is Seton Portage. Community specific policies addressing the Rural Residential land use designation are contained in the Seton Portage sub-area plan.
Within Electoral Area B the price of land has seen a slow increase over the last decade; however, the region remains one of the most affordable in southern British Columbia. There is no indication of a lack of supply for large rural parcels; however, small parcels that command a lower price (less than $100,000) are relatively scarce. This lack of small rural parcels has contributed to the perception of the region as not being exceptionally affordable. However, encouraging an additional supply of small (less than one hectare) parcels in rural areas, is not consistent with Smart Growth principles, and is generally not supported. This type of development should be directed to the District of Lillooet to encourage compact communities that limit the human footprint on the land.
The 2008 District of Lillooet OCP labels 34 hectares of land on the southwest boundary of the District (within Electoral Area B) as Special Area #1. These lands are located within the T’it’q’et IR 1, near existing band housing. (The SLRD does not do land use planning for IR lands.) The Lillooet OCP describes Special Areas as those lands that are recognized for their future growth potential. Special Area #1 is identified as a location that could potentially provide an opportunity for T’it’q’et IR 1 to grow and develop over time.
A need for additional residential lands associated with IRs has also been identified in other areas of Electoral Area B. The Xalip Band in Fountain has reported the need to develop agricultural lands for housing, due to a growing population and lack of other suitable lands.
Requests for additional Residential designated lands were not received as part of the OCP process.
Objectives
To ensure future development is consistent with the existing rural and semi-rural character of the area. To facilitate provision of an adequate supply of land for residential development, where it is consistent with Smart Growth principles and the desires of the community.
Policies
9.1. Lands designated for residential development are indicated on Map 5 - 8 as Residential and Rural Residential. 9.2. Permitted uses in all Residential and Rural Residential areas are single family home, secondary suite, home-based business, and auxiliary buildings and uses related to the above. 9.3. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Environment to establish a no-shooting reserve closure surrounding lands designated as Residential and Rural Residential.
26
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 42 of 361 AUGUST 2009
9.4. A high standard of energy efficiency for all new residential construction is encouraged: a) Consideration shall be given to incorporating energy efficiency objectives into zoning amendment bylaws; b) Density bonusing may be considered where alternative energy systems or other innovative sustainability initiatives are proposed. 9.5. Subdivisions to create lots accessible by water only are discouraged. 9.6. The Regional District encourages local First Nations and the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs to develop IRs in manner that reflects Smart Growth principles, including mixed use neighbourhoods, multi-family housing, and other initiatives to foster a level of density that is supportive of public transit.
Residential Development in Fountain, Pavilion Lake, and Seton Portage 9.7. The creation of additional waterfront parcels on Fountain and Pavilion lakes is not supported, including those lands designated as Residential. 9.8. The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District to ensure consistency with the OCP regarding policies within the Residential land use designation, particularly regarding minimum parcel size and land use on Fountain and Pavilion Lakes.
For additional policies on the Residential and Rural Residential land use designation, including minimum parcel sizes, see the Pavilion Lake Sub-area Plan and the Seton Portage Sub-area Plan.
10. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Context
The vast majority of Electoral Area B is designated as Resource Management. The Resource Management designation and policies are intended to guide development in ‘non-settlement areas,’ as defined in the SLRD Regional Growth Strategy. The Resource Management policies are also intended provide guidance for informed responses to referrals from provincial agencies and adjacent municipalities.
Much of the land and natural resource management that occurs within Electoral Area B is governed by the draft Lillooet Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). The St’át’imc Preliminary Draft Land Use Plan provides another layer of information to guide resource management in Electoral Area B. The policies below are intended to reflect the St’át’imc vision and principles for the St’át’imc territory and the general policy directions provided by the draft LRMP.
The draft LRMP emphasizes economic growth for the region through mining and energy development on Crown lands. Mining opportunities within Electoral Area B include metals (gold, silver, copper, tungsten), industrial minerals (limestone, dimension stone, talc), aggregates (sand, gravel, crushed rock) and gems (jade, agate). The energy related policies contained within the LRMP emphasize the development of new or expanded energy infrastructure and improving access for exploration and development.
27
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 43 of 361 AUGUST 2009
BC Hydro and the BC Transmission Corporation are two agencies that significantly shape the Resource Management lands within Electoral Area B. BC Hydro is working to implement the Province’s Energy Plan, which aims to maintain ninety per cent of all generation from ‘clean’ or renewable sources. Clean energy is defined as energy from alternative energy technologies that results in a net environmental improvement relative to existing energy production (e.g. hydroelectric, wind, solar, photovoltaic, geothermal, tidal, wave and biomass energy, as well as cogeneration, energy from landfill gas, and municipal solid waste).
The SLRD in general, and Electoral Area B in particular, are strategically positioned to take advantage of opportunities presented by emerging technologies and opportunities for clean energy. These opportunities include small-scale hydroelectric generation facilities, solar, and wind energy production. The SLRD believes that where compatible with other community values, it is desirable to accommodate such energy projects under the Resource Management land use designation. However, it is also recognized that much of Electoral Area B is highly impacted by transmission lines and other energy and transportation related infrastructure. Given the high value placed on the scenic, rural character of Electoral Area B, and the growing tourism economy, these impacts need to be addressed in the planning stages of all energy development.
Hydroelectric power projects have had a major impact on Electoral Area B, particularly around Seton Portage. Hydroelectric facilities on the Bridge and Seton Rivers are the third largest in the province. Major transmission corridors within Electoral Area B include the west side of Anderson Lake, the north and south shores of Seton Lake, along Highway 99 from Lillooet north to Pavilion, and through the Fountain Valley. Significant corridors lacking transmission lines include the Duffey Lake Corridor, along the Fraser River south of Lillooet, the Bridge River Valley downstream of the Carpenter Reservoir, and the Yalakom Valley.
Residents of Electoral Area B have expressed a strong desire to see further impacts from energy generation projects limited, and a comprehensive sub-regional plan for independent power projects (IPP) developed. Applications for IPPs within Electoral B, and the accompanying approval process, have generated a great deal of concern that existing transmission line free corridors will be impacted, environmental impacts are not well understood, and community benefits are not realized.
Section 877(1) of the Local Government Act stipulates that an OCP must include statements and map designations respecting the approximate location and area of sand and gravel deposits that are suitable for future sand and gravel extraction. This information is not available for the Electoral Area B, however, it is acknowledged that sand and gravel extraction are permitted uses throughout the Resource Management land use designation.
In several Electoral Area B communities, the inability to accommodate more than two homes for family members on large rural properties is viewed as problematic. Where the subdivision potential of the land is limited due to the RR3 zone (40 hectare minimum parcel size), the zoning bylaw permits a maximum of two homes on parcels over eight hectares. In some areas, this restriction on subdivision and the number of dwellings has prompted the un-permitted construction of homes in order to accommodate children and grandchildren on a single property. The proposed solution is a revision of the zoning bylaw to permit up to four homes on properties 40 hectares or greater.
Permitting additional homes on properties smaller than 40 hectares across Electoral Area B is not generally supported. In the SLRD’s Electoral Area C, where four homes are permitted on Resource Management zoned properties 8 hectares or larger, this policy has resulted in a large rural strata subdivision in a location that does not meet Smart Growth criteria for development. In Electoral Area B, where families desire to construct additional homes on a property beyond what the zoning bylaw allows,
28
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 44 of 361 AUGUST 2009 the land owner is encouraged to seek a rezoning if appropriate, or construct the permitted secondary suites.
Significant potential for further subdivision of larger ‘Resource Management’ parcels does exist within Electoral Area B, particularly on those lands zoned RR2 (8 hectare minimum parcel size) in Bylaw 670.
Rezoning of large rural properties in the RR3 zone (40 hectare minimum parcel size) to permit further subdivision is not generally consistent with Smart Growth principles and does result in some negative outcomes. Subdividing large rural acreages to create rural residential subdivisions decreases the potential for the land to operate as a viable farm unit or otherwise act as an income generating parcel. Subdivision increases the number of roads, houses, garbage, fences, cars, and pets, which all have a negative impact on wildlife. Subdivisions effectively decrease the wildlife habitat potential of the land. Subdivisions in rural areas increase the number of people who drive long distances to work, school, recreation, and shopping. This does not contribute to the community’s goal of decreasing green house gas emissions by limiting car travel. Additionally, rural subdivisions can be expensive to maintain. The cost of road maintenance in large lot subdivisions can be very high because there are more kilometres of road per person. In some cases, if the cost of future road surface replacement is factored in to those maintenance costs, the building and maintenance of the road is simply not economically feasible.
Generally speaking, Smart Growth principles advocate for accommodating the growing population in well-designed, urban communities with a small footprint, where people can walk and cycle for daily transportation, and in doing this, limit our impact on the environment and preserve rural areas as working landscapes and wildlife refuges. In light of this, the provision of residential or rural residential lots is encouraged within the District of Lillooet and in Seton Portage, rather than in remote areas.
Objective
To promote the management of land and water resources that respects the social and environmental values of the community, and protects biodiversity.
Policies
10.1.Sustainable natural resource use compatible with the social and environmental values of the community is encouraged on lands designated as Resource Management, as indicated on Maps 5 - 9. 10.2.Permitted uses on Resource Management lands are residential, agriculture, resource extraction (including aggregates), silviculture, dispersed outdoor recreation7, and ancillary uses related to these activities. 10.3.Industrial uses that have strong linkages to resource use activities that are primarily conducted outdoors, require a land area of one hectare or more, and may be incompatible with settlement uses or industry located within the District of Lillooet, may be permitted on a site specific rezoning basis on lands designated as Resource Management. 10.4.In all Resource Management areas of the plan, the minimum parcel area shall be forty hectares. 10.5.The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District to ensure consistency with the Resource Management land use designation policies, particularly regarding minimum parcel area.
7 Dispersed outdoor recreation means recreation that generally occurs throughout a large area and is not confined to a specific place, such as hiking, primitive camping, hunting, fishing, horseback riding, and cross-country skiing.
29
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 45 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Commercial Backcountry Recreation 10.6.Small-scale facilities for non-motorized backcountry recreation, including campgrounds, or small backcountry cabins (less than 60 m2), shall be considered consistent with the Resource Management land use designation. These facilities should not be located where they will infringe upon the public enjoyment of key natural features and popular backcountry destinations, such as waterfront locations. 10.7.Backcountry tourism guest staging8 (for motorized commercial recreation) shall be considered consistent with the Resource Management land use designation where 1) no building over 10 m2 is constructed; 2) the staging area is not within 1000 meter of a residence, except a residence on the same parcel; and, 3) the staging area is not located on lands that have been identified as culturally or environmentally sensitive. Commercial recreation operators seeking to establish facilities for motorized commercial recreation may apply for rezoning of the property. 10.8.The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District to ensure consistency with the Resource Management land use designation policies, particularly regarding small-scale facilities for non-motorized backcountry recreation and backcountry tourism guest staging for motorized commercial recreation.
Duffey Lake Corridor The Duffy Lake Corridor is a very popular recreation area for local communities, residents of the lower mainland and beyond, and an important resource management area, particularly for forestry and wildlife. The corridor is located in both Electoral Areas B and C of the Regional District. It is approximately 100 kilometres long and runs from Lillooet Lake east of Pemberton, through the Coast Mountain Range, and down the Cayoosh Creek valley to the District of Lillooet. The road elevation varies from several hundred meters at Lillooet Lake to 1300 meters at the summit. The corridor passes through the biogeoclimatic transition zone between the wet coastal climate and the dry interior climate in the lee of the Coast Mountains.
In 1860, James Duffey of the Royal Engineers explored the corridor between Port Pemberton and Cayoosh (as Lillooet was then known) under the orders of Governor James Douglas. Duffey Lake was later named after him. A gold discovery in the Cayoosh Creek canyon in 1897 led to development of the then famous Golden Cache Mine. During the 1960s, logging roads were built from the north and the south to access the area’s timber resources. These logging roads were eventually connected and the route was opened to the public in 1972. In 1990-91 the road was upgraded, paved, and designated Highway 99.
Specific to the Duffy Lake Corridor, the policies of this OCP are intended to:
1. Support a variety of uses within the corridor, including public and commercial recreation, and sustainable resource management for wildlife habitat, timber harvesting and mining (as per the Lillooet and Sea to Sky Land and Resource Management Plans); 2. Ensure that sufficient opportunities exist for non-commercial recreational activities;
8 ‘Backcountry tourism guest staging’ means commercial use of land that is subject to a commercial recreation tenure issued by the Province of British Columbia to congregate paying guests for the purpose of facilitating motorized open land recreation, including but not limited to helicopter accessed recreation, all-terrain vehicle tours, jet boating, and snowmobiling.
30
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 46 of 361 AUGUST 2009
3. To encourage residential, industrial, and commercial development to locate in adjacent communities, except for development directly related to the forestry, mining, and recreation resource base of the corridor; 4. To recognize the scenic values of the corridor; and 5. To support protection of environmentally significant areas, avoidance of habitat loss, and maintenance of biological diversity.
Policies: 10.9.The Duffey Lake Corridor shall be retained in a largely undeveloped state and preserved for backcountry recreation and wildlife habitat. 10.10. If approved though the provincial Crown land tenure process and/or zoning amendment process, small-scale commercial facilities for backcountry recreation or the travelling public shall be constructed in manner that prevents negative visual impacts along Highway 99.
Provincial Agency Communications 10.11. The SLRD encourages collaborative planning and decision making with all provincial ministries and licensees to ensure that operational plans, prescriptions, permits, and tenures contain provisions that will minimize adverse effects of resource use on adjacent communities (e.g. risk of flooding, debris flow, landslide, or erosion on downstream settlement areas, deteriorated water quality in domestic water supplies, deteriorated visual quality, noise pollution, et cetera). 10.12. The Integrated Land Management Bureau is encouraged to dispose of Crown land for residential, commercial, or industrial development only in locations that are consistent with the policies and designations of this plan and the SLRD Regional Growth Strategy. 10.13. The Regional District shall work with provincial ministries to identify and make possible the siting of municipal/regional infrastructure on Crown land to serve community and economic development needs throughout the plan area, where such infrastructure can appropriately co-exist with other resource and environmental values. 10.14. The Ministry of Forests and Range is encouraged to complete an update of the visual quality inventory for the plan area to reflect its very high visual sensitivity and the strong emphasis on retaining wilderness values and promoting tourism. 10.15. The Regional District encourages the Integrated Land Management Bureau to update the draft LRMP to include all areas visible from Highway 99 within Visual Management Zone A, so that it will be managed under provisions of the Forest and Range Practices Act as a known scenic area with established visual quality objectives9.
Hydroelectric Generation and Independent Power Projects 10.16. The Ministry of Energy, Mines, and Petroleum Resources is encouraged to carry out a study of the cumulative effects of IPPs in Electoral Area B and develop a sub-regional energy plan.
9 Visual Quality Objective: the degree of acceptable alteration from the characteristic visual landscape, as determined by the Ministry of Forests and Range, which is used as a basis for deciding what forest harvesting and silviculture activities are recommended in an area.
31
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 47 of 361 AUGUST 2009
10.17. The Regional District encourages B.C. Hydro and the British Columbia Transmission Corporation to not permit the construction of transmission lines within significant transmission line free corridors, including the Duffey Lake Corridor, along the Fraser River south of Lillooet, the Bridge River Valley down stream of the Carpenter Reservoir, and the Yalakom Valley. 10.18. The development of small hydroelectric facilities is considered to be consistent with the Resource Management land use designation where they are shown to be compatible with adjacent land uses, technically sound, environmentally responsible, socially responsible, and licensable.
11. AGRICULTURE
Context
The preservation of agricultural land and the promotion of farming are integral to the well-being of Electoral Area B residents, and the region as a whole, by creating food security. Food security can be defined as a situation in which:
1. the community has assured access to adequate and appropriate food; 2. farmers and others working in the food industry are able to earn a living wage by growing, producing, processing, handling, retailing and serving food; and, 3. the quality of land, air, and water are maintained and enhanced for future generations.
Those lands with agricultural potential within Electoral Area B are primarily located on the benches above the Fraser River and in the neighbourhoods of Texas Creek, Fountain, Pavilion Lake, West Pavilion, and the Yalakom Valley. The majority of these lands, with the exception of the Yalakom Valley, are designated as Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). ALR lands are regulated by the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC). The mandate of the ALC is to preserve agricultural land and encourage the establishment and maintenance of farms. In general, lands within Electoral Area B that are designated as Agriculture in this OCP coincide with ALR lands.
Ranching, haying, and gardening are the primary agricultural activities within Electoral Area B. Ginseng and hops are grown is some areas, and trials are underway in the Lillooet area to assess the feasibility of the region for growing wine grapes. Agritourism is largely undeveloped in Electoral Area B.
Objectives
To contribute to local and regional food security. To preserve the agricultural land base in the plan area. To encourage diversification and economic sustainability of the farming community. To minimize the impacts from non-agricultural development occurring at the edge of farming areas and within agricultural lands. To balance the interests of agriculture and protection of the environment.
Policies
Agricultural Land Base (Land Use) 11.1.Lands designated for agricultural use are indicated on Maps 5 and 6 as Agriculture. These lands shall be managed to retain their agricultural potential. Permitted uses are defined by the Agricultural Land Commission, including agriculture, farm retail sales, agritourism, sand and gravel extraction, residential, small hydroelectric facilities, and auxiliary uses related to these activities.
32
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 48 of 361 AUGUST 2009
11.2.Non-farm residential, recreational, institutional, industrial, commercial uses, utility facilities, and urban developments are encouraged to occur in locations that will not impact the viability of farm land. 11.3.Subdivision and exclusion of land from the Agricultural Land Reserve is discouraged. 11.4.The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District to ensure consistency with the Agriculture land use designation policies, particularly regarding minimum parcel area. 11.5.Paved and unpaved helipads and airstrips are discouraged on agricultural lands. 11.6.In order to limit the fragmentation of multi-parcel farm operations by the sale of individual parcels, the SLRD will work collaboratively with farm property owners and their agents, and the Agricultural Land Commission on a case by case basis to reconcile potentially conflicting interests. 11.7.The owners of agricultural lands are encouraged to facilitate the use of the land for agriculture by actively farming or leasing or loaning their lands to persons that would undertake active farming. 11.8.Non-farm uses on agricultural land, or non-soil dependent farm operations, are encouraged to locate in areas of poorer soils.
Economic Sustainability 11.9.The Regional District encourages economic diversification initiatives accessory to and compatible with farming that add value to locally produced farm products by: a) Supporting the development of farm outlets for the sale of local agricultural products; b) Permitting roadside stands for farm gate sales of agricultural products; c) Permitting bed and breakfasts in agricultural areas and guest houses/small scale agritourism operations that feature farm vacations and farming related activities; and, d) Support home occupations that produce value added products from locally produced agricultural products. 11.10. Agritourism accommodation to a maximum of 10 sleeping units per farm operation will be considered to be consistent with the Agriculture land use designation. Applications for agritourism accommodation will be considered on a site specific rezoning basis.
Agriculture Interface 11.11. Normal farm practices with possible undesirable side effects, such as odours, machinery and animal noises, and blowing dust, are to be expected in an agricultural area. In the case of conflict between a farm operation carrying on normal farm practices and adjacent non-farm development, the agricultural interest will be supported. 11.12. Future development activities in the plan area shall result in minimal creation of new residential- agriculture interfaces. Development and subdivisions at the residential - farm land interface shall be planned and mitigated as follows: a) no road endings shall abut the ALR boundary, b) the ALR – residential boundary shall be fenced and buffered as per the Agricultural Land Commission’s Landscaped Buffer Specifications, and, c) Building setbacks and other mitigations will be considered as per the Ministry of Agriculture and Land’s Guide to Edge Planning.
33
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 49 of 361 AUGUST 2009
11.13. Agricultural Impact Assessments should be considered to measure the impacts of a proposed major rezoning, subdivision, or non-farm use on the ALR or farmed lands. Mitigation should be required for identified impacts.
Housing 11.14. As per the Agricultural Land Commission Act and regulations, additional dwellings are permitted where necessary for farm use, provided: a) The property has farm classification under the Assessment Act; and, b) Supportive comments from the Regional Agrologist with the Ministry of Agriculture have been received.
Environmental Protection 11.15. Farm operations that sustain both farming and wildlife, protect against soil erosion and degradation, and maintain water quality and hydrological functions are supported. 11.16. Farmers are encouraged to prepare Environmental Farm Plans.10 11.17. To promote the long term sustainability of agricultural production, ecosystem integrity, and human health, land use decision making shall apply the precautionary principle: When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically, and in this context, the proponent of an activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof.
12. COMMERCIAL AND RESORT COMMERCIAL
Context
The District of Lillooet is the primary commercial centre servicing Electoral Area B residents. Seton Portage provides a second, smaller commercial centre to serve residents in the western part of the electoral area. In the vicinity of Pavilion Lake, the Ts’ay’laxw Nation has plans to reconstruct a commercial node at the old store site near the foot of the Clinton-Pavilion Road. The Ts’ay’laxw Nation is also redeveloping the Sky Blue Water Resort on Pavilion Lake. Small home-based businesses and resource-based industries are situated throughout the electoral area.
There is one community within Electoral Area B that has lands designated as Commercial, and that is Seton Portage. Community specific policies addressing the Commercial land use designation are contained in the Seton Portage Sub-area Plan.
10 Environmental Farm Plans are assessments voluntarily prepared by farm families to increase their environmental awareness in a variety of different areas on their farm. Farmers highlight their operation's environmental strengths, identify areas of environmental concern, and set realistic action plans with time tables to improve environmental conditions. Provincial funding may be available.
34
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 50 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Pavilion Lake is the only community within Electoral Area B that has lands designated as Resort Commercial. Policies addressing the Resort Commercial land use designation, and more specifically the Sky Blue Water Resort, are contained in the Pavilion Lake Sub-area Plan.
The 2008 District of Lillooet OCP identifies lands on the southwest boundary of the District, within Electoral Area B and also within the boundaries of an IR, as Special Area # 5. While local governments do not have land use planning authority within IRs, the District of Lillooet OCP recognizes these lands for their potential as a commercial node or resort opportunity. Special Area #5 is located at the gateway to Lillooet and ‘offers prime development opportunities associated with the attractive natural setting and the highway corridor.’
Requests for additional Commercial or Resort Commercial designated lands were not received as part of the OCP process.
Objectives
To support the District of Lillooet as the commercial centre for the plan area. To create a viable village center in Seton Portage that serves as a focal point for residents and tourists. To support home-based businesses.
Policies
12.1.Lands designated for commercial development are indicated on Maps 6 - 8 as Commercial or Resort Commercial. 12.2.Permitted uses on Commercial lands are restaurants, retail stores, tourist accommodation, offices, clinics, and other personal service businesses compatible with adjacent land uses, as well as auxiliary uses related to the above. 12.3.First Nations economic development initiatives that reflect the community’s values are supported, including the following proposed commercial nodes (both located within IRs): a) the old store site near the foot of the Clinton-Pavilion Road (Pavilion IR), b) lands on the southwest boundary of the District (Lillooet IR). 12.4.Where local First Nations and the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs propose to develop commercial nodes, the Regional District encourages public consultation, retaining a vegetated buffer along Highway 99, and adherence to applicable Smart Growth principles (mixed-use neighbourhoods and other initiatives to support the use of public transit). 12.5.A high standard of energy efficiency for all new commercial construction or renovations is encouraged: a) Consideration shall be given to incorporating energy efficiency objectives into zoning amendment bylaws; b) Density bonusing may be considered where alternative energy systems or other innovative sustainability initiatives are proposed.
13. INDUSTRIAL
35
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 51 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Context
Within Electoral Area B there are no lands designated as Industrial. Existing industrial-type operations are conducted as home industries or are resource-based and permitted under the Resource Management designation. Requests for additional Industrial designated lands were not received as part of the OCP process.
Objectives
To support the District of Lillooet as the industrial centre for the plan area. To provide a process for accommodating future industrial land use where appropriate, and to promote the wise use of industrial lands.
Policies
13.1.The Regional District encourages industrial uses to locate within the District of Lillooet. 13.2.Rezoning to Industrial may be considered where there is a clear benefit to the community, the land is separated from residential uses, and the activities will not negatively impact the community. 13.3.Applications for industrial development shall be accompanied by a proposal and concept plan addressing such matters as water usage, environmental protection, landscaping, buffering, access, servicing, reclamation, and any other matters deemed necessary by the Regional District.
14. INSTITUTIONAL
Context
Within Electoral Area B, there is one parcel of land in Seton Portage designated as Institutional. This parcel is the site of the community’s fire hall. Other institutional land uses (schools, clinics, ambulance stations, et cetera) are located within the District of Lillooet or on IRs. Requests for additional Institutional designated lands were not received as part of the OCP process.
Objectives
To support the development of lands for institutional use where appropriate. To promote the health and safety of residents and visitors by encouraging the improvement of medical services and fire and police protection. To foster cooperation among all agencies involved in planning for community services.
Policies
14.1.The Regional District recognizes the statutory responsibilities of federal and provincial government agencies and will work with these agencies to facilitate the provision of services, including health care, policing, emergency services, and road maintenance. 14.2.In support of the goals of achieving carbon neutral local government operations by 2020, a high standard of energy efficiency for all new institutional buildings or renovations is encouraged.
15. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREA
36
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 52 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Context
Under the Forests and Range Practices Act, the Ministry of Environment may authorize the designation of an area of land as a community watershed. The watershed designation allows for the establishment of water quality objectives and additional regulation of forest practices to prevent long-term changes to background water quality, quantity, and timing of flow. Within Electoral Area B, there are three provincially recognized community watersheds: one west of Lillooet, one in the Fountain Valley, and a small watershed near Seton Portage. These watersheds are designated as Community Watershed Protection Areas in the OCP.
Outside of the provincially recognized community watersheds, two other areas have been identified as good candidates for protection under the Forests and Range Practices Act. These areas include the larger watershed surrounding the community of Seton Portage and the drainage area for Pavilion Lake. Although they are not provincially recognized, these watersheds are also designated as Community Watershed Protection Areas in the OCP.
Objectives
To recognize the importance of water resources and protect and improve the quality and quantity of those resources for future generations. To ensure development activities within Electoral Area B support the protection of community watersheds.
Policies
15.1.The Community Watershed Protection Areas, as indicated on Maps 5 to 9, are those areas where the primary land management priority is to maintain local water quality. 15.2.Permitted uses within Community Watershed Protection Areas are appropriately managed resource extraction, dispersed outdoor recreation, and auxiliary uses related to these activities. 15.3.Intensive recreation, subdivision, and rezoning of lands within Community Watershed Protection Areas shall be discouraged. Recreationalists are encouraged to minimize stream crossings and stay on existing trails to prevent erosion. 15.4.The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Forests and Range to ensure that forest practices within community watersheds are conducted in accordance with the applicable regulations. 15.5.Community groups or individuals are encouraged to apply for formal protection of those Community Watershed Protection Areas that are not recognized under the Forests and Range Practices Act.
16. PARK
Context
The Regional District’s park function consists of taking ownership of land through the park dedication process at the time of subdivision or collecting funds in-lieu. No regional parks have yet been established. Electoral Area B residents access park facilities within the District of Lillooet or amenities provided by the province through the provincial parks system, forest recreation sites administered by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and the Arts, and private and Crown lands. Provincial parks include Duffey Lake Park, Marble Canyon Park, Edge Hills, and the Seton Portage Historic Park. The draft Lillooet LRMP proposes
37
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 53 of 361 AUGUST 2009 a 2,300 hectare extension to the Marble Canyon Park and potentially new parks at, Cerise Creek, Fred and Antoine Creeks, and the Yalakom Creek – Nile Mile Ridge.
Electoral Area B is home to an extensive network of trails and recreation sites (see Map 10). Many of these features are well used by locals and visitors, but are not officially recognized by provincial ministries or licensees.
As part of the OCP process, no requests were received for the SLRD to establish a regional park or a recreation or commuter trail network. Funding for these types of services would be generated through an additional property tax funded service area.
Objective
To satisfy the recreation needs of residents and visitors by ensuring that land is provided for community parks and recreation areas and by encouraging effective management.
Policies
16.1.Lands designated for recreation use and environmental conservation are indicated on Maps 5 - 8 as Park. 16.2.Where park dedication is required at the time of subdivision, the dedication of land shall be pursued where possible, rather than cash-in-lieu. 16.3.Future subdivision of waterfront properties shall favor the public use of the waterfront to the greatest extent possible through the provision of open space. 16.4.Where possible, parks shall be planned, designed, and maintained to provide for fire protection and mitigation. 16.5.The Regional District encourages the responsible provincial agencies to effectively maintain Park land under their jurisdiction. 16.6.The Regional District encourages the responsible provincial agencies to improve information and interpretive signage emphasizing recreational opportunities. 16.7.The Regional District supports the development of a joint comprehensive trails strategy for Electoral Area B and the District of Lillooet.
38
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 54 of 361 AUGUST 2009
PAVILION LAKE SUB-AREA PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 40
GUIDING PRINCIPLES ...... 40 COMMUNITY POLICIES ...... 41
1. GENERAL ...... 41 2. PUBLIC ACCESS ...... 41 3. IMPLEMENTATION ...... 42 LAND USE DESIGNATION POLICIES ...... 42
4. RESIDENTIAL ...... 42 5. RESORT COMMERCIAL ...... 43 6. AGRICULTURE ...... 43 7. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREA ...... 44 8. PARK ...... 44
39
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 55 of 361 AUGUST 2009
INTRODUCTION
Pavilion Lake is a physical feature, a geographic location, a human settlement, a cultural landscape, and a spiritual homeland. It attracts swimmers, divers, boaters, fishing enthusiasts, and naturalists, and supports unique ecological features, such as some of the world’s largest freshwater microbiolites (coral-like sedimentary structures formed by algal mat organisms). The lake is also licensed as a water supply for the Diamond S Ranch, a historically significant agricultural operation that covers hundreds of acres near the northern boundary of the plan area. Steep limestone walls and forested hillsides surrounding Pavilion Lake create an impressive canyon that provides outstanding rock and ice climbing opportunities, a natural canvas for remarkable displays of sunlight and shadows, and a sense of calm seclusion.
The plan area (see Map 6) falls within the traditional territory of the Ts’kw’aylaxw people, who are part of the Secwepemc (Shuswap) and St'át'imc (Interior Salish) Nations. The Ts’kw’aylaxw own and operate the Sky Blue Water Resort, a collection of rustic lakefront cabins and facilities for recreational tourists. They also own and have plans to redevelop the site of the former Pavilion General store, which falls outside the plan area, but will serve local residents and visitors.
Pavilion’s history of non-indigenous uses began when roads and railway lines linking the BC interior plateau to the Fraser Canyon and the coast were built through the area. These transportation corridors engendered roadhouses, early settlement, and some of BC’s first large ranches. Today, Pavilion Lake is home to a small community of year-round residents, and is a destination for many more seasonal residents, tourists, and recreational visitors. Two areas of settlement along the northern shore of the lake are best described as small-lot residential subdivisions with permanent and semi-permanent dwellings.
Existing and proposed parks cover most of the plan area. In April 2001 local ecological, recreational, and cultural attributes were officially recognised and protected through the addition of Pavilion Lake to Marble Canyon Provincial Park. The draft Lillooet Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) anticipates further expansion of the park boundaries. Communication and cooperation between the SLRD and the Ministry of Environment is thus a key element in any land use decisions for Pavilion Lake.
The community of Pavilion Lake is not large, nor is it experiencing notable growth. The prospect of significant development pressure within the plan area is remote. To reflect the local context, this sub-area plan covers a small geographic area, it addresses a limited range of local issues, it is restricted in its scope to a short list of basic planning principles, land use designations, and policies, and it has a simple goal:
‘To preserve the natural and scenic characteristics of Pavilion Lake, and respect the quiet, rural lifestyle enjoyed by the community of permanent and seasonal residents who live in the area.’
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Any future development in the plan area must be incremental, carefully considered, and only permitted to the extent that it reflects and supports the principles of this plan. These principles include:
a. Pavilion Lake is part of the Ts’kw’aylaxw Nation traditional territory. It’s spiritual and cultural significance to local indigenous people must be respected. b. The ecological integrity of Pavilion Lake is a key community priority. c. The quality and quantity of the local water supply must be protected. d. Existing water tenures must be recognized, respected, and preserved.
40
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 56 of 361 AUGUST 2009
e. Public access to Pavilion Lake should be managed to allow for recreational use by locals and visitors while minimising conflicts with adjacent landowners. f. Community planning will respect and support Ministry of Environment management directions for the Marble Canyon Provincial Park.
The remainder of the plan is divided into two sections: community policies and land use designation policies.
COMMUNITY POLICIES
1. GENERAL
Policies
1.1. The Regional District will work with landowners to identify local land use issues and develop practical strategies to address these issues. 1.2. The Regional District will consider the adoption of a new zoning bylaw for Pavilion Lake that complements the policies of this Official Community Plan and is more specific to the local context than the existing zoning (SLRD Bylaw 670). 1.3. The Regional District will communicate with the Ministry of Environment to ensure that local government land use decisions are consistent with park management objectives. 1.4. The Regional District supports the Ts’kw’aylaxw Nation’s plans to redevelop a commercial node at District Lot DL 89 (Although District Lot 89 falls outside the sub-plan area, proposed facilities are expected to meet future demands for neighbourhood commercial services.) 1.5. Industrial development is not considered appropriate within the plan area. Proponents of industrial activity will be encouraged to seek alternative locations. 1.6. In conjunction with the community and provincial agencies, the Regional District supports the development of a recreation management plan for Pavilion Lake, addressing motorized recreation, public access, dock construction, campgrounds, water quality, and wildlife habitat.
2. PUBLIC ACCESS
The areas identified on Map 6 as ‘public access’ are existing public rights-of-way that enable visitors and locals to reach the lake without crossing private land. These areas encourage equal access to all public access points in order to reduce the potential impacts of intensive use.
Policies
2.1. All existing public road rights of way should be equally accessible and available for use by residents and visitors, assuming site specific approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. 2.2. The Regional District will work with the Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and local residents to provide appropriate signage and maintenance of ‘public access’ areas.
41
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 57 of 361 AUGUST 2009
3. IMPLEMENTATION
Policies
3.1. To ensure consistency with the goal and principles of the sub-area plan, the following implementation measures are adopted: a. The Pavilion Lake Sub-area Plan will be distributed to local First Nations and provincial agencies for reference. b. The Pavilion Lake Sub-area Plan will be available to property owners and local residents for reference. c. If requested by the Ministry of Environment, the Regional District will participate actively in Park Management discussions. d. The Regional District will consider amending Zoning Bylaw 670 to more accurately reflect the land use priorities of the Pavilion Lake community. e. Community Plan amendments will be considered in consultation with local residents and property owners, the Ts’kw’aylaxw Nation, and provincial agencies. f. The SLRD will review the Pavilion Lake Sub-area Plan within five years of adoption.
LAND USE DESIGNATION POLICIES
This section describes the five land use designations within the plan area. The boundaries of these land use designations are outlined on Map 6.
4. RESIDENTIAL
The Residential designation applies to fee simple lands surrounding the lake, including settled small-lot subdivisions and larger undeveloped parcels. The goal of the Residential designation is to accommodate development of a form, density, and location that meets future housing needs without compromising the rural character of the existing community.
Policies
4.1. The creation of additional waterfront parcels for residential use on Pavilion Lake is not supported. 4.2. The zoning bylaw shall be reviewed by the Regional District to ensure consistency with the OCP regarding policies within the Residential land use designation, particularly regarding minimum parcel size and land use on Pavilion Lake.
42
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 58 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Number of Dwellings 4.3. The Regional District strongly discourages any further development of multiple dwellings on individual parcels; this type of development contravenes existing zoning, presents health and ecological concerns, and is not supported by the community. 4.4. The Regional District will work with local residents to achieve compliance with land use regulations regarding the number of dwellings on individual parcels. 4.5. The Regional District encourages owners of parcels with multiple dwelling units to consult with Interior Health to address local sewage disposal concerns. 4.6. Any future zoning changes should not allow more than 1 dwelling unit to be located on parcels that are smaller than 1 hectare. 4.7. Any future zoning changes should not allow more than 2 dwelling units to be located on parcels that are larger than 1 hectare.
5. RESORT COMMERCIAL
The Resort Commercial designation applies to Sky Blue Water Resort. This designation supports the Ts’kw’aylaxw Nation’s continued ownership and operation of the resort, including potential future development to accommodate demand for recreational use and lake access.
Policies
5.1. New development at the Sky Blue Water Resort should be designed to reflect the principles contained within this plan, and the creation of these designs should involve the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to ensure that proper traffic management plans and studies are in place. 5.2. Development that facilitates increased use of the Resort should adopt best practices for sewage treatment to minimize potential impacts on the lake ecology.
6. AGRICULTURE
All lands designated as Agriculture coincide with the boundaries of the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). This designation includes two tracts of land on the northeast side of Pavilion Lake. Land within the ALR is regulated by the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC). The purpose of the ALC is first and foremost to preserve agricultural land in the province and encourage the establishment and maintenance of farms. Provisions of the Agricultural Land Commission Act take precedence over local government land use bylaws.
Policies
6.1. Land designated Agriculture is intended for agricultural uses. Agricultural uses include the growing, rearing, producing, and harvesting of agricultural products, the sale of agricultural products, agritourism activities, as well as greenhouses and nursery uses. 6.2. All uses and subdivision of land within the Agricultural Land Reserve shall be in accordance with the Agricultural Land Commission Act.
43
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 59 of 361 AUGUST 2009
6.3. To promote the sustainability of the agricultural community, exclusions from the Agricultural Land Reserve and further subdivision of lots within the Agricultural Land Reserve are generally not supported. 6.4. To protect the water quality of Pavilion Lake, agricultural practices should be compliant with provincial and federal acts and regulations.
7. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREA
The Community Watershed Protection Area designation covers the rocky and forested slopes that rise to the northeast and southwest sides of the lake, to the height of land that forms the plan area boundary. This is intended to reflect the local importance of a safe drinking water supply by discouraging activities that could lead to the contamination of streams or groundwater. This watershed is not formally recognized under the Forests and Range Practices Act.
Policies
7.1. Land in the Community Watershed Protection Area designation should remain undeveloped. 7.2. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Forests and Range to limit activities within this designated in order to protect scenic values, recreational potential, and water quality.
8. PARK
This designation applies to the Pavilion Lake addition to Marble Canyon Provincial Park. It is intended to support BC Parks in managing the sensitive environment and special features as described in the park’s Management Direction Statement.
Policies
8.1. The Regional District will cooperate with the Ministry of Environment to ensure that land uses adjacent to the park are consistent with park management objectives. 8.2. Public recreational use of Pavilion Lake should be managed to ensure that the ecological features and water quality of the lake are protected.
44
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 60 of 361 AUGUST 2009
SETON PORTAGE SUB-AREA PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 46
PLAN AREA BOUNDARY ...... 46 GUIDING PRINCIPLES ...... 47 GENERAL PLAN AREA POLICIES ...... 47
1. COMMUNITY GROWTH AND CHARACTER ...... 47 2. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ...... 48 3. COMMUNITY SERVICES ...... 48 4. INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 49 5. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING ...... 49 LAND USE DESIGNATION POLICIES ...... 50
6. RESIDENTIAL AND RURAL RESIDENTIAL ...... 50 7. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ...... 50 8. COMMERCIAL ...... 51 9. INDUSTRIAL ...... 51 10. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREA ...... 51 11. PARK ...... 52
45
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 61 of 361 AUGUST 2009
INTRODUCTION
Seton Portage is a small community of approximately 150 residents situated between Anderson and Seton Lakes. Adjacent to Seton Portage, on the northwest shore of Seton Lake, is the Shalalth Indian Reserve, home to more than 500 members of the Seton Lake Band. There are also a number of small settlements, lake-accessed properties, and agricultural operations, such as Ponderosa Ranch, bordering either side of Anderson and Seton Lakes. These are remote communities, accessible via D’Arcy and the Douglas Trail (Highline Road), or via Lillooet and the Mission Mountain Road and Highway 40.
The plan area is situated in the biogeoclimatic transition zone between the moist Coast Mountain environment and the drier climate of the Interior Plateau. The area is surrounded by steep mountain valleys. The land mass that is now the community of Seton Portage was formed some time between 8,000 and 20,000 years ago when a landslide came down from the surrounding peaks to create a blockage in what was once a single lake.
Within the plan area, there is evidence of human habitation dating back nearly 7000 years. The region was originally settled by the St'át'imc Nation, attracted by the mild climate and abundant fish and game. In the mid-1800s, spurred by both the Klondike and Cariboo gold rushes, Seton Portage functioned as a major transportation hub. Miners traveled along the historic Douglas Trail route, following Harrison, Lillooet and Anderson Lakes to Seton Portage, then on to Lillooet.
In the early part of the 20th Century, the area provided a transport linkage to the gold claims in Bralorne and Gold Bridge using the Mission Mountain route. At the same time, the Pacific Great Eastern Railway was constructed from D’Arcy to Lillooet, providing a new link between Seton Portage and the Lower Mainland. The next significant development for Seton Portage occurred with the construction of the Mission Mountain hydro-electric generation project in the 1950s. The Bridge River was dammed, creating the Carpenter Reservoir. Water from the reservoir was diverted into penstocks constructed under Mission Mountain, and finally released into Seton Lake after powering a series of large turbines.
Today, Seton Portage and the Anderson/Seton Lake area is still home to the Seton Lake Band, centred around the Shalalth community. A number of these people are still involved in traditional hunting, fishing, and trapping practices, serving as important reminders of the subsistence lifestyle that once dominated the region. Both the native and non-native population of the area is comprised of retirees, seasonal residents, and those employed in the tourism, agriculture, forestry, rail, and hydro sectors.
PLAN AREA BOUNDARY
The boundary for the Seton Portage Sub-Area Plan comprises a significant portion of SLRD Electoral Area B (See Maps 7 and 8). It includes the community of Seton Portage, the surrounding watershed, and most of the rural residential properties along Anderson and Seton Lakes. The plan area is bordered to the southwest by the Electoral Area C boundary near the southern tip of Anderson Lake, to the south by the height of watersheds that drain into Anderson and Seton Lakes, to the east by the extent of rural residential properties on Seton Lake and to the north by the Electoral Area A boundary.
The OCP was originally intended to focus on the community of Seton Portage, however many of the residents with fee simple and crown lease properties on Anderson and Seton Lakes expressed a desire to be included in the plan, as they share many similar land use concerns.
46
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 62 of 361 AUGUST 2009
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The community of Seton Portage is not developing rapidly, nor is it expected to see significant development in the near future. Therefore the goal of the Seton Portage Sub-area Plan is:
‘To maintain the quiet, rural residential lifestyle of the Seton Portage, Shalalth, Anderson Lake, and Seton Lake communities, while providing for some low-impact development.’
The community of Seton Portage, property owners on Anderson and Seton Lakes, and the Regional Board are generally supportive of the following as common objectives to guide future development on both private and public land within the plan area:
a. To respect the spiritual and cultural significance of the traditional territory of the Seton Lake Band, which comprises a significant portion of the plan area. This includes following, as closely as possible, the recommendations put forward in the St’at’imc Draft Land Use Plan. b. To improve communications between the aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities in the plan area and between both of these groups and the Squamish Lillooet Regional District. c. To maintain legal, viable road access to the communities via the Highline Road/ Douglas Trail, Mission Mountain Road, and Highway 40. d. To secure public boat access to Anderson Lake at Seton Portage. e. To work with the Ministry of Forests and Range and BC Hydro to protect the area from the threat of wildfire, particularly in the urban/wildfire interface zone. f. To create and maintain a Bear Smart waste management system for the Seton Portage community. g. To work towards establishing an emergency response plan for the entire plan area, as part of the SLRD’s emergency plan. h. To promote the protection of ecological integrity throughout the plan area. i. To ensure the economic viability of the Seton Portage community. j. To maintain existing opportunities for additional rural residential development.
GENERAL PLAN AREA POLICIES
1. COMMUNITY GROWTH AND CHARACTER
Policies
1.1. The Regional District will work with landowners to identify local land use issues and develop practical strategies to address these issues. 1.2. The Regional District supports preservation initiatives for cultural and historical assets within the plan area. This includes potential heritage designations or an acknowledgement that certain areas need to remain undisclosed in order to maintain their preservation.
47
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 63 of 361 AUGUST 2009
1.3. The Regional District does not support the sale of vacant crown land for residential development within the plan area. 1.4. Any growth and development on private land within the community of Seton Portage should adhere to the principles of Smart Growth, specifically: a. Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities; and, b. Protect and preserve green space and sensitive areas. 1.5. Commercial and residential development that involves increased use of lakefront properties on either Anderson or Seton Lakes should adopt best practices for sewage treatment to minimize potential impacts on the ecology of the lakes. 1.6. The Regional District will work with the Ministry of Forests and Range to improve communication and education on forest fire hazards, particularly with respect to signage, the level of fire danger, and the appropriate periods for campfires. 1.7. Although the provincial Agricultural Land Reserve designation was removed from land around Seton Portage in 1986, the Regional District continues to support agricultural activities in this area. Agricultural uses include the growing, rearing, producing, and harvesting of agricultural products, the sale of agricultural products, agritourism activities, nurseries, and the use of greenhouses.
2. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Policies
2.1. The Regional District supports the return of passenger rail service to the communities of D’Arcy, Seton Portage, and Lillooet. 2.2. The Regional District will assist the community in attempting to secure the development of legal water access in the form of a beach, mooring, dock, and boat ramp on Anderson Lake close to Seton Portage. Water access onto Seton Lake is also a project supported by the Regional District. 2.3. In order to promote economic diversification and the development of the tourism industry, the Regional District will support the development of a strategy and infrastructure that will encourage low impact tourism activities that reflect the values of this plan. 2.4. The Regional District supports the development of home-based businesses and home-based industries that are self-contained, as a means to further promote economic diversity in the Seton Portage community. 2.5. The Regional District supports measures taken to ensure the sustainability and vitality of the economy in Seton Portage, as long as they do not create a negative aesthetic impact on the community.
3. COMMUNITY SERVICES
Policies
3.1. The Regional District will try to work with Chief and council of the Seton Lake Band and the community of Seton Portage to create a more effective communication link between the residents of the Seton Portage/ Shalalth area and the SLRD. The creation of a Local Community
48
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 64 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Commission, as provided for in Section 838 of the Local Government Act, is a possible means to secure this link. 3.2. The Regional District will work with the community to establish more effective waste diversion mechanisms, including the potential provision of a recycling depot and by making household composters available to the community for purchase at a subsidized rate. 3.3. The Regional District will work with the Seton Fire Department to create some form of emergency planning for the plan area. This will follow the implementation of a 9-1-1 service across Electoral Areas A & B, and will likely be put forward in conjunction with the creation of an SLRD-wide Emergency Response Plan. 3.4. The Regional District will collaborate with School District #74 and local families to ensure the long-term viability of the existing Sk’il Mountain School. 3.5. If the opportunity presents itself, the Regional District will look to form new parks or create facilities within existing parks to provide for recreational amenities within the community of Seton Portage.
4. INFRASTRUCTURE
These policies apply to all existing access roads (Highline Road/ Douglas Trail, Mission Mountain Road), transmission lines, and trail corridors.
Policies
4.1. The Regional District will support community efforts to provide secure, year-round access to the community of Seton Portage via the Highline Road/Douglas Trail and the Mission Mountain Rd. 4.2. The Regional District will support lobbying of the Ministry of Forests and Range and the Ministry of Transportation to make certain that they follow their legislated obligations for maintenance of access roads. 4.3. The Regional District will support requests to the BC Transmission Corporation to follow through with its obligations to reduce the fire hazard under power lines by eliminating slash and debris piles. 4.4. The Regional District will support requests to the BC Transmission Corporation to ensure that power lines are not being used beyond their capacity and causing a potential hazard with excessive sagging. 4.5. The communities within the plan area support an extension of the proposed Sea to Sky Trail from Horseshoe Bay to D’Arcy through to Seton Portage and on to Lillooet. The route will provide recreational access through the area, following existing roadways and potential crown land trail easements. 4.6. The Regional District supports the provision of high-speed internet access to the community of Seton Portage.
5. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
To ensure consistency with the goal and principles of the OCP, the following implementation measures are adopted:
49
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 65 of 361 AUGUST 2009
5.1. The Seton Portage Sub-area Plan will be distributed to local First Nations and provincial agencies for reference, and will be made available to property owners and local residents. 5.2. Plan amendments will be considered in consultation with local residents and property owners, the Seton Lake Band, and provincial agencies.
LAND USE DESIGNATION POLICIES
This section describes the five land use designations within the plan area. The boundaries of these land use designations are outlined on Maps 7 and 8.
6. RESIDENTIAL AND RURAL RESIDENTIAL
Policies
6.1. Future development must be of a form, density, and location that meets future housing needs without compromising the rural character of the existing community. 6.2. Residential development will be discouraged in the urban/wildfire interface zone, or within areas that could be threatened in the event of significant forest fire activity. 6.3. The Regional District encourages owners of water-access lots on Anderson Lake to make legal arrangements for storage of cars and boat trailers in D’Arcy. 6.4. Subdivisions to create lots accessible by water only are discouraged. 6.5. Minimum residential lot sizes are applicable only to the extent that site specific environmental factors allow for, including slope and natural features, access to the site, and the ability to service a parcel with water and sewer.
Residential 6.6. The minimum lot size permitted for a newly created parcel on lands designated as Residential shall be 0.8 hectares. 6.7. Subdivision to create a distinct village core through parcels smaller than 0.8 hectares may be considered as part of a comprehensive planning/rezoning process.
Rural Residential 6.8. The minimum lot size permitted for a newly created parcel on lands designated as Rural Residential shall be 8 hectares.
7. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Policies
7.1. All crown land within the OCP area that is not an Indian Reserve or within the Community Watershed Protection Area designation, is designated Resource Management.
50
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 66 of 361 AUGUST 2009
7.2. The Regional District will work with the Ministry of Forests and Range to address the issue of increasing fuel load and fire hazard on Crown Land. 7.3. The Regional District will work with the Ministry of Forests and Range and the community of Seton Portage to address flood control and debris flow issues arising from the Whitecap Creek Fire of 2004 and any future significant forest fire activities.
8. COMMERCIAL
Policies
8.1. To contribute to the community’s economic vitality, additional development on Commercial designated parcels is supported.
9. INDUSTRIAL
Policies
9.1. There are no industrial designations within the Seton Portage and Anderson/Seton Lakes OCP. However, should an industrial development proposal come forward, it will be dealt with through a site specific rezoning process, including a public hearing.
10. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREA
This designation pertains to crown land within the drainage of watersheds that are known sources of drinking water within the plan area. This watershed is not officially recognized under the under the Forests and Range Practices Act.
Policies
10.1. Land in this designation should remain undeveloped. 10.2. The Regional District will work with the Ministry of Environment to establish provincial watershed protection designations for the areas designated Community Watershed Protection Area in this plan. 10.3. Activities that could lead to the contamination of streams or ground water and ultimately lead to an unsafe drinking water supply are discouraged. 10.4. Commercial motorized recreation tenures should not be issued in areas under this designation. 10.5. Independent Power Projects are not supported within this designation. 10.6. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Forests and Range and the Ministry of Energy, and Mines, and Petroleum Resources to limit activities in the area designated as Community Watershed Protection Area so that scenic values, recreational potential, and water quality are protected.
51
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 67 of 361 AUGUST 2009
11. PARK
Seton Portage Historic Provincial Park is located on the south side of the Seton River, on the main road through the community. The park was established on March 29, 1972 by the British Columbia Railway. The park commemorates the first stretch of railway constructed in the province. In 1861, three miles of railway track were constructed to transport miners and their provisions between Anderson and Seton Lakes. A continuation of the railway line to Lillooet was completed in 1915.
Policies
11.1. The Regional District will cooperate with BC Rail to ensure that land uses adjacent to the park are consistent with park management objectives.
52
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 68 of 361 AUGUST 2009
YALAKOM VALLEY SUB-AREA PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 54
GENERAL PLAN AREA POLICIES ...... 54
1. COMMUNITY GROWTH AND CHARACTER ...... 54 2. BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY ...... 55 3. COMMUNITY SERVICES,INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TRANSPORTATION ...... 56 4. EMERGENCY SERVICES ...... 57 5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ...... 57 6. RECREATION,TOURISM, AND ACCESS ...... 58 LAND USE DESIGNATION POLICIES ...... 59
7. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ...... 59 8. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ...... 60 9. AGRICULTURE ...... 60 10. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREAS ...... 61 11. PARKS AND PROTECTED AREAS ...... 61
53
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 69 of 361 AUGUST 2009
INTRODUCTION
The Yalakom River and Antoine Creek Watersheds, located approximately thirty kilometres northwest of Lillooet on Highway 40, are the geographical area to which the Yalakom Valley Sub-area Plan applies (see Map 9). The plan area consists of approximately 75,000 hectares of land. The elevational range is 400 metres to nearly 3000 metres. The topography consists of highly incised, steep valleys in the southern portion of the area, with benchlands along the lower Yalakom River and Bridge River. The northern Yalakom Watershed has gentler terrain and long ridges in transition to the Fraser Plateau. The geology is highly variable and complex. Nearly 25 per cent of the area is alpine.
Similar to other communities in the northern half of Electoral Area B, the climate in the Yalakom Valley is very dry throughout the year due to the rainshadow effect of the Coast Range. The valley exhibits some of the hottest, driest ecosystem types in British Columbia along the low elevation benches. Over the last thirty-five years, residents have noticed changes in local climate with more variable conditions, including timing of seasons, temperature, and precipitation. Residents report that the danger from wildfire has increased dramatically.
GENERAL PLAN AREA POLICIES
1. COMMUNITY GROWTH AND CHARACTER
The Yalakom community is a diverse group of families making up the latest wave of settlement, which has been ongoing since 1897. The community has maintained a steady population of approximately seventy permanent residents. Settlement has affected only a small part of the Yalakom River and Antoine Creek Watersheds, mostly on the benchlands along the rivers in the southern part of the watersheds. Through the OCP planning process residents expressed their feelings of connectedness to the land and commitment to protecting the wilderness values that make their community uniquely spectacular. Homesteads have developed using principles of sustainability and self-reliance. Families grow large gardens and produce a significant percentage of organic food locally.
Policies
1.1. The present character of the community, a small, rural community living at the edge of wilderness, should be maintained. 1.2. The pattern of slow community growth should be maintained. 1.3. The healthy, caring social relations among all community members and the good relations with surrounding communities should continue to be emphasized. 1.4. The plan area shall be considered a ‘Dark Night Sky Zone’, and those activities that contribute light pollution are discouraged in order to maintain ideal conditions for local and visiting astronomers. 1.5. Honouring and accommodating aboriginal title, rights and traditional uses, while ensuring community values and privacy is respected, is encouraged.
54
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 70 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Cultural Heritage 1.6. Studies to assess and locate cultural and historical sites and features in the plan area are supported. 1.7. Preservation initiatives for cultural or historical sites and features in the plan area are supported.
2. BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY
The biodiversity of Yalakom Valley is considered high in relation to the wider bioregion. Biodiversity is defined by the Yalakom community as the diversity of ecosystem types, plants, animals, and other organisms that live in an area, and the evolutionary and functional processes that link all of them, allowing them to adapt to biophysical and ecological conditions over time.
The Yalakom community is supportive of Ecosystem-Based Conservation Planning (EBCP). EBCP is a method of ecosystem protection, maintenance, restoration and human use that as the first priority maintains and restores natural ecological integrity, including biological diversity, across the full range of spatial and temporal scales. At the same time, EBCP guides ecologically and culturally sustainable communities and their economies by providing a comprehensive picture of the ecosystem and the ecological limits for human uses. (In this definition, the word natural describes a condition which reflects pre-industrial ecological characteristics and includes indigenous management systems.)
Yalakom Valley residents have begun an EBCP for the Yalakom Valley and adjacent areas along the Bridge River. The analysis was carried out with the assistance of the Lillooet Tribal Council and the technical expertise of the Silva Forest Foundation. The results of the research were incorporated into the St’át’imc Draft Land Use Plan (Nxekmenlhkálha Iti Tmícwa).
Policies
2.1. All permanent and temporary residents, as well as other parties conducting land use activities within the Yalakom River and Antoine Creek Watersheds, are encouraged to apply the following Ecosystem-Based Conservation Planning principles: a. focus on what to protect, before deciding what to use; b. recognize the interdependent relationships between ecosystems, cultures and economies; c. apply the precautionary principle to all plans and activities; d. protect, maintain and, where necessary, restore ecological connectivity, and the full range of composition, structure, and function of enduring features, natural plant communities, and animal habitats and ranges. e. facilitate the protection and restoration of indigenous land use; f. ensure that any planning process is inclusive of the known range of values and interests; g. provide for diverse, ecologically sustainable, community-based economies; and, h. practice adaptive management. 2.2. In all activities, protect the water quality, quantity, and timing of flow for all rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, and springs, including temporary flows. The community’s first priority is protecting
55
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 71 of 361 AUGUST 2009
waterbodies and the riparian areas within domestic use watersheds and along the Yalakom River itself. 2.3. All permanent and temporary residents, as well as other parties conducting land use activities within the Yalakom River and Antoine Creek Watersheds, are encouraged to continue to study and educate themselves about the biodiversity and changing ecological conditions of the area. Collecting a database of ecosystem types and the associated plant and animal communities is encouraged. 2.4. Awareness and protection of rare or endangered plants, animals, and ecotypes is encouraged. 2.5. Continued development of the Yalakom Valley Ecosystem-Based Conservation Plan is encouraged.
Pesticides 2.6. As the Yalakom Community is opposed to pesticide use within the plan area, all land users are encouraged to apply natural pest control measures, such as those approved for organic farming. 2.7. All corporations, contractors, and provincial agencies and are strongly encouraged to notify the Yalakom Community Council of pesticide use within the plan area, including information on the location and timing of the pesticide application.
3. COMMUNITY SERVICES,INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TRANSPORTATION
Water supply and liquid waste management systems within the Yalakom Valley are all private systems. Some water supplies are shared among neighbours through private agreements. The water supplies are typically untreated surface water, used for both domestic and agricultural purposes. The community values the unchlorinated, unfloridated water and wishes to continue to hold responsibility for protecting and conserving the resource. Solid waste is brought to SLRD landfill in Lillooet by individual residents.
Highway 40, the Yalakom Road, and Barton and Osterlund Roads are the primary routes through the Yalakom community. Within the sub-plan area, Highway 40 is largely paved. The other primary routes are Ministry of Transportation maintained gravel roads. All other roads within the sub-plan area that are used to access residences are private roads maintained by the owner or Forest Service Roads.
Other than road maintenance, there are no provincial services provided within the plan area. Local children meet the school bus (provided by the School District #74) at Highway 40 and attend schools in Lillooet. The community lacks reliable telephone service. Some residents have satellite phones and satellite internet.
Policies
3.1. The Regional District supports the development and maintenance of a local or regional recycling program. 3.2. The Regional District supports the development of multi-purpose community hall within the plan area.
56
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 72 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Yalakom Road and Highway 40 3.3. The Regional District encourages the Ministry of Transportation to: a. improve Yalakom Road through additional grading and use of a water truck in conjunction with the grader; b. coordinate road maintenance with the school bus schedule in order to ensure safe travelling conditions for school children; c. refrain from applying pesticides or road salt in the Yalakom Valley; d. improve road signage with consultation with the community; e. refrain from depositing fill at two locations adjacent to Highway 40 switchbacks where the slopes are unstable.
4. EMERGENCY SERVICES
Within the Yalakom Valley, wildfire, avalanches, and hazards related to La Joie or Terzaghi Dams, such as spills and flooding, have the most potential to create emergency situations.
The Yalakom Community has organized a Wildfire Protection Group to coordinate the residents’ response to wildfire outbreaks. Many residents have taken a fire suppression course through the Ministry of Forests and Range, and several have first-aid training. A system is in place to ensure proper reporting of fires and notification of residents. The community has access to a full set of fire-fighting tools, which was provided through a grant from the Regional District. The tools are housed in a central location in the valley and fire suppression drills conducted seasonally. The community intends to continue to develop its capacity to suppress fire locally, including the future acquisition of a water truck. Residents are interested in working with the Ministry of Forests and Range to explore methods of controlled burning near homes in order to protect the community from wildfire.
Policies
4.1. The Regional District supports the establishment of reliable communication system, particularly for use during emergency events. 4.2. As funds become available, the Regional District supports continued funding of the Wildfire Protection Group for emergency management education, first-aid training, purchasing emergency equipment, and establishing an emergency vehicle in the community. 4.3. The Regional District encourages BC Hydro to establish a protocol and warning system for downstream communities in the event of an emergency affecting Terzaghi or La Joie Dams.
5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Mining and timber extraction continue to be important economic activities in the Yalakom Valley. Hunting and recreational pursuits are also significant economic generators. The community wish to ensure that these economic activities are not detrimental to ecological and community sustainability, and believes that diverse, smaller-scale economic activities are more suitable for the plan area than large-scale operations.
57
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 73 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Policies
5.1. The use of the Yalakom EBCP principles to create an ecologically sustainable, community-based economy is supported. 5.2. The continued diversification of the local economy is supported, particularly with organic farming, eco-certified wood products, trades, crafts, and home-based businesses that focus on ecological and community sustainability. 5.3. Ecological restoration projects to address the effects of human land use and climate change are supported. 5.4. Further development of local food production capacity and self-sufficiency is encouraged. 5.5. Yalakom community residents are encouraged to reduce community-level greenhouse gas emissions by: a) using alternative transportation methods (for example, carpooling and developing local public transit), b) reducing the need to commute (for example, by creating home-based businesses), c) using renewable energy sources for homes and vehicles, d) increasing energy efficiency to the greatest extent possible, and, e) sharing resource and implementing Smart Growth principles.
6. RECREATION,TOURISM, AND ACCESS
Policies
Recreation 6.1. Maintaining the current spectrum of outdoor recreation activities is encouraged, with the proviso that closing roads and preventing motorized access to alpine areas is supported where necessary to maintain and improve these activities. 6.2. The low impact, non-motorized11 outdoor recreation opportunity areas proposed by the draft Lillooet LRMP, particularly for the entire Shulaps Range, are supported. 6.3. Directing intensive recreational use to existing sites, such as Lac La Mare, Beaverdam, Ore Creek Recreation Site, is supported. 6.4. Provincial agencies are encouraged to protect highly valued trails from irresponsible, motorized use. 6.5. Provincial agencies are encouraged to provide education to recreational visitors to encourage responsible enjoyment of both mid-country and backcountry areas, and signage for grazing, logging, or other industrial activities.
11 For example, hiking, primitive camping, hunting, fishing, horseback riding, and backcountry skiing.
58
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 74 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Tourism 6.6. The development of services for tourists and backcountry recreationists is supported, particularly locally owned establishments that provide food and services, and create an outlet for locally made products, and showcase the community’s local culture. 6.7. Backcountry commercial recreation operators are encouraged to uphold the EBCP principles and consult with experienced local tourism operators and the Yalakom Community Council regarding appropriate land use, locations of critical wildlife habitat, ecologically sensitive areas, and hazardous areas.
Access 6.8. The Regional District encourages the Integrated Land Management Bureau to: a. initiate a comprehensive access management planning process for the plan area, b. implement the recommendations of previous access management agreements developed through the Yalakom Local Resource Use Plan (YLRUP) and the draft Lillooet LRMP; c. maintain existing Wildlife Act motor vehicle closures, including those closures in restricting motorized access above 1920 meters at China Head Mountain, Nine Mile Ridge, Red Mountain to French Mountain, and Hog Mountain; d. improve enforcement efforts and access controls to prevent motorized vehicles from destructive, irresponsible use of backcountry areas; e. implement seasonal access closures in the Upper Yalakom Valley to protect the migration routes of two distinct herds of California Bighorn Sheep (radio collar studies have shown that the size of these herds has declined in recent years); and, f. improve information availability and local signage to advise all users of the locations of private properties and encourage respect for local residents’ peace and quiet enjoyment.
LAND USE DESIGNATION POLICIES
7. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Policies
7.1. Maintaining the current zone of Rural Resource 3 (RR3) is supported. 7.2. Zoning amendment applications to decrease the minimum lots size for newly created lots or increase the permitted number of dwelling will be considered on a case by case basis, in consultation with the Yalakom Community.
59
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 75 of 361 AUGUST 2009
Management of Natural Resources 7.3. As the community lives on the edge of a wilderness area with many species of wildlife, residents are encouraged to develop their homes in manner that conserves native species and their habitats, especially species at risk, while applying Bear Smart practices. 7.4. The Regional District encourages individuals and corporations conducting resource management activities within the plan area to: a. consult with the Yalakom Community Council and the Lillooet Tribal Council; b. follow the principles and management directions found within the Official Community Plan, the Yalakom EBCP, and the St’át’imc Draft Land Use Plan (Nxekmenlhkálha Iti Tmícwa); c. emphasize conservation, sharing of our resources, and community-based resource extraction and processing. 7.5. While the development of alternative energy sources is encouraged, independent power project proposals that that do not reflect the principles of the OCP are opposed. 7.6. Other than power lines that directly serve residences (25 kV), the construction of major power line corridors (69 kV or greater) within the plan area is opposed. 7.7. The designations in the St’át’imc Draft Land Use Plan of Antoine, Fred, Ore, Applespring and Terry Creek watersheds as non-industrial use areas where water conservation and protection is the primary consideration is supported.
8. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
There are no lands designated as Commercial or Industrial within the plan area.
Policies
8.1. Should a commercial development proposal come forward, proponents are encouraged to consult with the community and consider ecosystem-based conservation planning principles as part of the rezoning application process.
9. AGRICULTURE
There are no lands designated as Agriculture within the sub-plan area.
In the Yalakom Community most gardens and farms are certified organic or adhere to sustainable, organic principles. The community is opposed to the use of deleterious substances that would threaten or impair the ability to grow organic food crops. Local farmers emphasize the importance of soil building and reducing reliance on fossil-fuel-based fertilizers.
Policies
9.1. Property owners are encouraged to consult with the community and consider ecosystem-based conservation planning principles in the development of any large-scale farming operations or water diversions for irrigation.
60
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 76 of 361 AUGUST 2009
9.2. The plan area is considered by the residents to be a ‘genetically modified organism free zone’, and so those activities that may bring genetically modified organisms into the valley are discouraged. 9.3. Conservation of soil, arable land, and irrigation water sources is encouraged. 9.4. Any water reservoirs constructed for agricultural purposes should also be designed to assist in fire protection. 9.5. Efforts to control the establishment and spread of noxious weeds, particularly those employing alternative methods to pesticide, are encouraged, and funding applications for weed control shall be supported where able.
10. COMMUNITY WATERSHED PROTECTION AREAS
Please see Electoral Area B OCP general policies on Community Watershed Protections Areas.
Policies
10.1. Members of the Yalakom community are encouraged to apply for formal protection of Community Watershed Protection Areas that are not recognized under the Forests and Range Practices Act.
11. PARKS AND PROTECTED AREAS
There are currently no parks or protected areas within the sub-plan area. The draft Lillooet LRMP designates two areas, Fred-Antoine Creeks and Yalakom Nine Mile Ridge, as Proposed Protected Areas. Proposed Protected Areas are equivalent to ‘Designated Areas’ under Part 13 of the Forest Act. This means that various forestry licences in the area may be rescinded or modified by written order of the Minister.
Maps 9 and 10 show both official and unofficial recreation sites that have been identified on Crown land.
Policies
11.1. The Fred and Antoine Creeks and Yalakom Creek-Nine Mile Ridge Proposed Protected Areas are supported. 11.2. The following management directions for the Proposed Protected Areas are supported: a. respecting the aboriginal title and rights of the St’át’imc Nation; b. maintaining the areas as wilderness to be left in a natural, undisturbed condition; c. allowing non-motorized cultural and recreational opportunities while protecting the access to and quality of domestic water supplies and the privacy of local residents; d. maintaining a single road through the Fred & Antoine Creeks Proposed Protected Areas to allow access to private land located in Antoine Creek; and, e. enabling community participation in resource management and planning.
61
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 77 of 361 AUGUST 2009
11.3. In consultation with the community, further designation of protected areas to protect the ecology of the plan area, especially species at risk and their habitats, is supported.
62
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 78 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 79 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 80 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 81 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 82 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 83 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 84 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 85 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 86 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 87 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 88 of 361 Request for Decision Report Bylaw 1141 Wayside Avenue, Gold Bridge Industrial Rezoning
Date: February 1, 2010
Recommendation:
THAT Bylaw No. 1141, cited as ‘Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A &B Zoning Bylaw No.670,1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1141, 2009’ be read a second time, as amended.
THAT the Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District delegate the holding of a public hearing for consideration of Bylaw 1141 to Area “A” Director Russ Oakley with Director Mickey Macri as alternate, pursuant to Section 891 of the Local Government Act.
THAT the public hearing for consideration of Bylaw No. 1141 be scheduled for Wednesday, April 21, 2010 at 7 pm the Gold Bridge Community Club.
CAO Comments: I concur with the recommendations. PRE
Who Votes: All; Count: Directors; Decision: Majority Recommendation Report/Document: Attached _X_ Available __ Nil __
Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined: Bylaw 1141, 2009 proposes to rezone a .36 hectare parcel of land on Lots 20 and 21, Block B, Plan 2366, DL 5690, Lillooet District and Lot 1, Plan 40372, DL 5690, Lillooet District from R1 (Residential 1) to M1 (Light Industrial) with site specific use restrictions to bring a long standing Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure works facility into conformance with SLRD zoning. Bylaw 1141 was referred to the relevant agencies in October, 2009 and no comments were received in opposition.
Relevant Policy: s. 891 of the Local Government Act. Upper Bridge River Valley OCP, Section 1.1: “The objectives, policies, and land use designations within this plan are adopted with the understanding that existing long- standing land and subsurface uses may continue.” Strategic Relevance: n/a
Desired Outcome(s): Land use management that is consistent with SLRD policy.
Response Options:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 89 of 361 1. THAT Bylaw No. 1141 be read a second time, as amended, and a public hearing be scheduled.
2. THAT Bylaw No. 1141 not be read a second time.
Preferred Strategy: 1. THAT Bylaw No. 1141 be read a second time, as amended, and a public hearing be scheduled.
General: As there are no agencies in opposition to this application, a public hearing is deemed appropriate.
Organizational: n/a
Financial: n/a
Legal: n/a
Follow Up Action: Inform the applicant of the SLRD Board’s decision and schedule and advertise the public hearing, as necessary.
Communication: Inform the applicant of the Board’s decision.
Other Comments: n/a
Submitted by: Strategy Planner, K.Needham Reviewed by: Director of Planning, Steve Olmstead Approved by: CAO, Paul Edgington
2
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 90 of 361 Background Report Bylaw 1141 Wayside Avenue, Gold Bridge Industrial Rezoning Electoral Area A
Background:
On September 16, 2009 Mr. R.E.(Lee) Dodds submitted a rezoning application for Lots 20 and 21, Block B, Plan 2366, DL 5690, Lillooet District and Lot 1, Plan 40372, DL 5690, Lillooet District . The parcel is .36 hectares and has an existing non-conforming light industrial use on the property that includes heavy equipment repair shops, fuel tanks and dispensing facilities, and a variety of trailers used for contractor’s offices, washrooms and outbuildings used for dry storage. The subject property is located on Wayside Avenue in Gold Bridge. The property is currently zoned Residential 1 in SLRD Electoral Areas A and B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999.
The subject property is located on Wayside (Bralorne) Avenue in Gold Bridge and is surrounded by residentially zoned properties.
The applicant has requested that their existing non-conforming use be legitimized so that they would be allowed to re-build if there were a catastrophic event such as a fire. Currently, under the Local Government Act non-conforming uses that are more than 75% destroyed cannot be re-built unless they conform with the zoning on the site. As such, the applicants have applied for rezoning to allow for the existing light industrial uses.
The subject property does not conform to the setback requirement of the Light Industrial zone. The proposed rezoning does not amend the setback requirements, however, it does allow for the re-building of the site to the current industrial use, given a catastrophic event. The proposed zoning amendment bylaw will limit the allowable industrial uses on this site to only those that are presently being carried out, namely: fuel storage and distribution, indoor storage, office, caretaker’s suite and heavy equipment repair and servicing and anciliary uses. Bylaw 1141 has been amended since first reading to further refine the allowable uses and limit densities to that which currently exist on the site.
The subject property is not within the Agricultural Land Reserve, and not within 800 m of a controlled access highway, and thus Ministry of Transportation approval is not required for the rezoning.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 91 of 361 Relevant OCP Policies:
The “Upper Bridge River Valley Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 608, 1996” underwent an update in 2006. The OCP designates the subject land as “residential”. The OCP recognizes the need to allow long-standing uses to continue while at the same time protecting residential areas, as noted in the following policies: Section 1.1: “The objectives, policies, and land use designations within this plan are adopted with the understanding that existing long-standing land and subsurface uses may continue.” Section 9: “Future consideration should be given to preempting conflict between adjacent uses by providing a separation between Residential and Industrial lands.” Policy 9.5: Permitted Uses in all Industrial areas are works yard, manufacturing, processing, assembly, distribution, and repair services that carry out a portion of their operations outdoors. Policy 9.6: “Rezoning to Industrial uses may be considered where there is a clear benefit to the community, the land is separated from residential uses, and the activities will not negatively impact the community.”
Agency Referrals
By-law 1141 was referred to relevant provincial agencies and stakeholders, with the following responses:
St’át’imc Land and Resource Authority – No response.
Ministry of Transportation – Interests unaffected.
Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum resources – No response.
Ministry of Environment – No response.
Ministry of Forests and Range - No response.
Integrated Land Management Bureau – Interests unaffected.
Ministry of Tourism Sports and the Arts – No response.
No other comments were received with respect to this application.
2
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 92 of 361 Staff Comments:
Staff would not normally support proposals that involve intrusion of new industrial uses into residential areas, however, since the use has been in existence for many years, it is felt that the application should proceed to a public hearing in order to assess neighbourhood support.
This application does not involve new uses and is consistent with the SLRD’s approach to recognizing uses that have been in existence for many years.
Respectfully submitted,
K. Needham Strategy Planner
Attachment: Bylaw 1141, 2009
3
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 93 of 361 SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT
BYLAW NO. 1141, 2009
A bylaw of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District to amend Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A & B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999
The Board of Directors of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. This bylaw may be cited for all purposes as the ‘Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A& B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999, Amendment Bylaw No. 1141, 2009’.
2. The Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A & B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999, is hereby amended as follows:
a) the Official Zoning Map, Schedule D (inset map C), Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A& B Zoning Bylaw No. 670,1999 is hereby amended by rezoning the following properties from Residential 1 zone (R1) to Light Industrial Zone (M1):
(i) Lot 1, DL 5690, LLD Plan 40372 (PID 012-334-642); (ii) Lot 20, Block 8, DL 5690, LLD, Plan 2366 (PID 011-038-641); and (iii) Lot 21, Block 8, DL 5690, LLD, Plan 2366 (PID 011-038-659)
as outlined on Schedule A, which is attached to and forms part of this bylaw; and
b) Adding section 15.4 to the “Light Industrial Zone (M1)” as follows:
15.4 Notwithstanding the uses outlined in s. 15.1, for the lands legally described as Lot 1, DL 5690, LLD Plan 40372 (PID 012-334-642); Lot 20, Block 8, DL 5690, LLD, Plan 2366 (PID 011-038-641); and Lot 21, Block 8, DL 5690, LLD, Plan 2366 (PID 011-038-659) the permitted uses and maximum combined total floor areas for all three parcels shall be limited to: .1 165 m2 for indoor storage and distribution .2 100 m2 for heavy equipment repair and servicing .3 55 m2 for caretaker’s suite .4 55 m2 for office uses .5 30 m2 for ancillary uses. .6 outdoor storage
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 94 of 361 READ A FIRST TIME this 26th day of October 2009.
READ A SECOND TIME, as amended, this day of 2010.
PUBLIC HEARING held on the day of 2010.
READ A THIRD TIME this day of 2010.
ADOPTED this day of 2010.
______Russ Oakley Leslie E. Lloyd Chair Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 95 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 96 of 361 SCHEDULE A Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Areas A& B Zoning Bylaw No. 670, 1999, Amendment Bylaw No. 1141, 2009
DL 5472 DL 5472
DL 1343 PT 6
A
DL 5690 LILLOOET 5 7 4 DL 5473
3 DL 5626
2
DL 5690 1 1 A
DL 1344 2 A A 3 DL 5690 LILLOOET 4 30 7 9 & 8 Subject Properties 5 29 W 28 Lot 1, DL 5690, LLD, Plan 40372 6 11 10 & 12 V 7 U Lots 20 and 21, Block 8, DL5690, LLD, Plan 2366 8 T 9 R Q & S 10 16 P 11 1 O DL 5627 12 N 1 20 13 M 21 L 24 14 K 2 DL 5474 15 J 23 22 23 & 24 21 22 16 19 20 A 18 17 16 17 2 15 3 14 4 17 12 1 13 5 16 26 11 6 15 2 27 3 10 7 14 28 4 8 13 29 5 9 12 6 1 30 A 11 31 10 1 A 9 A 18 8 2 8 9 10 3 17 7 7 GoldA BridgeB 4 6 DL 2368 5 14 15 16 5 2 3 4 1 14 2 6 16 15 3 26 13 25 18 17 11 4 24 1 1 20 10 33 34 35 36 19 9 23 23 21 8 22 DL 4933 7 & 8 1 23A 22 21 DL 2369 A 20 2 PT 7 9 3 19 4 18 PT 7 5 6 A 17 6 5 7 12 10 8 15 13 10 9 14 13 11 9 14 32 16 8 11 15 14 A 13 12 17 1 2 3 & 4 16 15 32 18 20 18 19 20 21 27 22 19 32 17 22 23 24 25 26 28 26 24 23 21 30 31 DL 4933 25 29
1 DL 4933 LILLOOET DL 2368 DL 2366 I
DL 4933 DL 2371
From: Residential 1 (R1) Chair To: Light Industrial Zone (M1) Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 97 of 361 Request for Decision
Bylaw 1161, Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan, Area C
Date: February 10, 2009
Recommendation:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
1. THAT Bylaw No. 1161, cited as ‘Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010’ be introduced and read a first time. 2. THAT Bylaw No. 1161 be referred to the Village of Pemberton, Lower Stl'atl'imx Land and Resource Authority, Lil’wat Nation, and provincial and federal agencies for comment.
CAO Comments: I concur with the recommendations. PRE.
Who Votes: All
Recommendation Report/Document: Attached __ Available __ Nil _ X
Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined:
In September of 2008, the SLRD Board endorsed the terms of reference for the Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan (AAP). Since 2008, Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Consultants and Quadra Planning Consultants have carried out a program of research and public consultation, and developed the first draft of the AAP. The AAP is a policy document that focuses on the community's farm land to discover practical solutions to issues and identify opportunities to strengthen farming. The AAP is intended to become a schedule to the Electoral Area C Official Community Plan.
The draft Agricultural Area Plan was developed with significant feedback from the community. Over the course of the last year, four advisory group meetings were held, and four public meetings/workshops were held. The plan represents input from the various sectors of the agricultural community (organic producers, seed potato producers, cattle, equestrian, etc.), community groups, the Ministry of Agricultural and Lands, and many others.
Relevant Policy: Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689
Strategic Relevance: The Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan was a strategic priority of the board in 2009.
Desired Outcome(s): A planning document that balances the region’s social, economic and environmental goals, and addresses the needs of the farming community.
Response Options: 1. Give the bylaw first reading and schedule the public hearing. 2. Schedule a Committee of the Whole meeting to review the bylaw in more detail. 3. Refer the bylaw back to staff for clarification or revisions.
Preferred Strategy: 1. Give the bylaw first reading and schedule the public hearing.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 98 of 361 Request for Decision
Bylaw 1161, Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan, Area C
Implications Of Recommendation
General: The bylaw will be moved forward into the next phase of public and agency consultation.
Organizational: The funding period for the project is nearing completion. In order to receive the full amount of funding granted by the Investment Agriculture Foundation of BC (IAFBC), all expenses must be accounted for by the end of March 2010. (Due to delays caused by the fires in 2009, staff requested an extension of three months. The original end date was January 2010.)
Public hearings may be scheduled any time between first and third reading of a bylaw, though they are customarily scheduled after second reading. Due to the limited funding period, staff are requesting that the public hearing be scheduled in March after first reading, allowing for the consultants to present the bylaw to the public, and the costs to be covered by the IAFBC grant. This hearing will also provide Board members that want further explanation of the plan with the opportunity to hear a presentation from the consultants. Alternatively, the Board could schedule a presentation by the consultants at a COW meeting in March, and the public hearing presentation could be conducted by staff at a later date.
Financial: The project has been completed within budget.
Legal: n/a
Follow Up Action: 1. Set up the public hearing.
Communication: 1. Advertise for the public hearing 2. Update the webpage.
Other Comments: n/a
Submitted by: Planner, Amica Antonelli Reviewed by: Director of Planning and Development, Steven Olmstead Approved by: CAO, Paul Edgington
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 99 of 361 SLRD Electoral Area D Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 495 Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010 Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 100 of 361 SLRD Electoral Area D Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 495 Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010
A bylaw of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District to amend the Electoral Area C Official Community Plan and to establish an Agricultural Area Plan for the Pemberton Valley.
WHEREAS the Board of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District wishes to adopt an Agricultural Area Plan for the Pemberton Valley portion of Electoral Area C;
NOW THEREFORE, the Regional Board of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. This bylaw may be cited for all purposes as ‘Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010.’
2. Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689 is amended as follows:
(a) Following Schedule A, Schedule B – Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan is inserted.
READ A FIRST TIME this day of , 2010.
READ A SECOND TIME this day of ,2010.
PUBLIC HEARING held on the day of ,2010.
READ A THIRD TIME this day of ,2010.
APPROVED BY THE MINISTER OF COMMUNITY and RURAL DEVELOPMENT on this day of , 2010.
ADOPTED this day of ,2010.
______Russ Oakley Leslie Lloyd Chair Secretary
I hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of Bylaw No. 1161 cited as ‘Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, Amendment Bylaw No. 1161, 2010’ as read a third time.
______Leslie Lloyd Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 101 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Planning
Schedule B
i Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 102 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table of Contents ...... ii List of Tables ...... iii 1.0 Introduction ...... 1 2.0 Guiding Principles for the Agricultural Plan ...... 2 3.0 The Agricultural Area Vision ...... 3 4.0 Key Issues, Options and Recommended Actions ...... 6 4.1 Mechanisms to ensure that the Agricultural Land Base is maintained for Working Agriculture ...... 6 4.1.1 Keeping the Farmland Base in Working Agriculture ...... 6 4.1.2 Protecting the ALR from Wasteful Use ...... 7 4.1.3 Maintaining the ALR in Good Agronomic Condition...... 7 4.1.4 Improving the Agricultural Capability of the ALR ...... 8 4.1.5 Retaining Crown ALR Potential for Agriculture ...... 8 4.2 Coordination with Other Users to ensure that the Natural Advantages of the Pemberton Valley are protected ...... 9 4.3 Develop Methods to Comply with the Seed Potato Control Regulation and Diversify the Agricultural Sector ...... 10 4.4 Improve the Economic Viability of Farming ...... 11 4.5 Increase Awareness of and Support for Agriculture ...... 11 4.6 Attract New Farmers and Engage New Workers ...... 12 5.0 Other Issues and Options ...... 13 5.1 Agriculture/Non-Agriculture Interface ...... 13 6.0 Implementation Considerations ...... 14 6.1 Mobilization of Human Resources ...... 14 6.2 Generation of Capital and Operating Resources ...... 14 6.3 Role of the Pemberton Farmers Institute ...... 15 6.3.1 Representing the Agricultural Sector in Local Affairs ...... 15 6.3.2 Leading High Priority Short Term Action Items ...... 15 Appendix A: Issues, Options and Recommended Actions ...... 16 Appendix B: SWOT Findings ...... 16
ii Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 103 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
List of Tables
Table 1: Proposed Guiding Principles, Vision and Strategy for the Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan ...... 5
iii Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 104 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
1.0 Introduction This report is the Draft Phase 3: Agricultural Plan. It has been developed through research, investigation, interviews, survey, workshops and Open Houses conducted in 2009 in the Pemberton Valley, Area C, Squamish-Lillooet Regional District. An intended outcome of the study is that the Agricultural Area Plan form part of the Electoral Area C Official Community Plan.
The purpose of the Agricultural Plan is to build on the work done to date through the Phase I: Situational Analysis and the Phase 2 SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) Analysis. Based on this previous work, the Agricultural Plan identifies a number of Guiding Principles and a Vision for agriculture in the Pemberton Valley. It outlines a Strategy for agriculture that tackles the key issues identified during the planning process and outlines options and recommended actions. Appendix A includes details of the issues, options and recommended actions and Appendix B includes a summary of the SWOT.
The Phase 2 investigation and analysis revealed that the Pemberton Valley agricultural sector wishes to see a concerted effort to protect, enhance, and promote agriculture in the Valley. There is an expectation that traditional farming models will not be as applicable in the future and that alternative models with new and multiple objectives should be pursued. There are individuals within the Pemberton Valley agricultural sector who see a need for changes in how the agricultural sector currently interacts with the community and are embracing new emerging food system options.
Key observations emerged from sector consultations that will guide the agricultural planning process. Close proximity to growing urban population and year-round tourist destination with an increasing demand for local food and agricultural products is the biggest strength of Pemberton Valley agriculture. As such, there is considerable opportunity to develop markets for a diverse range of high quality products that are fresher, safer, and healthier by virtue of being local.
The Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (SLRD), in which most of the farmland in the Pemberton Valley is located, has adopted an Official Community Plan (OCP) for Area C that contains several agricultural policies. These policies indicate strong support for agriculture:
Land designated as AGRICULTURE on the Land Use Plan is intended for agricultural uses All uses and subdivision of land in the ALR shall be in accordance with the ALC Act Exclusions from the ALR and further subdivision of lots within the ALR are generally not supported Existing home-based businesses in the AGRICULTURE designation are recognized and establishment of additional home-based businesses, including Bed and Breakfast, are supported
There is general optimism that emerging food trends favouring local food can be translated into profitable business opportunities, as some entrepreneurial operators in the Pemberton Valley are finding out. At the same time, it is critical that pursuit of new agricultural opportunities does not jeopardize or threaten the future of current agricultural operations, which currently contribute the vast majority of the revenues generated by agriculture in the Valley (e.g., activities resulting in reduced pest vigilance).
1 Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 105 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
The agriculture sector faces significant weaknesses, as indicated by the inadequacy of agricultural infrastructure (such as gaps in the local marketing system and inadequate drainage and flood control), loss of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, and a declining knowledge base about agriculture. As such, there are gaps in providing the necessary conditions for working agriculture focusing on the local food economy. 2.0 Guiding Principles for the Agricultural Plan Workshop #2 was concerned specifically with developing guiding principles to direct the vision and strategy of the agricultural plan. Table 1 presents the principles, visions and strategy that have emerged from these consultations. A series of principles to guide the agricultural area plan have been articulated.
1. Agriculture is the highest and best use of the ALR and policy will support productive and profitable agricultural use of the ALR
This statement recognizes the threat to the agricultural sector created by the competing demands for the farmland base in the Pemberton Valley. The agricultural area plan will support sustainable agricultural uses that are economically viable based upon returns from farming activities.
2. The unique agronomic advantages of the Pemberton Valley are to be protected
The community is aware of the uniqueness of the Pemberton Valley from an agronomic perspective and sees the advantage of being attuned to ensure that these attributes are not compromised inadvertently.
3. Impacts on conditions necessary for seed potato production are to be addressed in promoting the Pemberton Valley
Seed potato production is an important part of the heritage, the current and future fabric of agriculture of the Pemberton Valley and every measure should be made to ensure that the whole community is vigilant in preventing the introduction of pests that could threaten or compromise the sector.
4. Promoting local markets for local agricultural goods and services is key to a sustainable local agricultural economy
The Pemberton Valley is strategically positioned in relation to the Resort Municipality of Whistler and Vancouver and ideally located to provide more food products to meet local food trends in these markets.
5. Awareness of the contribution of agriculture by the public, politicians and students must be promoted to develop respect for farming and farmland and to maintain conditions for continued viability
The need for increased awareness in the Pemberton Valley is recognized in order that the needs of local agriculture are clearly evident to all stakeholders and that the relevance of local agriculture to the development of the community is understood.
2 Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 106 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
6. Recruiting new and younger farmers is key to perpetuating the agricultural sector
Creating opportunities for young farmers, not only those who have been born into the sector, is the best way for the replacement necessary for farm succession to occur and for management and labour to be attracted to the sector. 3.0 The Agricultural Area Vision Based on consultations with area farmers and other stakeholders, a vision of Pemberton Valley agriculture has been crafted to guide the area planning process. The Vision has several parts:
1. The agricultural land base is protected and conditions for working agriculture are maintained and enhanced
This statement envisions an agricultural sector that operates efficiently as a result of appropriate investments in infrastructure and with maintenance of the integrity of the agricultural landscape for working agriculture.1
2. All stakeholders are actively working together to protect the Pemberton Valley’s unique natural agronomic advantages
Residents and visitors are all cognizant of the unique biotic characteristics of the Pemberton Valley and of their responsibilities to agriculture when they are in the Valley.
3. The seed potato and other agricultural sectors are able to work together to expand agricultural opportunities and maintain necessary seed production conditions
All sectors of working agriculture have developed cooperative relationships and protocols that facilitate inter-farm management, cropping diversity, and agricultural opportunity.
4. Local markets have become increasingly important to Pemberton Valley agriculture, increasing the economic viability of farming operations
Community and regional demand has contributed to a lucrative market for local agricultural products and services supported by expanded local storage, handling, distribution, processing and marketing infrastructure.
5. The value and contribution of agriculture is widely recognized as a strength of the local community
The recognition of the value of agriculture is reflected in earned respect for farming, farmland, and the important role of agricultural sector as a provider of food, goods, ecological services and contributor to the local economy.
1 Working agriculture is defined as economically viable agriculture that can support an operator from the proceeds of farming. 3 Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 107 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
6. Agriculture has attracted sufficient new participants able and willing to respond to new and continuing agricultural opportunities
Economic opportunities in the agricultural sector are attracting new farmers, workers, and agricultural entrepreneurs and opportunities are being created to make land available for working agriculture.
4 Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 108 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategy, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
SLRD Table 1: Proposed Guiding Principles, Vision and Strategy for the Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan Regular Item Proposed Guiding Principle Proposed Vision Proposed Strategy # Meeting 1 Agriculture is the highest and best The agricultural land base is protected and Mechanisms will be pursued to ensure that the agricultural use of the ALR and policy will conditions for working agriculture are land base is in the hands of those willing and able to farm it
Agenda; support productive agricultural use maintained and enhanced or made available to those willing and able to farm of the ALR 2 The unique agronomic advantages of All stakeholders are actively working together Pursue improved information and communication with other February the Pemberton Valley are to be to protect the Pemberton Valley’s unique users of the Pemberton Valley to ensure that suitable protected agronomic advantages protective protocols are identified, established, and observed
22, 3 Impacts on conditions necessary for The seed potato and other agricultural sectors Support agricultural diversification, while pursuing
2010 seed potato production are to be are able to work together to expand into alternative methods of achieving compliance with the addressed in promoting farmland higher-value agricultural opportunities and objectives of the Seed Potato Control Regulation, and using use maintain necessary seed production conditions performance based assessments of the effectiveness of control measures 4 Economic viability of farms will be Local markets have become increasingly Promote initiatives to expand local markets for local improved through coordinated important to Pemberton Valley agriculture, agricultural goods and services by supporting diversification, action of farmers to capture local increasing the viability of farming operations. value-adding, marketing, handling and storage solutions markets for local agricultural goods Farmers work together to obtain inputs at Create the infrastructure for value-added enterprise and services favourable prices Promote initiatives for farmers to collaborate with each other In pursuing goals 5 Awareness of contribution of Agriculture in the Valley is recognized as a Educate to describe agriculture contributions agriculture by the public, politicians strength of the local community More involvement of farm organizations in delivering the and students is essential to Farmers have a voice in community affairs and message developing respect for farming and regional economic development strategy Articulate policies and regulations required to promote
farmland and maintaining conditions The public, politicians and students are highly agriculture for continued viability knowledgeable of local agriculture Community decisions are made with clear articulation of impacts on the agriculture 6 Recruitment of new and younger Agriculture has attracted numerous new Opportunities will be pursued to engage new workers, farmers is key to replacement in the farmers able and willing to respond to new provide access to land, assist with financing, offer business
Page agricultural sector and continuing agricultural opportunities training, and support agricultural initiatives in the community
109 of 361 5 Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Quadra Planning
Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
4.0 Key Issues, Options and Recommended Actions
The agricultural strategy is the overall plan, flowing out of the planning and consultation process, to pursue the vision for agriculture. It is based on consultation to formulate the guiding principles for Valley agriculture. The key issues are summarized below along with options and actions that would promote the vision. More detail is found in Appendix A. A summary of the community’s perception of the Pemberton Valley’s agricultural strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) is presented in Appendix B.
Pemberton Valley’s agricultural plan has several key issues and options that will work towards the preferred strategy, presented below. 4.1 Mechanisms to ensure that the Agricultural Land Base is maintained for Working Agriculture
4.1.1 Keeping the Farmland Base in Working Agriculture While agricultural farming operations in Pemberton Valley are located predominantly (94%) within the ALR, only 51% of the ALR is in current agricultural use. Of the remaining 49%, about 19% of the ALR is unimproved Crown land, First Nations land consists of 9%, and 21% of the private farmland is held in non-farm use. The Situation The area of farmland in “agriculture” has been relatively static and the proportion in lower intensity uses, such as pasture, has not changed. However, an influx of new property owners has lead to price competition for farmland and a disconnection between the established farming community and new owners. About 65% of the private ALR land not being actively farmed but subject to ALC restriction is owned by non-residents.
Historically, operators have enjoyed access to farmland under rental and lease agreements, arrangements that have minimized investment in land and facilitated crop rotations. More recently, farmland has been withdrawn from the rental market by absentee owners and owners of rural estates. The Issue Maintaining access to the agricultural land base in Pemberton Valley is one of the top issues requiring a strategy in the agricultural area plan. While there are no restrictions on who may own farmland, there are financial advantages for those who wish to own farmland in the ALR for rural-residential estate or speculative purposes. This advantage is reflected in farmland being sold at values beyond what it has the capability of supporting based on its productive capacity, and at the expense of working agriculture. Preferred Option Removing the real and perceived financial advantages associated with owning farmland for non- agricultural purposes are ultimately the best ways to ensure that farmland values are determined by working agriculture competing for the land base. Coupled with this approach, non-farm property owners should be encouraged to make their land available for farming activities.
6 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 110 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Recommended Actions Several actions have been identified that could increase access to the land base for working agriculture. These recommended actions include: Create a taxation classification in the ALR that taxes rural-residential properties at a rate comparable to urban residential, based on a non-agricultural assessment Establish a clearinghouse and database to link property owners with potential renters Support the permanence of the boundary around the ALR to discourage farmland purchase for speculation Ensure agricultural impact assessments are done, as part of the development approval process, to identify the impacts of developments on agricultural lands and operations prior to development Ensure that applications for converting agricultural land or creating impacts on agricultural operations are vetted through an agricultural advisory committee for review and comment In unavoidable situations where ALR lands must be converted to non-farm use, the Regional, District to charge an “agricultural utility” to the developer of an amount considered adequate to fully compensate for the impacts created, and in turn, the levy be used to make tangible improvements in the conditions for the agricultural sector
4.1.2 Protecting the ALR from Wasteful Use The Situation Farmland used for rural-residential purposes is characterized by large building footprints and estate siting of access and structures. The Issue Some farmland properties purchased for rural-residential purposes are characterized by large non- agricultural structures situated without regard to agricultural land use practices or the integrity of the land for agriculture. Preferred Option All development on agricultural lands should be planned to ensure that the impact on current and future agricultural activities is minimized and that size of structures is correlated with the farming functions they are intended to satisfy. Recommended Actions Agricultural interest in the ALR used for rural-residential purposes should be addressed by: Regulating the size and location of non-agricultural development in the ALR Provide tax disincentives to creating large footprints
4.1.3 Maintaining the ALR in Good Agronomic Condition The Situation Some farmland is characterized inadequate management so as to control the spread of noxious weeds or other pests.
7 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 111 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
The Issue Mismanagement of farmland so as to harbour pests and/or allow the spread of pests creates higher pest populations for adjacent farming areas and can increase the costs of pest control for working agriculture.
Preferred Option Farmland owners should be required to maintain their properties so as to prevent the establishment of pests in the farming area. Recommended Actions Agricultural interest in the maintenance in good management conditions in the ALR should be addressed by: Educating owners about their responsibilities in the agricultural zone Requiring land owners of ALR farmland to maintain their farmland in pest-controlled condition Develop and implement a code of good agricultural practice
4.1.4 Improving the Agricultural Capability of the ALR The Situation Substantial areas of the Pemberton Valley in the ALR are under-utilized or not being used for farming. The Issue While incremental infrastructure improvements have been made in the Valley since the original flood control, drainage and irrigation works were constructed, the system has in recent years not been managed with agricultural objectives as a priority. Significant areas of the Pemberton Valley ALR have inadequate flood control, drainage, water quality, and irrigation capability, resulting in less productive conditions and inefficient farming practices. Preferred Option The agricultural land base requires a re-assessment of its infrastructural needs in light of the age and condition of the current infrastructure and the changes in capacity to be created by climate change. Recommended Actions The capability of the agricultural infrastructure should be addressed by: Assessing drainage and flood control infrastructure needs, using an agricultural standard Improving irrigation infrastructure for agriculture, particularly in areas that do not currently have access to irrigation Providing improved water quality, where required
4.1.5 Retaining Crown ALR Potential for Agriculture
About 19% of the ALR is unimproved Crown land. The Situation: Demand for access to the Pemberton Valley by commercial recreation operators, trail users, and conservation interests is being considered and/or satisfied on Crown ALR.
8 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 112 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
The Issue: Encumbrances created on Crown ALR lands are a concern because agricultural operators are being restricted in use of ALR lands for agricultural use. In the future, there is the danger that established recreational and wildlife conservation initiatives have the potential to preclude the use of the ALR for agricultural use. Preferred Option Agricultural operations should have priority access to Crown ALR for farming purposes. Where demand is latent, options considered by the Regional District should be evaluated to ensure that permanent encumbrances are not created. Recommended Actions Agricultural interest in Crown ALR should be addressed by: Offering Crown ALR grazing leases to Pemberton Valley farmers Prioritize non-ALR land for habitat areas Performing agricultural impact assessments on all proposals to use Crown ALR for non- agricultural purposes Ensuring adverse impacts on agriculture are mitigated or off-set in favour of agriculture Encourage farmers to become more environmentally conscious in their farming operations. 4.2 Coordination with Other Users to ensure that the Natural Advantages of the Pemberton Valley are protected Situation The natural agronomic attributes of the Pemberton Valley are internationally recognized. These unique conditions bestow advantages ranging from “northern vigour” to the absence of invasive species and diseases affecting other growing areas of the continent.
Current practices and precautions are inadequate to prevent the inadvertent introduction of invasive pests and disease. As well, precautions are insufficient to prevent the establishment of noxious weeds in the ALR. The Issue The introduction of invasive pests and disease would threaten the agricultural reputation of the area. The establishment of these pests would eliminate an agronomic advantage of the Pemberton Valley. Preferred Option Pest issues are much easier and, in the long term less costly, to avoid than to eliminate or control once established. A coordinated approach should be developed with other interest groups to ensure that mutually beneficial pest control protocols are implemented. Recommended Actions All users of the Pemberton Valley in Crown ALR should be engaged in pro-active manner by: Increasing public awareness of pest risks Using the Pemberton Valley’s natural advantages as a marketing tool Developing information to assist land owners to recognize invasive species Require farmland owners to maintain a vigilance with respect to invasive pests /disease
9 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 113 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Educate recreation/tourist operations on risks, vigilance and pest identification Develop information to assist recreation/tourism operators and recreationists to take precautionary measures 4.3 Develop Methods to Comply with the Seed Potato Control Regulation and Diversify the Agricultural Sector Situation Pemberton was the first commercial seed potato area in the world to grow virus-free seed potatoes. Since 1967, the sector has carried out strict production practices, monitoring, inspection and testing, to ensure that Pemberton Valley potatoes remain free of all known viruses, bacterial ring rot and spindle tuber viroid.
Seed potato production is governed by the Seed Potato Act and Regulation. The regulation requires all residents in the seed control area to plant virus-free potato seed only from Pemberton seed growers or from a source approved by their committee. The Issue Maintaining conditions for seed potato production is vital to the current agricultural viability of the Pemberton Valley and it would make no sense to jeopardize this sector while pursuing other agricultural opportunities. The major concerns are that: 1) The need for ongoing precautions to ensure that quarantine pests do not enter the Valley 2) The Seed Potato Control Regulation is not violated on new farming operations 3) Pest control in organic farming systems can meet the requirements of the Seed Potato Control Regulation 4) Access by potato growers to rental lands might be restricted by property owners placing conditions on pesticide use. Preferred Option In the immediate term, greater effort should be made to ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the provisions of the Seed Control Regulation and that the requirements are met on Valley farms and public areas. In the longer term, research should be conducted to identify pest control practices that might better meet the diversifying needs of the area. Recommended Actions All users of the Pemberton Valley in the ALR should be engaged in a pro-active manner by: Educating land owners about requirements of the Seed Potato Control Area regulation Enforcing Seed Potato Control Area regulations Enforcing Noxious Weeds Act Communicating implications of quarantine pest introduction on Valley agriculture Establishing and implementing a Valley-wide precautionary approach to pests Re-evaluating requirements of Seed Potato Act and Regulations from a pest control perspective Conducting research on methods of effective pest control in organic areas, local government lands, roads and rights-of-way
10 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 114 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
4.4 Improve the Economic Viability of Farming Situation It is anticipated that diversification to respond to regional markets is the only initiative at the regional level that will improve the viability of local farming operations and increase the farmer’s capacity to compete for the farmland base. Local infrastructure to support local marketing is largely undeveloped in the Pemberton Valley. Individual growers pursue local markets largely in the fresh produce segment through farm sales, direct to retail, and Farmers Markets. While relatively small in term of overall market share, there is growing demand for a range of agricultural products and services in the regional food market. The Issue It is anticipated that the local market can provide opportunities for Pemberton Valley farmers to capture higher farm gate returns. However, individual farmers are challenged in their ability to provide customers with a range of products of reliable supply and quality, cost and organization of marketing, seasonality, absence of local meat processing, and facility requirements for distribution, handling and storage. Preferred Option There is an opportunity for local farmers to cooperate to capture the local food market to their collective advantage. This initiative should focus on working cooperatively to eliminate redundant marketing costs; developing differentiated food products, promote processing of commodities grown in the Valley, and providing high standards of food safety. Recommended Actions The key actions that provide the greatest potential for augmenting agriculture in the local market include: Seeking investment, grant, seed capital, and local support to explore options for meat processing (e.g. mobile abattoir) and for potato processing (e.g., vodka distillery) Investigating financing options to assist the development of new small scale value-added opportunities Accessing small scale food processing technical programs (SSFPA) to “get it right” from the outset Examining the feasibility of a local products marketing cooperative, including bulk purchasing of inputs Providing a permanent venue for country sales Investigating coordinated regional facilities for the handling, cooling and transport of Valley agricultural products Determining the feasibility of Pemberton Valley brand and labeling initiative
4.5 Increase Awareness of and Support for Agriculture Situation The demands on the Pemberton Valley are changing as the population grows, new property owners acquire agricultural properties, and the region attracts increasing numbers of tourists and recreational 11 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 115 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
users. This has created pressure on the agricultural land base to accommodate non-agricultural activities. The Issue As the non-agricultural uses of the land base have grown, property rights, land owner responsibilities, and existing rural ethics in agricultural areas have been challenged, compromising farming protocols and creating encroachment issues. Much of the disharmony is created by a general lack of knowledge of farming activities and knowledge about the operational requirements of farms. Preferred Options It is anticipated that non-agricultural visitors and Valley residents will respond to improved information on Pemberton Valley agriculture by adjusting their actions and behaviour to be more respectful of farming operations Recommended Actions The key actions that should provide the greatest potential for increasing awareness of local agriculture and lead to conditions more favourable for farming operations include: Develop educational materials for politicians and the public that describe the scope and contribution of local agriculture Develop educational materials and programs on agriculture for local schools Enlist the participation of the local farming community in delivering the message about local agriculture Articulate specific actions and provisions to promote the profile of agriculture. 4.6 Attract New Farmers and Engage New Workers Situation Farm families have traditionally provided the pool for the succession of the farm and labour for the farming operation, either on their own or neighbouring farms. In many cases, the children of current farmers have departed the area for opportunities elsewhere and succession of the farm/farming operation is unplanned. The average age of Pemberton Valley potato farmers is 70 years of age. The Issue Farm operators, as a segment of the general population, are significantly older and a disproportionate number are approaching retirement. While traditionally, replacement of retiring farmers with new farmers has been achieved predominantly within the ranks of farming families, this situation is now less frequent. Non-agricultural owners of farmland do not come with families capable of, or interested in, working in agriculture. Preferred Options While there is a concern that a poorly targeted farmer recruitment program could contribute to tougher short term economic conditions for farmers locally, the need for replacement is critical to preserving the critical mass of farm operators. Initiatives that support new farmer entrepreneurship and increase access to farmland would contribute to needed diversification as well as bring new blood into the sector.
12 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 116 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Recommended Actions The key actions that should provide the greatest potential recruiting new farmers into Pemberton Valley agriculture include: Creating incentives for non-agricultural property owners to make their land available for entry level lease farming Facilitating access to farmland held by non-agricultural property owners, Coordinating mentorship and apprenticeship opportunities for young would -be farmers with established operators Pursuing agricultural business training workshops for aspiring farmers Engaging First Nations to participate to create critical mass and momentum Pursuing financing options to assist low asset new farmers to enter the sector 5.0 Other Issues and Options Other issues have been identified but not given as high a priority in the agricultural area planning process, either because the actions required are beyond the control of the District or are not seen as critical to the plan’s success. Nevertheless, consideration needs to be made of these factors in order to promote a balanced and integrated approach to enhancing the agricultural sector in Pemberton Valley, as there is potential for interaction in the interface to intensify in the future. 5.1 Agriculture/Non-Agriculture Interface The Situation Edge planning along borders of agricultural areas is an effective method managing the transition from agricultural to non-agricultural areas and of minimizing conflicts related to farm sights, smells, and sounds. In the Pemberton Valley, the definition of the “edge” is complicated by outstanding current proposals for Village of Pemberton expansion. In addition, the encroachment of rural-residential into the Pemberton Valley farming area is increasing the zone of interface between agricultural and non- agricultural property owners. The Issue Farmers can be expected to be confronted by these rural residents about their agricultural activities, creating resentment, unwarranted harassment, and stress. However, if these interactions are anticipated future conflicts man be avoided through various planning measures. Recommended Actions: If working agriculture is to be able to operate smoothly in the presence of non-farming intrusion, steps need to be taken to convey this to all property owners. These steps could include: Require real estate vendors to inform prospective purchasers of ALR parcels that they will be residing in an agricultural area, where agriculture is practiced, and sights, sounds, and smells of agriculture are to be expected Consider establishing an agriculture Development Permit Area along the border of the ALR and to require buffers to reduce and eliminate the potential for conflicts The Regional District and Village implement buffer guidelines recommended by the ALC Create signage to inform non-farming neighbours about where the farming areas are and farm practices Use the Farmers Institute to provide agricultural perspective and represent the farming sector
13 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 117 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Hold workshops for rural residents to inform them of the ways in which their actions and behavior can adversely affect agriculture Better enforcement of laws respecting behavior causing adverse impacts on agricultural operations
6.0 Implementation Considerations Given the relatively small population in the Pemberton Valley, a repeated question has been “Who is going to implement the agricultural plan?” Bureaucrats are over extended, farmers are too busy, and there are few resources available to hire capable expertise.
The answer must be the local agricultural community itself. First, no one else has the degree of vested interest in the local agricultural situation than farmers. Second, no other interest group has the knowledge of the local farming community. Third, no other group can claim to represent farming interests in the Valley.
Mobilizing the local farming community to action vis-à-vis the agricultural plan requires several actions: the first step will be to re-invigorate the Pemberton Farmers Institute (PFI) so that it is representative of farmers and so that it can mobilize the resources to undertake its responsibilities in the plan. In this sense, it is the PFI that is envisioned as the voice of the agricultural sector and the initiator of most of the action items at the local level. 6.1 Mobilization of Human Resources Volunteer manpower of the PFI alone will not have the capacity to undertake the tasks envisaged in the plan. It is anticipated that a strong case can be made to the Investment Agriculture Foundation (IAF) to support a pilot project in local governance capacity building directly aimed at managing the impacts on agriculture in the Pemberton Valley. In addition to a minimal staff to coordinate the initiatives proposed in this plan, the local agricultural sector will enlist its own: Young leaders Established and successful farmers Retired farmers as mentors First nations Other entrepreneurial individuals 6.2 Generation of Capital and Operating Resources The PFI will be expected to generate capital funds and receive support for specific initiatives through various means, including: Contributions from jurisdictions (e.g., VOP, SLRD) Support of agencies (e.g. CFIA, MAL) Partnering with other agencies with like minded objectives (e.g, Heath Authority, schools, First Nations, local businesses) Engaging interest groups (tourism, recreation, food trendees, chefs) Applying for grants from (e.g., federal infrastructure, IAF)
Operating resources will need to come from local contributions. It is proposed that owners of farmland agree to a voluntary or mandatory check-off be applied to all farmland in the Pemberton Valley. This will 14 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 118 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
supplement membership dues currently being received. These funds will be leveraged by means of accessing grants and matching contributions from other partners.
6.3 Role of the Pemberton Farmers Institute The proposed actions fall into several categories of action;
6.3.1 Representing the Agricultural Sector in Local Affairs It is envisaged that the PFI, by virtue of its funding model, will have a natural inclination to more fully represent broader agricultural interests and to be present as a voice in local government affairs. It is also expected that its funding base and representation will require PFI’s mandate be more inclusive rather than exclusive of certain sectors of its membership, and will provide a forum for resolving internal intra- sector issues. The PFI will represent all farm types.
6.3.2 Leading High Priority Short Term Action Items The most important agricultural plan items will be those tagged as of high priority and short action time lines (see Appendix A, below). Thos e high priority, short action items include: Improving the dialogue among all jurisdictions ensuring that a clear agriculture message is sent to decision makers in the SLRD and requesting that accountability/feedback is required Improving the working communication, coordination, and working relationships among stakeholders Setting in motion policy investigations that related to specific issues facing the Pemberton Valley, such as non-farm use of the ALR Drafting proposal s to investigate options that have been identified with the potential to materially improve the viability of agricultural enterprises in the Pemberton Valley.
15 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 119 of 361 Guiding Principles, Vision, Strategies, Issues, Preferred Options and Recommended Actions
Appendix A: Issues, Options and Recommended Actions
Appendix B: SWOT Findings
16 Zbeetnoff Ago-Environmental Quadra Planning
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 120 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; A. Maintaining A.1 Private ALR land not Impact of community population Assist in making land owned Establish a clearinghouse and database SLRD a) High the Land being farmed consisting growth is being felt at the agricultural by non-farming property to link property owners with potential AAC Base in of: land use level owners available to area renters PFI b) Short February Working Agricultural land owners should have farmers Lobby province to tax rural-residential Agriculture Rural residential not an obligation to be farmers Encourage non-farm at urban residential rates to reflect the c) Negligible wishing to farm, make Land not being farmed or made property owners to make subsidy created by using the ALR 22, available to farmers available for farming is lost to the their land available for Establish tough non-farm land use
2010 farming community farming activities requirements (Farm Bylaw) Non-resident owners Agriculturally productive land used as Increase the cost to land Require agricultural impact not making their land rural residential is afforded a subsidy owners of not facilitating assessment to be completed as part of available to farmers at the expense of agriculture farming activity community development process Farmers having difficulty in gaining Ensure agriculture is taken Require real farming activities in order access to the agricultural land base into consideration when to qualify for farm tax assessment Lack of access to rental land is considering community status affecting the rotations of seed potato needs Tax unfarmed land at urban residential farmers Inform property owners of rates Less room for agriculture to grow their responsibilities in Encourage property owners to Infrastructure, such as fencing working agriculture areas maintain infrastructure , such as allowed to deteriorate fencing, in order to preserve utility for agriculture A.2 Farming activities Landlord is placing restriction on Produce conventional crops Conduct research to identify MAL a) Medium restricted on leased land farming activities related to pest under organic protocols production protocols for crops not CFIA management and fertilization Develop response plan if using synthetic chemicals SLRD b) Long
Seed potato control area regulation infestations break out Conduct research to investigate the VOP requires the use of management risk posed by organic operations to c) Access IAF , protocols to ensure disease-free seed potato production direct AAFC and status Require land owners to maintain their MAL research, re- New residents not accepting that land in a pest, noxious weed, and direct MAL normal farming practices need to be disease-free state resources to carried out around them achieve
Page compliance
121 17 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; A.3 Farm land not being Land not being kept in good Educate owners about their Enforce the BC Weed Control Act MAL a) Medium maintained in good agricultural condition is a refuge for responsibilities in the Enforce the Seed Potato Control CFIA pest-free condition pests and noxious weeds agricultural zone regulation b) Medium February These areas can become refuges for Require land owners of ALR pests farmland to maintain their c) Re-direct Increases pest control costs in crops farmland in pest-controlled existing agency 22, condition resources to
2010 achieve compliance A.4 Large building Non-agricultural development is Regulate the size and Home plate regulation SLRD a) High footprints, wasteful compromising the future use of the location of non-agricultural Lobby province to tax rural-residential MAL siting, and estate use of land base by creating fragmentation development in the ALR at urban residential rates to reflect the AAC b) Short the land base and permanent conversion into non- Provide disincentives to subsidy created by using the ALR PFI productive uses large footprints c) Negligible A.5 Underutilized Lack of adequate drainage and/or Improve drainage and flood Pursue regional/provincial/federal MAL a) Medium private ALR lands irrigation control infrastructure with investment in agricultural SLRD Irrigation water quality agriculture in mind infrastructure Develop flood control VOP b) Medium Irrigation water supply Improve irrigation and drainage improvements in rural infrastructure for agriculture areas only to agricultural standard c) Significant local, Provide improved water Develop agricultural drainage and provincial, federal quality irrigation in unimproved areas to agricultural standard Develop water supply sources A.6 Crown ALR not Land reserved for agriculture should Ensure farmers have access Provide access by farmers to Crown MAL a) Medium being made available for be retained for that purpose to the ALR as farm economic ALR for grazing tenures IRMB farming Agricultural infrastructure to these opportunities warrant Develop regional infrastructure to SLRD b) Long areas is undeveloped Assess impact of competing support agriculture on Crown ALR AAC Crown ALR being appropriated for uses on agriculture Require agricultural impact assessment PFI c) Significant local, conservation purposes and/or Prioritize non-ALR land for of conservation and recreation provincial, federal; encumbered by recreational uses habitat areas projects on Crown ALR EFP Page Farms should be allowed to steward Encourage farmers to Farmers complete and implement
122 18 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; conservation resources in the ALR become more Environmental Farm Plans environmentally conscious in their farming operations February B. Continued B1. Intense competition Low economic returns from Reduce input costs Explore new generation cooperatives MAL a) High Economic for the agricultural land conventional farming make farmer Increase the productivity of for bulk buying of inputs SLRD Viability of base from non- competition for land base the land base Provide farmers with information to PVI b) Short 22, Farming agricultural interests unaffordable Promote the production of take advantage of local food trends
2010 Prices paid for farm land exceed higher value crops Assist farmers in orienting themselves c) Access IAF; Certain farm sectors value justified by the economic Promote intensification of to local food markets engage interest under economic siege return from conventional agriculture cropping practices to Make improvements to increase the groups and generate more yield per unit agricultural productivity of the land responsible area base agencies; Increase agricultural Develop local infrastructure for significant diversification servicing local markets provincial and Promote value-added Develop local infrastructure for federal opportunities supporting value-added enterprise investments Request extension expertise from required to BCMAL or fund the service improve Host local courses and training in new infrastructure agricultural opportunities B.2 Influx of property Perception that the Pemberton Valley Inform new residents of Require property owner SLRD a) Medium purchasers buying is squandering its agricultural farming activities in responsibilities to be disclosed in PFI farmland for estate resources farmland areas writing by realtors to prospective Realtors b) Medium
purposes New rural residents have purchasers environmental expectations of the Request disclosure agreements about c) Engage affected urban and lifestyle community farming to be attached to changes in groups land title B.3 Boundary expansion Boundary expansion creates Create certainty about Establish a clear urban boundary and a SLRD a) High of the Village of expectations and speculation about where agriculture will be hard boundary for the ALR MAL Pemberton the future protected din the future Require agricultural impact assessment ALC b) Short Page Potential step toward future Ensure that expansion of expansion impacts AAC
123 19 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; conversion of farmland to provide opportunities for Establish DPA on lands adjacent to PFI c) Negligible residential development that supports agricultural properties respecting Non-contiguous development agriculture density of development, setbacks and February creating corridors through Ensure that location of buffering agricultural areas expansion provides Create an agri-industrial area within Purpose of including ALR in the maximum opportunity for the Village 22, Village buffering edge effects Support for a local agricultural value-
2010 Impact on farm taxes added initiative Include agricultural processing in local economic growth strategy C. Maintaining C.1 Seed potato Some farmland owners do not Use a precautionary Educate land owners about MAL a) High Conditions producers rent land as accept conventional seed control approach identifying risks of requirements of the Seed Potato CFIA for Seed part of their rotation area practices pest introduction on all Control Area regulation SLRD b) Medium Potato Some farmland owners are unaware lands in the farming area Communicate implications of VOP Production Organic production of the importance of minimizing Use science-based approach quarantine pest introduction on Valley AAC c) Re-direct occurring in the midst of biosecurity risks to determine risks to seed agriculture PFI existing agency potato growing area Concerns about the establishment potato control area Establish and implement a Valley-wide resources; re- of diseases and pests on organic Control risky farm precautionary approach to pests direct AAFC and Some owners not farms management practices Re-evaluate requirements of Seed MAL research; maintaining their Increased risk of harbouring pests Potato Act and Regulations from a access IAF; enlist farmlands in good on un-maintained farmland pest control perspective support of condition Increased pests create increased Conduct research on methods of affected groups pest control costs effective pest control in organic areas, local government lands, roads and rights-of-way Enforce the Seed Potato Control Regulation D. Presence and D.1 Inadequate Increased presence of pests requires Increase public awareness of Educate the public PFI a) Medium Control of precautions being taken the use of more controls at greater pest risks Develop information to assist land MAL Pests and to prevent the cost to growers Reduce the risk of owners to recognize invasive species SLRD b) Medium Page Noxious introduction of invasive Introduction of invasive pests into the introduction of pests Require farmland owners to maintain AAC
124 20 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; Weeds pests potato seed control area could a vigilance w.r.t. invasive pests VOP c) Re-direct jeopardize the seed potato sector Enforce the Seed Potato Control existing agency Regulation resources; re- February Develop a biosecurity checkpoint to direct AAFC and the Valley MAL research; Educate tourist operations on risks, access IAF; enlist 22, vigilance and pest identification support of
2010 affected groups D.2 Inadequate Noxious plants need to be controlled Education of tourism Develop information to assist tourism PFI a) High precautions being taken to prevent weed outbreaks operators and recreationists operators and recreationists to take MAL to control noxious Weed outbreaks could jeopardize Require farmland owners to precautionary measures SLRD b) Short weeds seed potato sector biosecurity control noxious weeds on Engage all affected groups in AAC their property or have the implementing a solution VOP c) Re-direct District control for them Enforcement of the BC Weed Control existing agency Act resources; access IAF; enlist support of affected groups E. Create E.1 Public knowledge of Trespass Educate the public Showcase farming in the schools PFI a) High Respect for farming is poor and Harassment Create venues for farmer- Promote agri-tourism AAC Farmers and incomplete Vandalism and theft public interaction Provide farm bus tours SLRD b) Short Farming Primacy of agriculture in the ALR not Spruce up the local Promote local food and food trends VOP Activities Farming activities are respected agricultural image Promote local farmers c) Re-direct challenged Agricultural heritage being lost Assist farmers to interact Document farming heritage existing agency with the public Build on the Whistler connection resources; access Develop an agri-tourism website IAF; enlist support Develop Pemberton food brand of affected groups ; EFP program Improve the environmental stewardship of local farmers F. Public F.1 Value of Agriculture resources and Raise the profile of Include agriculture in school PFI a) High Education and agriculture in local infrastructure are being degraded agriculture curriculum AAC Page Awareness economy not Commercial farming perceived to be Engage the public in Seek buy-in from farm community and SLRD b) Medium
125 21 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; About understood unsustainable agricultural events groups VOP agriculture Farming perceived not to be worth Make local agricultural Develop a community agriculture c) Re-direct Working agriculture saving products more visible in the events page existing agency February not appreciated community Cross-market local products resources; access Celebrate agriculture Encourage/promote purchasing of IAF; enlist support Sell local agricultural local foods at public institutions of affected 22, products to residents School gardening groups; significant
2010 Engage regional chefs, restaurants to provincial and promote Valley agriculture federal Engage local food security groups to investments promote local food required in Engage Health Authority to promote regional Valley agriculture infrastructure G. Entry of New G.1 Limited land Non-farmers not making land Increase the cost to ALR land Lobby for taxing rural-residential at MAL a) High Farmers into availability available to would-be farmers owners of not allowing/ urban rates to reflect the subsidy ALC Agriculture facilitating farming activity offered by using the ALR SLRD b) Short Encourage property owners Make Crown ALR available to new PFI to make land available for farmers c) Negligible; re- lease farming Create a database of land availability direct policy; for interested new farmers access IAF on pilot project G.2 High cost of New farmers finding entry expensive Reduce the costs of entry Develop a loans program for new FCC a) Medium agricultural land Engage interest groups farmers with no capital MAL
interested in preserving Lobby province to provide greater tax SLRD b) Long access to farmland exemptions for small and beginning PFI farmers Land Trusts c) Negligible Attract Land Trust interest G.3 Farming regulations Getting farm designation for start-up Provide incentives to attract Lobby province to better tailor farm tax MAL a) Medium for small farmers operations on rented parcels small scale start-up farmers assessment status in start-up years to SLRD restrict entry on rented areas reflect local situation b) Long Page Lobby province to better differentiate
126 22 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; bona fide small and beginning farmers c) Negligible from tax farmers G.4 Aging farm Farmers not being replaced in the Attract farm workers Partner the Lil’wat Nation to engage MAL a) Short February operators sector Encourage young farmers young First Nations in agriculture SLRD Current farmers retiring Management skills being lost with agriculture training Create an outreach program to recruit PFI b) Medium Work with land owners who and train young small scale Land Trusts 22, are interested in making farmers/workers c) Access IAF on
2010 their farmland available to Create mentoring, apprenticeships and pilot project; new farmers farm start opportunities for aspiring District long term Tap into local farmer farmers with established farmers investment expertise Negotiate farm partnerships for start- program could be Plan for continuance of the up farming significant; access land in farming use Negotiate start-up farming for young Land Trusts Plan for succession of the people and immigrants land base Lobby regional and provincial District or Land Trust government for such programs investment in agricultural Develop District agricultural land infrastructure purchase program from retiring farmers with lease to new farmers Attract Land Trust interest Provide transition services G.5 Overall level of Improved information on which Promote improved Coordinate local courses and training MAL a) Low agricultural knowledge varieties to grow, production knowledge in small scale Engage associations to stage SLRD
among small scale practices, harvesting and marketing farming workshops on small scale production PFI b) Medium farmers needs will improve chance of success Promote establishment of practices improvement appropriate local Assist small scale farmers in accessing c) Access IAF on agricultural support and currently available programs pilot project; services engage interest groups; re-direct existing resources Page H. Encroachmen H.1 Recreationists using Permission not being obtained Support respect for private Ensure that recreation organizers SLRD a) Medium
127 23 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; t on Private private farmland as property rights have land owner permission to access PFI Property recreation area Re-route trails to avoid trails through private property Recreational b) Short Rights conflicts Develop materials to communicate organizers February issues c) Access IAF on Enforce compliance pilot project; Have farmers run the recreational engage affected 22, program groups
2010 H.2 Agricultural impacts Harassment of livestock Improved communication of Block watch programs SLRD a) Medium being sustained Off-leash pets on farm land impacts of recreation/trial Enforce laws respecting trespass on PFI Trespassing by horse riders access on agricultural agricultural lands Recreational b) Short Refuse operations and livestock Require tourism operators to enforce and tourism Fire hazard Improved communication client behaviour organizers c) Engage affected Behaviour and coordination among Require damage deposits from trail RCMP groups Trespass agricultural sectors and recreational users Vandalism I. Agro-Tourism I.1 Agro-tourism Local regulations constrain agro- Promote local food More flexible regulations to better SLRD a) High represents an tourism activities production accommodate small scale agro- VOP opportunity to make an Agro-tourism is creating strains Promote agro-tourism tourism PFI b) Medium economic return from between farm types in the Valley events Link farmers and agro-tourism events Recreational farm land by: Agro-tourism needs to be Promote agricultural to Whistler tourism and tourism c) PVI; Engage marketing to coordinated within the farming diversity Increase diversity of agro-tourism organizers affected groups recreationists and community to provide broader Improve transportation products tourists benefits corridors to handle agro- Research approaches in other attracting tourists to tourism traffic jurisdictions the Pemberton Valley Agro-tourism operators Continue to promote Slow Food Cycle for agro-tourism systematically coordinate Tours events upcoming activities with Create local Food Events neighbours J. Value-added J.1 Local potential is Sale of local commodities is Promote processing of Seek investment, grant, seed capital, MAL a) High Agricultural undeveloped primarily fresh- and raw-based commodities grown in the and local support to explore options SLRD Page Processing in Food safety as a top priority Valley for meat processing (e.g. mobile VOP b) Short
128 24 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; the Promote safe food abattoir) and for potato processing PFI Pemberton processing (e.g., vodka distillery) c) Access IAF; Valley Investigate financing options to assist engage CFIA; February the development of new small scale attract agency value-added opportunities interest Access small scale food processing 22, technical programs (SSFPA)
2010 Coordinate with the Economic Development initiatives of VOP K. Local K.1 There is expanding Pemberton food products have an Coordinate local food supply Investigate the feasibility of a local MAL a) High Agriculture demand for locally opportunity to capitalize on regional and marketing options products marketing cooperative SLRD Products grown agricultural market Develop high quality food Provide permanent venues for country VOP b) Short Handling, products in the regional Individual producers are challenged handling and distribution sales PFI Distribution food market to provide customers with a range of system Investigate coordinated facilities for c) Access IAF; and Marketing products of reliable supply and Market differentiated Valley the handling, cooling and transport of engage CFIA; Systems Infrastructure to quality origin products Valley agricultural products attract agency support local food Individual marketing is creating Investigate the feasibility of interest marketing is redundant marketing costs Pemberton Valley brand and labelling undeveloped Market channels not developed initiative Coordinate with the Economic Development initiatives of VOP L. Independent L.1 Run of the river Impact on fish habitat Design the project with a Lobby province to include agricultural MAL a) Medium Power projects Potential to divert water for balance among energy, benefits in project rationale SLRD
Projects irrigation fisheries and agricultural VOP b) Short interests PFI c) Attract agency consideration L.2 Projects require Land loss to corridor Require an agricultural Lobby province to require and MAL a) High transmission corridor Recreational access impact assessment to be agricultural impact assessment SLRD access Trespass, harassment, vandalism, conducted prior to project Lobby province to enforce access to VOP b) Short Page theft approval ROWs PFI
129 25 of 361 SLRD
Regular Appendix A: Pemberton Valley Agricultural Plan – Issues, Options, and Recommended Actions
Meeting Item Situation Issues Options Potential Actions Responsible a) Priority, Organizations b) Timeline & c) Funding Agenda; c) Attract agency consideration February 22, 2010
Page
130 26 of 361 Appendix B: Summary of Pemberton Valley Agricultural Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats
Strengths Fertile soils Excellent growing conditions Pristine water and food growing environment Local secure supply of fresh food Natural biosecurity afforded by the isolation of the Valley Close proximity to Whistler and Vancouver area markets Growing local economy and associated economic opportunity Knowledgeable farmers with significant assets on the ground
Weaknesses ALR being increasingly used for non-food agricultural purposes Perceived negative environmental impact of agriculture Lack of respect for farmers and agriculture Lack of public understanding of impacts on agriculture Perceived absence of tolerance/compatibility between organic and conventional production practices Complex governance related to agricultural planning and implementation Absence of local plant or animal processing Limited local agricultural diversity Inadequate agricultural infrastructure, such as drainage, flood control, and irriigation
Opportunities Contribute to local and regional food security Develop local markets Protect and market biosecurity Open up more ALR for agriculture Plan agro-tourism to generate broad benefits to the agricultural sector Attract and develop value-added enterprise
Threats/Challenges Developing a sustainable balance between Village of Pemberton growth, erosion and encumbrance of ALR land by government, and the protection of ALR for working agriculture Developing a sustainable balance between recreational users and agricultural land use Developing a sustainable balance between agro-tourism and other agricultural sectors Developing a sustainable balance between new resident pressure, rural-residential expansion, and farming access to the agricultural land base Introduction of noxious weed and invasive species High land costs undermining the economic sustainability and future viability of farming Poor recruitment of new farmers
27
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 131 of 361 Date: Recommendation:
Local Government Act CAO Comments: Who Votes Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined: Relevant Policy:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 132 of 361 major
Strategic Relevance: Desired Outcome(s): Response Options: Preferred Strategy: 1. General:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 133 of 361 Organizational: Financial:
Legal Follow Up Action Communication: Other Comments:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 134 of 361
Issue Defined: Lot 1, DL 179, Lillooet District Plan 8954 and Parcel M (Plan B5692) of DL 179, Lillooet District
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 135 of 361 Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) referral: - - - - - Agency Referrals:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 136 of 361
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 137 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 138 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 139 of 361 SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT
BYLAW NO. 1162, 2009
L:\Legal\Bylaws\Bylaws\Planning By-laws\PA Community Plan Amendment\PA 1162.doc
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 140 of 361 SCHEDULE A Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C OCP Bylaw No. 689, 1999, Amendment Bylaw No. 1162, 2009
Subject Properties Lot 1, DL 179, LLD, Plan 8954; and Parcel M (Pl B5692) of DL 179, LLD
Pemberton Meadows Rd
I
From: Agriculture Chair To: Commercial Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 141 of 361 SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT
BYLAW NO. 1163, 2009
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 142 of 361
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 143 of 361 SCHEDULE A Squamish Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C OCPZoning Bylaw No. 765,689, 20021999, Amendment Bylaw No. 11631162, 2009
Subject Properties Lot 1, DL 179, LLD, Plan 8954; and Parcel M (Pl B5692) of DL 179, LLD
Pemberton Meadows Rd
I
From: Agriculture Chair
To: CommercialTourist Commercial 6 (TC6) Sub Zone Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 144 of 361 Request for Decision
Building Bylaw – Climatic Data
Date: January 8, 2010
Recommendation:
1.0 That Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Bylaw No. 863, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1179, 2010 be introduced, and read a first, second and third time.
2.0 That Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Bylaw No. 863, 2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1179, 2010 be adopted.
CAO Comments:
Who Votes:
Recommendation Report/Document: Attached X Available __ Nil __
Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined:
1. The 2006 BC Building Code has made a change in the way ground snow loads are calculated. Previous codes used ground snow loads based on a 1-in-30 year probability of being exceeded in any one year. The 2006 BC Building Code uses a 1-in-50 year probability. 2. The revised Schedule B incorporates the climatic data obtained from Environment Canada in late November of 2009 as well as the seismic data obtained from http://earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca. 3. It is common practice to include the climatic and seismic data in the Building Bylaw when such data is not referenced in the Appendix of the BC Building Code. 4. Incorporate a cost recovery fee of $250.00 for areas of the SLRD that may require Climatic Data, due to development in that area that has not been documented in Schedule B.
Relevant Policy: Building Bylaw 863, 2003
Strategic Relevance: The 2006 BC Building Code
Desired Outcome(s): Adoption of Amendment Bylaw 1179, 2010.
Response Options: 1. Adopt Amendment Bylaw 1179, 2010. 2. Request more information from staff.
Preferred Strategy: Adopt Amendment Bylaw 1179, 2010.
Implications Of Recommendation
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 145 of 361 Request for Decision
Building Bylaw – Climatic Data
General: updated, accurate climatic data for the benefit of the property owners of the SLRD.
Organizational: no impact.
Financial: The Board approved a budget request of $6,000.00 for 2009 to update the Climatic Data for the SLRD.
Legal: no impact.
Follow Up Action: amend consolidated bylaw 863, 2003.
Communication: update website with new Schedule B, and updated consolidated bylaw 863, 2003.
Other Comments:
Submitted by: Belinda Hernandez, Building Inspector Reviewed by: Steven Olmstead, Director of Planning and Development Approved by: Paul Edgington, CAO
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 146 of 361 SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT BY-LAW NO. 1179, 2010 O ! " # # $ %&'()'P + " # ! " # ( , # - ( . + - $ /()(- #O ! " # # $ %&'()'( $ /()P ) %&' - 0# ,# #. 19.0 Climatic and Seismic Data + # - # ! " # - - , - - ) + , / - # 10 , , - # ! " # ' %&' - 0# ,# 2 %&' -# #. / 3)4 "156" ++671 )) 5 - ))() "1 18$+671 )) 5 - ))() "1+96"+671 )) 5 - ))() 8+1 )) 5 - ))()
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 147 of 361 )
" 8: "1## 6 - # # - , $ /()(- # ! " # # $ %&'()'( $ /() , ( 5 - ))() "1##
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 148 of 361 SCHEDULE B - Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Climatic and Seismic Data SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 SLRD Regular Seismic Data - Determined for a 2% in 50 Snow Load, Driving Hourly Wind Pressures kPa One Design Temperatures year (0.000404 per annum) probability of kPa, 1/50 Rain Ann. Mois- Deg Elec- Ann. Day 15 min. exceedence. Elev., Wind Total ture Days toral Location Rain, Rain, rain, m pres- Ppn., Index, Below Area mm 1/50 mm sures, mm MI Jan. Jan. Jul. 18 C Ss Sr q 1/10 q 1/30 q 1/50 q 1/100 mm Jul. Dry Pa, 1/5 Dry Dry Wet Sa(0.2) Sa(0.5) Sa(1.0) Sa(2.0) PGA (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) 2½% 2½% 1% 2½%
A Bralorne 1060 6.8 0.2 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 400 520 0.41 50 8 -27 -29 30 18 4600 0.616 0.458 0.274 0.153 0.277 A Gold Bridge 694 3.9 0.2 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 325 510 0.33 25 5 -25 -28 30 18 4600 0.616 0.457 0.274 0.152 0.276 A Gun Lake 920 3.9 0.2 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 300 475 0.31 25 5 -27 -29 30 18 4600 0.616 0.457 0.274 0.152 0.276 A Marshall Lake 1160 3.5 0.2 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 325 500 0.33 35 8 -28 -30 30 18 4500 0.614 0.453 0.269 0.150 0.275 A Tyaughton Lake 1020 3.0 0.2 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 300 500 0.31 30 8 -27 -29 30 18 4500 0.616 0.455 0.272 0.151 0.276 A Yalakam 640 2.2 0.1 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 100 280 320 0.29 60 10 -25 -28 31 19 3600 0.606 0.442 0.260 0.144 0.269
B Anderson Lake 580 2.1 0.1 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 450 550 0.55 40 7 -17 -20 32 20 3700 0.615 0.455 0.272 0.151 0.275 B Fountain Valley 840 2.0 0.1 0.28 0.36 0.40 0.45 80 270 320 0.28 50 10 -25 -27 33 18 3800 0.575 0.416 0.244 0.135 0.257 B Highway 12 400 2.0 0.1 0.31 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 300 380 0.31 50 10 -24 -26 33 20 3250 0.595 0.433 0.255 0.141 0.265 B Lillooet 254 2.1 0.1 0.32 n/a 0.44 n/a 100 300 350 0.31 75 10 -23 -25 33 20 3550 0.60 0.44 0.26 0.14 0.27 B Pavilion Lake 820 2.2 0.2 0.30 0.36 0.40 0.45 80 200 300 0.22 30 10 -26 -29 34 20 4200 0.504 0.366 0.217 0.121 0.231 B Ponderosa 320 2.9 0.2 0.32 0.41 0.45 0.51 90 475 610 0.57 55 10 -16 -19 32 20 3850 0.615 0.457 0.273 0.152 0.276 B Seton Portage/Shalalth 260 2.1 0.2 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 430 525 0.44 70 10 -16 -19 33 19 3600 0.613 0.452 0.269 0.149 0.274 B Texas Creek 280 1.9 0.1 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 280 360 0.29 50 10 -23 -25 33 20 3250 0.598 0.436 0.256 0.142 0.266 B West Pavilion 540 1.9 0.1 0.30 0.36 0.40 0.45 80 275 320 0.29 30 7 -25 -27 33 18 3825 0.568 0.410 0.240 0.133 0.254
C Birken 440 2.5 0.1 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.48 80 480 580 0.57 65 7 -19 -21 32 20 3275 0.617 0.460 0.276 0.154 0.278 C Birkenhead Lake 720 6.0 0.5 0.32 0.41 0.45 0.51 90 560 775 0.64 55 7 -17 -20 30 20 4350 0.616 0.459 0.276 0.153 0.277 C Blackwater 640 5.5 0.5 0.32 0.41 0.45 0.51 90 560 775 0.64 55 8 -17 -20 30 20 4350 0.617 0.460 0.277 0.154 0.278 C D'Arcy 260 3.2 0.4 0.32 0.41 0.45 0.51 90 500 630 0.59 60 10 -16 -19 32 20 3850 0.616 0.458 0.274 0.153 0.276 C Devine 340 3.4 0.4 0.32 0.41 0.45 0.51 90 510 630 0.60 60 7 -16 -19 32 20 3850 0.616 0.458 0.274 0.153 0.276 C Ivy Lake/Reid Rd/Walkerville 420 7.2 0.4 0.33 0.43 0.47 0.55 90 910 1230 1.06 80 8 -20 -23 33 20 4000 0.619 0.463 0.278 0.155 0.279 C Lillooet Lake 300 5.2 0.4 0.33 0.43 0.47 0.55 90 950 1300 1.09 100 10 -16 -18 32 20 3600 0.619 0.462 0.278 0.155 0.279
C Mount Currie 220 4.6 0.4 0.33 0.43 0.47 0.55 90 755 955 0.93 60 7 -17 -20 33 20 3650 0.620 0.463 0.279 0.155 0.280 C Owl Ridge 380 6.8 0.5 0.33 0.43 0.47 0.55 90 920 1250 1.07 80 8 -19 -22 33 20 4070 0.619 0.462 0.278 0.155 0.279 C Pemberton Valley 220 5.3 0.5 0.33 0.43 0.47 0.55 90 940 1230 1.08 80 8 -18 -21 32 20 4075 0.621 0.464 0.279 0.155 0.280
D Britannia Beach 100 3.2 0.6 0.39 0.49 0.62 0.62 160 2150 2300 2.22 130 10 -12 -14 27 19 3100 0.750 0.541 0.303 0.163 0.352 D Five Coves 20 2.6 0.6 0.39 0.49 0.54 0.60 160 1950 2050 2.03 125 10 -11 -13 26 19 3100 0.765 0.55 0.306 0.164 0.361 D Furry Creek 100 3.0 0.5 0.39 0.49 0.54 0.60 160 2150 2300 2.22 130 10 -12 -14 27 19 3100 0.775 0.556 0.308 0.165 0.366
Page D Black Tusk/Pinecrest 400 7.7 0.6 0.34 0.43 0.48 0.54 160 1550 1950 1.64 90 9 -14 -17 28 18 4130 0.649 0.482 0.285 0.158 0.296 D Green River 600 8.6 0.8 0.34 0.43 0.48 0.54 160 845 1215 1.00 87 8 -17 -20 30 21 4250 0.626 0.468 0.280 0.156 0.283
149 D Porteau Cove 60 2.4 0.4 0.39 0.49 0.60 0.60 160 1975 2100 2.05 125 10 -11 -13 26 19 3100 0.790 0.565 0.311 0.165 0.375 D Ring Creek 620 7.0 0.6 0.40 0.50 0.62 0.62 150 2400 2950 2.46 125 10 -13 -15 29 19 3500 0.697 0.511 0.294 0.160 0.323 of D Tantalus Acres 20 3.5 0.7 0.40 0.50 0.62 0.62 150 2375 2725 2.44 150 10 -12 -14 29 19 3300 0.690 0.507 0.292 0.160 0.319 361 D Tunnel Station 100 3.1 0.6 0.39 0.50 0.53 0.59 150 1730 1825 1.81 125 10 -13 -15 29 19 3400 0.670 0.495 0.289 0.159 0.308 D Upper Squamish Valley 20 3.2 0.7 0.39 0.50 0.53 0.59 150 2125 2375 2.19 150 10 -12 -14 29 19 3350 0.672 0.496 0.289 0.159 0.309
Climatic Data obtained from Environment Canada Seismic Data obtained from http://earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca Revised February 22, 2010 by Bylaw 1179, 2010 Date: Recommendation:
CAO Comments:
Who Votes Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined:
Relevant Policy: Strategic Relevance: Desired Outcome(s): Response Options:
Preferred Strategy: General:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 150 of 361 Organizational: Financial: Legal Follow Up Action: Communication: Other Comments: Director of Planning and Development, S. Olmstead CAO, P. Edgington
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 151 of 361 Background: THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the current procedure for recruiting AAC members for one year be returned to its previous two year commitment.”
THAT the Board defer appointments to the Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (“AAC”) until the SLRD Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848- 2003 has been amended to 2 year alternating terms for members as requested by the AAC and, removing Electoral Area C Director and a representative of the Village of Pemberton Council from the AAC membership requirement.”
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 152 of 361 SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT
BY-LAW NO. 1184-2010
A by-law to amend Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee By-law No. 848-2003 (Consolidated Version).
The Board of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District in open meeting assembled enacts as follows: 1. This by-law may be cited as “Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848-2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1184-2010". 2. The Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee By-law No. 848-2003 is hereby amended as follows: (a) Membership is amended by replacing Section 7 with the following:
7. The Committee shall consist of a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 11 members appointed by the Regional Board, and committee members shall primarily be selected from:
a. the farming and ranching community, b. the agricultural product processing and distribution sectors.
(b) Term of Appointment is amended by replacing Section 9 with the following: 9. All subsequent appointments to the Committee shall be for a two year term.
(c) Section 18, which states “The Electoral Area C Director and the representative from the Village of Pemberton Council are non-voting Committee members.” is hereby deleted and the remaining sections are re- numbered.
READ A FIRST TIME this day of , 2010.
READ A SECOND TIME this day of , 2010.
READ A THIRD TIME this day of , 2010.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 153 of 361 - 2 –
ADOPTED BY AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF AT LEAST 2/3 OF THE VOTES CAST this day of 2010.
Russ Oakley Leslie Lloyd Chair Secretary
I hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of By-law No. 1184 cited as “Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848-2003, Amendment Bylaw No. 1184-2010".
Leslie Lloyd Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 154 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 155 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 156 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 157 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 158 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 159 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 160 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 161 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 162 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 163 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 164 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 165 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 166 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 167 of 361 From: Lisa Griffith Sent: February 4, 2010 3:33 PM To: Leslie Lloyd Cc: Susan Cheng; Steve Olmstead Subject: Request for a meeting with the Regional Board from CAO, Metro Vancouver RD
The CAO of Metro Vancouver, Johnny Carline, is requesting an opportunity to meet with the SLRD Board sometime in March or April re: Metro’s RGS. They anticipate sending a formal 120 referral of their RGS to the SLRD and other affected local governments in May, and this meeting would occur in advance of that referral to trouble-shoot any potential issues as they will be seeking the SLRD’s acceptance of their strategy.
They do not wish to appear as a delegation if the time-limit would be limited to 10 minutes or so, they are specifically requesting at least one hour. Could they be accommodated in a regular board meeting or perhaps there would be need for a Committee of the Whole?
I have been asked to find out and get back to Leanne Garnett, Senior Planner, Metro Vancouver.
Lisa Griffith, MCIP Community Planner Squamish-Lillooet Regional District t 604.894.6371 f 604.894.6526 1.800.298.7753, ext 237
file:///L|/...quest%20for%20a%20meeting%20with%20the%20Regional%20Board%20from%20CAO%20Metro%20Vancouver%20RD.htm[15/02/2010SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 168 of 361 4:03:27 PM] SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 169 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 170 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 171 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 172 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 173 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 174 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 175 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 176 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 177 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 178 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 179 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 180 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 181 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 182 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 183 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 184 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 185 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 186 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 187 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations
Date: February 10, 2010
Recommendation:
1. THAT the Regional Board pass the following motion with respect to the proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area:
“THAT the Ministry of Environment be requested to consider including a member of the SLRD’s Agricultural Advisory Committee (or another representative of the Pemberton Valley farming community) for appointment to the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Plan Management Committee, if established.”
CAO Comments: Request MOE to include a staff representative of the SLRD as well. P.R.E.
Who Votes: All; Count: Directors; Decision: Majority
Recommendation Report/Document: Attached _X_ Available __ Nil __
Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined: The Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) has expressed continuing concerns with the proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area (WMA); specifically, that the proposed use of crown ALR for wildlife protection may negatively impact the current and future use of crown ALR land for agricultural purposes. In December 2009, the AAC passed a resolution requesting that the SLRD Board support their request to review the final WMA map and that further consultation with adjacent landowners be undertaken by the Ministry of Environment (MOE). The AAC have also asked the SLRD to request that the Ministry include having representation from the Pemberton Valley farming community on the local WMA management board.
SLRD staff has been recently advised by MOE that the public consultation process on the designation of the WMA is over, and that no further consultation is contemplated. An Order in Council is currently being drafted to approve the WMA by the Provincial Government this spring. Please refer to the Background report for more information on the implications of the AAC’s recommendations.
Relevant Policy: Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw 1008, 2008; sections of the Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw 1062, 2008 (at second reading)
Strategic Relevance:
Desired Outcome(s): Management practices for Crown land wetlands that protect and maintain the productive capacity of fish and wildlife habitat, while allowing agricultural activities, where appropriate, to continue.
Response Options:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 188 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations
1. Support the AAC’s recommendations, as is. 2. Request that the Ministry of Environment consider including a representative SLRD’s AAC (or another member of the agricultural community) on the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Plan local board or management committee, if established. 3. Do not support any of the AAC’s recommendations and take no further action on the proposed Pemberton Wetlands WMA.
Preferred Strategy: Response Option No. 2
Implications Of Recommendation
General: Once a WMA is established, it is managed by the Ministry of Environment (BC Parks). New uses require approval from the MOE Regional Director, and must not negatively impact wildlife.
Organizational: The SLRD Planning Department may receive referrals for new use applications.
Financial: n/a
Legal: n/a
Follow Up Action: 1. February 24 - Follow-up letter to Ministry of Environment staff after the Board decision. 2. March 17 – Inform the AAC.
Communication: see above
Other Comments:
Submitted by: Planner, L. Griffith Reviewed by: Director of Planning and Development, S. Olmstead Approved by: CAO, P. Edgington
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 189 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations
BACKGROUND ON THE PEMBERTON WETLANDS WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA
The purpose of the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area management plan is to set a direction for the management of wetlands and contiguous riparian areas located on provincial Crown Lands in the Pemberton Valley. The Ministry of Environment has been working toward establishing the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area (WMA) for over a decade.
The management area is comprised of a series of low elevation wetlands and contiguous riparian areas located on the upper Lillooet River floodplain in the Pemberton Valley. The area falls within the north end of Lillooet Lake and the confluence of the Lillooet River and Mowich Creek (see attached management plan & maps).
The establishment of the Pemberton Wetlands WMA supports objectives found in both the Area C OCP (“to support the protection of environmentally significant areas, avoid loss of key habitats, and maintain biological diversity”, p. 47) and the Regional Growth Strategy (“protecting critical and sensitive habitats and ecological areas; promoting connectivity through landscape level planning and maintaining and creating wildlife corridors”, p. 27). The Area C OCP recognizes the proposed WMA in the section entitled: Natural Environment, 16. Biodiversity. The Bylaw reads, “WMA’s are a designation under the British Columbia Wildlife Act and are put in place when there is a need to conserve or manage important species while still allowing certain types of activity or development to continue. They are for the conservation and management of wildlife, fish and their habitats, but other uses may be permitted.”
In terms of acknowledging potential impacts to agriculture, the 1998 Management Plan, Section 5.5.3 “Agriculture” states,
“No wildlife management activities are proposed which have the potential to impact agricultural land. Any further proposals which could affect agriculture or the Agricultural Land Reserve (where applicable) will be developed in consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, local farmers, the Agricultural Land Commission and the Pemberton Valley Dyking District.”
Once a WMA is established, it is managed by the Ministry of Environment (BC Parks). New uses require approval from the MOE Regional Director, and must not negatively impact wildlife. The SLRD may receive referrals for new use applications in the future.
LOCAL CONSULTATION RE: THE PEMBERTON WETLANDS WMA
As part of their public consultation process, Ministry staff met with SLRD staff and held an open house in Pemberton on June 10th 2009. Following this, Ministry staff agreed to present information on the WMA to the Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC). On June 17th, 2009, the AAC passed the following motion:
“That the AAC recommend to the SLRD Board of Directors that they strongly support the proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area.”
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 190 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations
Further to this, at the July 15th, 2009 meeting, the AAC discussed concerns with the overlap between land within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) and designated Wildlife Manage- ment Area and were unclear as to the impact on future agricultural use of Crown Land. The AAC passed the following motion on July 15th, 2009:
“That the AAC requests accurate mapping and information on how the Ministry of Environment and the Agricultural Land Commission legislative jurisdictions will interact to address the WMA / ALR overlap”.
In response to AAC concerns which arose at the July 2009 AAC meeting, the Regional Board resolved in July 2009:
“THAT the Regional Board advise the Ministry of Environment of its support for the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area Management Plan, however request:
1) Clarification of how Wildlife Management Area designation under Wildlife Act and Agricultural Land Commission legislation will interact, and
2) T hat mapping be refined to eliminate any inaccuracies or mapping errors prior to adoption
3) C larify implementation process for Wildlife Management Act and process for addressing conflict with existing uses.
The Ministry of Environment responded to the SLRD’s request for clarification via the attached correspondence dated October 15, 2009.
The AAC, at their December 2009 meeting, once again discussed the proposed WMA, in particular the Ministry’s letter. Although it had been clarified that Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) established under the Wildlife Act are a permitted land use within the Agricultural Land Reserve, the AAC was still not comfortable that the lands designated WMA could be used for agriculture in the future. They noted concerns with the map (that some of the Crown Land sites shown on the map are wet, but others are gravel bars or dry land, and some of the lines do not follow the high water mark), and expressed their hope that farming practices can continue and that there will be room for negotiations with respect to management restrictions that impact agriculture. It was noted that adjacent land-owners had not been individually contacted/consulted, and as a result the AAC passed following recommendation:
That the AAC recommends to the Regional Board that:
The Ministry of Environment be requested to give the SLRD Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) an opportunity to review the final map for the wildlife management area before the area is established;
AND THAT the Ministry be informed that the AAC encourages Ministry staff to contact individual land-owners with any land adjacent to the proposed wildlife management area in order to inform and consult with them before the area is designated;
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 191 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations
AND THAT the Ministry be requested to consider including a member of the SLRD’s AAC or another representative of the Pemberton Valley farming community for appointment to the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Plan Management Committee.
At the January 2010 Regional Board meeting, in response to the AAC’s December 2009 recommendation, the Board resolved:
THAT the December 16, 2009 Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee recommendation regarding: Proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – follow-up to correspondence dated October 15, 2009 from J. Aikman, Ministry of Environment be deferred, and that Staff be directed to prepare a report.
PRESENT STATUS OF THE WMA
Staff contacted the Regional Planner of the Ministry of Environment (Jennie Aikman) on February 8, 2010 to request a status update on the WMA and discuss the concerns raised by the AAC. The purpose of the communication was twofold; to research the feasibility of following through on the AAC’s recommendations, and the potential impact of the AAC’s recommendation on the establishment of the WMA, if the Board were to support their recommendation.
Staff was informed that the Management Plan for the WMA was approved in 2001, and that the designation of the WMA, which is the final step, is presently being drafted as an Order in Council (OIC) to be placed before Cabinet for approval this spring. [An OIC is the means by which a WMA get established by the Provincial Government.] The consultation process for the designation of the WMA was initiated in 1997-98 and involved many previous community sessions. It was re-initiated in 2008, and has followed the standard consultation process for establishing Wildlife Management areas. Recent local consultation included consulting with the SLRD and a public open house held in the spring of 2009 in Pemberton. The public open house was held as a means of describing and capturing citizen and landowner comment with respect to the proposed WMA. In addition, the Ministry Regional Planner had agreed to make a presentation to the AAC last summer as a result of the SLRD Planning staff’s suggestions. The Ministry representative advised that no further consultation outside of the consultation plan will be undertaken. Accordingly, at this juncture, the Ministry cannot endeavour to contact and further consider the adjacent landowners’ perspectives.
However, the Ministry staff person assured SLRD planning staff that the Ministry is aware of the concerns raised by the Pemberton farming community during the Open House and at the AAC meeting in the summer. With respect to the mapping inaccuracies, Ms. Aikman advised that the map is currently being rectified and the technicians utilize legal descriptions and the final map is approved by the Surveyor General. Therefore, she advised that landowners need not worry about the boundaries of the WMA impinging on private property, as the WMA will only include Crown land property. Once the map is finalized it can be shared with the AAC, but the Ministry will not be considering any further amendments to the map at this time.
With respect to a management board for the WMA, Ms. Aikman advised that the MOE may establish a committee to provide recommendations to the Ministry regarding the management of the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area. Should it be established, the Ministry is
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 192 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations supportive of having a representative of the SLRD’s AAC, or another representative of the local agricultural community, appointed to the committee.
THE WMA AND THE DRAFT PEMBERTON VALLEY AGRICULTURAL AREA PLAN
For the Board’s information, the Draft Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan (AAP) will contain sections that address the retention of crown ALR potential for agriculture while taking into account sensitivities to wildlife.
OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Support the first two AAC’s recommendations, as is:
- that the Ministry be requested to allow the Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) an opportunity to review the final map for the wildlife management area before the area is established; - that the Ministry be informed that the AAC encourages Ministry staff to contact individual land-owners with any land adjacent to the proposed wildlife management area in order to inform and consult with them before the area is designated;
2. Request that the Ministry consider including a representative SLRD’s AAC (or another member of the Pemberton agricultural community) on the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Plan local board or management committee.
3. Do not support any of the AAC’s recommendations and take no further action on the proposed Pemberton Wetlands WMA.
EVALUATION OF OPTIONS
1. Supporting the AAC’s recommendations as is. This option appears to be ineffectual given the status of the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area designation / impending Order in Council. Consultation on the establishment of the WMA is complete and the Ministry has no intentions to re-open the consultation process to consider feedback from adjacent landowners or amendments to the map. The map requires a rigorous process of acceptance by the Surveyor General and therefore revisions would not be easily accommodated. This option is not recommended.
2. Support the AAC’s third recommendation that the Ministry be requested to consider including a member of the SLRD’s AAC or another representative of the Pemberton Valley farming community for appointment to the Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Plan Management Committee. This would recognize the intent of the AAC’s first two recommendations to ensure inclusion of the agricultural community’s perspective with respect to the management of the proposed WMA. As per a conversation between SLRD and MOE staff on February 8 2010, this option is supported
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 193 of 361 Request for Decision
Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – Follow up to AAC Recommendations
by the Ministry and appears to be a proactive way to ensure the agricultural community’s concerns are represented in the management of the WMA. This is the preferred option.
3. The Board could choose to take no further action, given the impending status of the WMA designation. However, this option is not preferred, as it would be prudent to follow- up on at least one of the recommendations from the AAC that a member of the AAC or the farming community be requested to be involved in the local management committee, if established.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 194 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 195 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 196 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
Date: February 10, 2010
Recommendation:
1. THAT the Regional Board endorse the attached Terms of Reference for processing the Sunstone Ridge Neighbourhood Concept Plan Official Community Plan Amendment / Rezoning Applications.
CAO Comments: I concur. P.R.E.
Who Votes: All
Recommendation Report/Document: Attached _X_ Available __ Nil __
Key Issue(s)/Concepts Defined: To provide the Regional Board with an amended Terms of Reference to guide the processing of the OCP amendment /rezoning application submitted by the Sunstone Ridge Consortium.
Staff presented a proposed Terms of Reference for the Sunstone Ridge Application to the Board in January 2010. The Board considered the staff report and passed the following recommendation:
“THAT the Terms of Reference be referred back to Staff for a Terms of Reference that establishes criteria for analysis of the development proposal, and a preliminary review of the proposal to advise the Board how it fits with SLRD growth plans.”
This report endeavours to address the ‘criteria for analysis’ portion of the above-noted Board motion. A companion report will address how the proposal fits with SLRD growth plans.
Relevant Policy(ies): Area C OCP Bylaw 1008, 2008; SLRD RGS Bylaw 1062, 2008 at second Reading
Strategic Relevance: n/a
Desired Outcome(s): Board endorsement on a Terms of Reference that will guide the review of the application.
Response Options: 1. Endorse the attached Terms of Reference. 2. Endorse the attached Terms of Reference, with amendments. 3. Do not endorse the attached Terms of Reference; refer back to Staff for changes with respect to specifically identified issues [List in Resolution].
Preferred Strategy: 1. Endorse the attached Terms of Reference.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 197 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
Implications Of Recommendation
General: n/a
Organizational: n/a
Financial: n/a
Legal: n/a
Follow Up Action:
1. Board endorses Terms of Reference – Feb. 22, 2010 2. Distribute TOR to TWG members / Notify the applicants - Feb 23 – 26, 2010
Communication: The applicant is kept up to date on the status of the application via letters, and phone and email correspondence.
Other Comments: n/a
Submitted by: Planner, L. Griffith Reviewed by: Director of Planning and Development, S. Olmstead Approved by: CAO, P. Edgington
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 198 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
Sunstone Ridge Neighbourhood Concept Plan / Rezoning Application Terms of Reference
1. Purpose
The purpose of the Terms of Reference is to outline evaluation criteria, a proposed consultation methodology, and a proposed timeline for processing the development applications submitted by the Sunstone Ridge Consortium for the Sunstone Ridge neighbourhood concept plan.
2. Criteria for Evaluation
2.1 Sustainable Neighbourhood Planning Criteria
The Area C Official Community Plan (OCP), in the Section entitled “Special Planning Area”, contains Criteria for a Future Comprehensive Development Designation to guide the determination of a comprehensive development planning process to amend the OCP and allow development in the area proposed for Sunstone Ridge. (The section is attached as Appendix 1 and paraphrased below.)
The goal of the criteria contained in the Area C OCP is to create a community built around sound planning principles including: - Reflection of the Smart Growth / Sustainability principles contained in the RGS - Provision of a enhanced non-motorized recreation trail network - Provision of a variety and abundance of open space and parkland - Provision of a variety of Housing Types, including affordable housing, and mixed uses - Accommodation of higher densities in recognition of environmental, archeological and view protection - Protection of ecologically sensitive areas and key natural features - Provision of community facilities such as a [public] school, firehall and recreation facilities - Cooperation and coordination with First Nations - Inclusion of a plan for efficient and effective transit - Provision of neighbourhood-geared commercial services - Requirement of infrastructure to meet long-term population needs - Encouragement of a high standard of Energy Efficiency
In addition the Planning Department has developed the attached “Sustainability / Smart Growth” checklist for in-house evaluation purposes of development applications. Staff intend on using the checklist to systematically evaluate in the Sunstone Ridge project in terms of sustainability and smart growth criteria in collaboration with the applicants in an ongoing effort to improve the application.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 199 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
2.2 Servicing/Infrastructure and Governance Criteria
The Area C OCP also includes criteria to guide the analysis of servicing/infrastructure and eventual governance of a comprehensive development in the area designated Special Planning Area. Specifically, section 5.20 acknowledges “that where the comprehensive servicing analysis demonstrates the feasibility of urban density and scale development in the Special Planning Area, the land to be developed will be included at an appropriate time within a municipality.” 5.21 goes on to say that “the planning process for the Special Planning area should be undertaken as a collaborative effort by the Village of Pemberton, SLRD, Lil’wat Nation, landowners and the community in ongoing consultation with the ALC and other affected agencies.” These Board approved policies will be adhered to in the processing of this application.
3. Consultation Methodology
3.1 Public Consultation The public will be consulted on the development of the neighbourhood concept plan from the onset. A project initiation public open house was held for January 18, 2010 at the Pemberton Community Centre. SLRD planning staff delivered a short presentation introducing the background and planning policy context and the applicants’ agent provided an overview of the Neighbourhood Concept Plan. The public was encouraged to ask questions at the open house and fill out comment sheets either that night or on- line. Information on the application has been posted to the SLRD Website, for those people interested but unable to attend the public open house. A possible second open house will occur once more detail is prepared. A formal public hearing will be held in the fall of 2010 prior to third reading of the bylaws.
3.2 Early and Ongoing Consultation with Stakeholders Invitations for early and ongoing consultation were sent out to an extensive list of provincial government agencies, other external stakeholders and local community groups. The list includes:
Aboriginal Groups: • Lower Stl’atl’imx Land and Resource Authority • Lil’wat Nation Provincial Agencies: • Ministry of Agriculture and Lands • Agricultural Land Commission • Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure • Ministry of Environment • Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and the Arts • Ministry of Community and Rural Development • Vancouver Coastal Health Authority • School District 48 • CN Rail Local Government / Local Government Committees: • Village of Pemberton
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 200 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
• SLRD Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) • Village of Pemberton / Area C Recreation Advisory Committee (RAC)
Organizations: • P emberton & District Chamber of Commerce • Pemberton Valley Dyking District • Pemberton Valley Trails Association (PVTA) Persons: • The Public
Separate meetings (presentations) with the following have also been arranged: AAC, RAC, PVTA and the Pemberton and District Chamber of Commerce.
3.3 Technical Working Group A technical working group has been established to lead the review of the technical elements of the application. The Technical Working Group (TWG) will consist of SLRD Planning and Utilities and Environmental Services staff, the Manager of Development and engineering consultant of the Village of Pemberton, the Manager of the Land and Resources Department of the Lil’wat Nation, and staff representatives of the Ministries of Transportation and Infrastructure, Agriculture and Lands, Tourism, Culture and the Arts (Trails), the Agricultural Land Commission, Vancouver Coastal Health, and School District #48. The agent and other consultants for the applicants will be invited to participate at specified times.
The following table displays the names of the persons invited to participate in the technical working group.
Organization/Authority Representative(s)
Lil’wat Nation – Land and Resources Lucinda Phillips/Harriet van Wert Department
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands Kim Sutherland Agricultural Land Commission Tony Pellet Ministry of Transportation and Howard Hunter / Dale Jeffs / Patrick Hill / Infrastructure Patrick Coates Ministry of Tourism, Culture & the Arts Norbert Greinacher Ministry of Environment Steve Rochetta Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Cindy Watson School District 48 John Hetherington Pemberton Valley Dyking District Jeff Westlake CN Rail Gary Hanson
Village of Pemberton Caroline Lamont, Manager of Development Services Graham Schulz , VoP Engineering Consultant
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 201 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
SLRD - Planning Steven Olmstead, Director of Planning and Development Planner - Utilities and Environmental Allison Macdonald, Open Spaces Coordinator Services Janis Netzel, Snr Engineering Technologist Jesse Lee, Environmental/Utilities Technician
Others (by invitation only at specified Andy Beaird, Agent for the Applicants times) Other consultants for the Applicants
SLRD Planning staff will take a lead role in organizing and coordinating the activities of the Technical Working Group. The technical working group session will be facilitated by SLRD staff. Only members of the technical working group will be able to participate [meetings will not be open to the public/media/land owners/elected officials as this is a staff level technical working group.] Background information and an agenda will be distributed at least five working days prior to the meeting date. Notes shall be recorded by the SLRD staff representative and distributed afterwards by email. The staff representative will ensure that advice provided by the technical working group as a whole and by individual members is documented, reported back to the Regional Board, and actively considered in development of the relevant bylaws and covenants. The first technical working group meeting was held January 28, 2010. It is expected that the technical working group will meet two to three times more between March and May. Technical working group members will be invited to provide written and/or verbal feedback on detailed reports and plans, draft bylaws and covenants circulated by email. Results from their preliminary review will be presented to the Board in March, 2010.
4. Timeline
The following table outlines the timing of the various steps that will be (have been) followed in processing this application. All of the dates may be subject to change, and any major amendments to this time-line will be communicated to the Board and applicants.
Timing Step 1. December 09 Initial Report to Board re: Early and Ongoing OCP Consultation 2. January18 1st Public Open House 3. January 20 Presentation to Agricultural Advisory Committee 4. January 26 Report to Board – Project ToR 5. January 28 Technical Working Group review of preliminary application 6. Feb Additional reports/design details submitted by proponents (confirm) 7. Feb 5 Staff Review of Application using ‘Sustainability Checklist’
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 202 of 361 Request for Decision Amended Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
8. Feb 22 Report to the Board – Revised Project ToR 9. Feb 23 Presentation to Recreation Advisory Committee 10. March9 Presentation to Chamber of Commerce 11. March Technical Review of detailed reports and plans #2 12. March 22 Report to Board on new technical reports and technical review comments. 13. Early April Master Servicing Plans submitted for review 14. Mid-late April Technical Agency Review of detailed design plans 15. April 26 Report to Board on detailed application; recommend bylaw(s) be prepared. 16. May EAD/VoP/Board review of bylaws 17. May 1st reading of bylaws; referral to agencies and local governments for comment 18. Early June Public Open House(s) 19. June/July Applicants respond to key issues raised prior to Public Hearing 20. July EAD review of agency and Open House comments 21. July Board schedules Public Hearing 22. August Service Establishment Bylaws (if necessary) 23. September Public Hearing 24. October 3rd reading 25. November -> OCP Ministerial approval 26. TBD Preparation, execution and registration of legal documents (PDA, covenants, etc) 27. TBD Delivery of amenities December – Adoption – including adoption of BL 741 amendment
*TBD=to be determined, based on the timing of preceding steps/circumstances outside the SLRD’s control (i.e. Ministerial approval).
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 203 of 361 5. SPECIAL PLANNING AREA - Context A subregional planning study for SLRD Electoral Area C, the Village of Pemberton, and the Lil’wat Nation was undertaken in 2007 in conjunction with the Regional Growth Strategy. The planning process included assessments of population, demographics, and land suitability for development. This information informed an estimate of future requirements for residential land within the study area. A primary conclusion of the study is that at least 2,000 additional dwelling units will be required over the next 20 years at current rates of growth.
To accommodate long term population growth in Pemberton and Area C, the Subregional Planning Study concludes that the Pemberton Benchlands and infill development in the Village of Pemberton can accommodate up to 1000 future housing units. However, if the community chooses to accommodate population growth at rates comparable to those experienced over the past 20 years, additional developable land will be required. Floodplain, the Agricultural Land Reserve, and steep terrain limit options for expansion of the Village of Pemberton into areas adjacent to the Village boundary. The option of developing a new growth area in conjunction with other planning initiatives, such as policies to support the intensification of the existing village area, was explored.
The long term growth option recommended by the Subregional Planning study includes the development of the Benchlands and Pemberton infill, plus the development of a new growth area south of Mosquito Lake (approximately 400 hectares of land. including portions of the Lil’wat Nation transfer lands, the “Ravenscrest”, and “Sabre/Biro” lands). Densities equivalent to those included in the Pemberton Benchlands area (5.25 units per hectare) could be allocated in several ways to include a broad range of housing types from some acreage type lots to apartments. This would be serviced with a full range of urban infrastructure (water, sewer, etc.). Total yield would be up to 2,125 dwelling units. At a density of 6.6 dwellings/ha total yield would be 2,670 dwelling units. This option was explored to show the potential impact on long term supply that might come from higher density.
These potential future development lands have been designated in the RGS mapping as “Future Growth Node” and are designated as “Special Planning Area” in this OCP. Comprehensive planning is needed to establish development parameters for desired density, servicing, public land requirements, governance, and phasing sequence that recognize the significant development potential within the Special Planning Area.
Objectives
To establish a land use designation which identifies areas which have the potential to be developed within the next 5 years. To provide flexibility in establishing a land use mix provided all proposals are consistent with the provisions of the Official Community Plan. To encourage strong linkages with the existing population base in the Village of Pemberton To encourage innovative planning that results in mixed use development, protection of open spaces, a variety of transportation options, and infrastructure servicing efficiencies. To plan for an overall scale of development that will accommodate the long term growth needs of the Pemberton area. To ensure the planning, design, and construction of energy efficient neighbourhoods and buildings to minimize greenhouse gas emissions, maximize energy conservation and improve air and water quality.
Electoral Area C OCP Amendment Bylaw 1008, 2008 August 20, 2008 15 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 204 of 361 Policies
5.1. Areas designated as Special Planning Area are outlined on Map 1 – Land Use Designations. 5.2. In order for any development to occur on land designated as Special Planning Area, an application to amend the Official Community Plan by redesignating the parcel to an appropriate new OCP designation must be approved. A development plan shall accompany each application and the development plan must address the key issues associated with the land. The development plan will be prepared based on the criteria outlined in Sections 5.4 through 5.19 of this Plan. 5.3. Uses permitted in areas designated Special Planning Area are residential on existing parcels.
Criteria for a Future Comprehensive Development Designation
The future character of the new community will be determined in a comprehensive development planning process which will involve an amendment to this plan. The goal will be to create a community of neighbourhoods built around the following planning principles:
5.4. the development should reflect the Smart Growth and sustainability principles in the Regional Growth Strategy 5.5. provide for an enhanced non-motorized recreation trail network and pedestrian pathways that form the backbone of the community and that involve no net loss of existing trails 5.6. provide for a variety of types and a significant amount of open space and parkland, including provision for retaining the shorelands around Mosquito Lake as park 5.7. provide for a variety of housing types, affordable housing options and densities in compact, pedestrian friendly neighbourhoods and include at least one community oriented commercial development. Consider zoning that establishes minimum as well as maximum permitted densities. 5.8. higher densities will be accommodated on sites that minimize impacts on environmentally sensitive areas, areas of cultural or archeological value, viewscapes and are in proximity to major roads. 5.9. protect ecologically sensitive areas and key natural features within a comprehensive open space system that focuses development in less sensitive areas in a way that minimizes negative impacts on fish habitat and water quality, sensitive wetlands and their riparian zones; wildlife habitats; and environmentally sensitive old growth forest areas; 5.10. provide for community facilities such as school, fire hall, and recreation facilities to meet the social and cultural needs of the community; 5.11. consult, cooperate and coordinate with the Lil’wat First Nation in planning for (and management of) development of lands acquired in the planning area and addressing issues of mutual interest; 5.12. plan and design for efficient and effective transit service; 5.13. require provision of commercial services that serve the needs of the resident population;
Electoral Area C OCP Amendment Bylaw 1008, 2008 August 20, 2008 16 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 205 of 361 5.14. design and prove the viability of infrastructure to meet the long-term population requirements of the community and which minimizes impacts to the natural environment. 5.15. A high standard of energy efficiency for all new construction is encouraged: a. Energy efficiency objectives shall be incorporated into all zoning amendment bylaws; b. Density bonusing may be considered where alternative energy systems or other innovative sustainability initiatives are proposed.
Servicing and Development Analysis
5.16. The plan amendment process should include a detailed analysis of site constraints and opportunities. This analysis should also address Lil’wat cultural sites. The analysis will have to be detailed enough to inform the servicing review. 5.17. Prior to development proceeding, a comprehensive servicing analysis must be undertaken to determine how the new growth area can best be economically serviced with utility infrastructure. The servicing analysis should include recommendations regarding best environmental practices and an analysis that addresses the economic implications of capital funding, development timing and rates, risk and in particular, the staging of services under various growth scenarios. The servicing analysis should also include an assessment of the feasibility of providing the Ivey Lake – Reid Road rural residential subdivision with community water as part of the comprehensive development. 5.18. Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Subdivision and Development Servicing (Planned Communities) Bylaw No. 741 or Village of Pemberton subdivision servicing bylaw, as applicable, should be amended to include the subject area at the time of consideration of a development application. Community services and infrastructure would then be required to meet basic municipal servicing standards, except where specifically varied by Development Variance Permit. Variances to specific standards will be considered where the variances result in reduced environmental or visual impacts, while still providing a suitable level of service. 5.19. Prior to adoption of a rezoning bylaw to permit subdivision or development, owners must verify that adequate water supply is available, and submit water, sanitary sewer and stormwater sewer master plans in accordance with SLRD Servicing Bylaw 741 or Village of Pemberton Servicing Bylaw.
Governance
5.20. It is acknowledged that where the comprehensive servicing analysis demonstrates the feasibility of urban density and scale development in the Special Planning Area, the land to be developed will be included at an appropriate time within a municipality. 5.21. The planning process for the Special Planning Area should be undertaken as a collaborative effort by the Village of Pemberton, the SLRD, Lil’wat Nation, landowners and the community in ongoing consultation with the Agricultural Land Commission and other affected agencies. This planning process will be guided by the objectives and policies of this plan, the policies of the Village with respect to smart growth, densities, timing, rate of development, and the values and economic aspirations of the Lil’wat Nation.
Electoral Area C OCP Amendment Bylaw 1008, 2008 August 20, 2008 17 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 206 of 361 Information Report Future Growth Context - Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning
1. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
The purpose of this information report is to provide the Regional Board with preliminary staff analysis of how the OCP amendment /rezoning application submitted by the Sunstone Ridge Consortium fits with SLRD growth plans, as a follow-up to the Board’s January 2010 resolution:
“THAT the Terms of Reference be referred back to Staff for a Terms of Reference that establishes criteria for analysis of the development proposal, and a preliminary review of the proposal to advise the Board how it fits with SLRD growth plans.”
A companion report addresses the ‘criteria for analysis’ portion of the above-noted Board motion.
2. BACKGROUND
As background, the report will provide a brief description of the application, and a history of the planning work and reports that preceded the application.
2.1 Application Details
An OCP amendment application / Neighbourhood Concept Plan (NCP) was submitted to the SLRD in November 2009, by Andrew Beaird of EABB Planning Services (EABB), as agent for the owners: Ravens Crest Developments Ltd., 580049 BC Ltd. (Sabre/Biro Group) and Lil’wat Properties Inc. (Lil’wat Nation-Mount Currie Band) The Sunstone Ridge neighbourhood site encompasses a total of approximately 400 ha and consists of four legal parcels:
- Lot 2, DL 211, Plan EPP1353; - Lot 1, DL 211, KAP87819; - Block A, DL’s 7665 & 8784, KAP81444; and - DL 8785.
A project team headed by EABB with other specialist consulting firms prepared the NCP as a preliminary OCP amendment application. The NCP provides a high-level overview of the site conditions, proposed neighbourhood elements, infrastructure and services, sustainability strategies and planning approach to developing the property.
2.2 SLRD Growth Plans and Studies
2.2.1 Pemberton Area C Sub-Regional Land Use Planning Study – June 2007
The purpose of the sub-regional planning study for the Village of Pemberton, SLRD Electoral Area C and the Lil’wat Nation was to inform overall policy direction within the Regional Growth Strategy and the Area C Official Community Plan Review for managing long-term urban growth in the Pemberton-Mt. Currie area and to address other areas of interest in Area C. This report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. in 2007.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 207 of 361 Stantec Consulting designed a study process that included determining potential growth rates (using 2006 Census and population data from the Lil’wat Nation), and then forecasting these rates 20 years. Potential population growth rates were then reviewed as to the potential requirements for residential and commercial/industrial land in the area. Third, constraint mapping was prepared for the general area which considered such constraints as steep slopes, the Agricultural Land Reserve, floodplains, etc. Finally, various planning scenarios were developed that did or did not accommodate the potential population growth. This growth was allocated to specific geographic areas (such as the proposed Benchlands area, infill in the Village, and other new potential growth areas). Spreadsheets were prepared to show the projected timing of potential development against potential population scenarios, including potential dwelling shortfalls. Then, the scenarios were evaluated against a series of planning principles primarily focused on the principles described in the SLRD’s draft Regional Growth Strategy.
The result of this study was the identification of a potential new growth area with the recommendation that the SLRD protect it for future urban settlement growth. This new growth area would be approximately 400 ha, located north of the river on the slopes above the rail line towards the Ivey and Mosquito Lakes area. It was noted that “if the area were unconstrained, one would logically plan for the orderly expansion of the Village of Pemberton onto adjacent lands. However, the ALR and floodplains preclude this” (Stantec 2007, p.17).
In the evaluation of this option, the study stated,
“In order to accommodate potential long term population over what can be accommodated by infill and the Pemberton Benchlands, there is only one justifiable option and that is the development of a new area on the slopes east of the existing Village of Pemberton. This is the only area large enough to accommodate the potential long-term new growth in way that could meet criteria for smart growth. We recommend that this option be pursued further within an overall growth management framework.”
The study also acknowledged the jurisdictional issues given that most of the existing development in the sub-regional planning area is either in the Village of Pemberton or on the Lil’wat Nation’s Indian Reserve (IR) lands. Options for a new development area would provide for new development on lands now in the SLRD outside of either of the Village or IR. Therefore it suggested that it was most logical that the Village boundaries be extended to include the new development area. This would provide an appropriate governance and administrative vehicle for the planning and development of this area in conjunction with the SLRD and Lil’wat Nation, as well as long term delivery of local services. This area includes much of the Lil’wat Nation’s transfer and option lands as well as private holdings.
2.2.2 Regional Growth Strategy, Bylaw 1062, 2008 – 1st & 2nd reading June 2008
The area identified in the Stantec Report as a potential new growth area is designated in the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) as Future Growth Node. The RGS describes the subject property as an area “deemed to have potential for the development of residential (Mosquito / Ivey Lake)” and the objective within these areas is to “encourage compact, mixed use communities within well-defined boundaries”. Note: The time-frame for projected population growth to be accommodated in the RGS designated Future Growth Node areas is 25 – 30 years.
Lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve are designated Non-Settlement Areas in the RGS. The policy under this designation states, “These areas are to be maintained in a predominantly non-
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 208 of 361 settled state without significant urban or rural land development and in accordance with smart growth principles which direct residential development toward compact communities and maintain the integrity of the resource lands that separate the settlement areas. Major land developments will be limited to agricultural developments in the ALR, resource extraction and industrial uses (forestry, mining, etc.) on resource lands, Backcountry Resorts and Destination Resorts without residential components.”
2.2.3 Area C Official Community Plan (OCP) Bylaw 1008, 2008 – Adopted April 2009
The area identified in the Stantec Report as a potential new growth area is designated in the Area C OCP as Special Planning Area. The estimate of future requirements for residential land were based on the Sub-regional Land Use Planning Study’s finding which had a primary conclusion that between 2,000 and 4500 additional dwelling units will be required over the next 20 years at current rates of growth, based on population projections shown in Table 2 of the study (copy of Table 2 attached). The Area C OCP includes a comprehensive set of criteria to guide future OCP amendments necessary to develop this area into a future neighbourhood. The goal of the criteria contained in the Area C OCP is to create a community built around sound planning principles. The paraphrased criteria include:
- Reflection of the Smart Growth / Sustainability principles contained in the RGS - Provision of a enhanced non-motorized recreation trail network - Provision of a variety and abundance of open space and parkland - Provision of a variety of Housing Types, including affordable housing, and mixed uses - Accommodation of higher densities in recognition of environmental, archaeological and view protection - Protection of ecologically sensitive areas and key natural features - Provision of community facilities such as a [public] school, firehall and recreation facilities - Cooperation and coordination with First Nations - Inclusion of a plan for efficient and effective transit - Provision of neighbourhood-geared commercial services - Requirement of infrastructure to meet long-term population needs - Encouragement of a high standard of Energy Efficiency
Lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve are designated Agriculture and the policies under the Agriculture designation do not support the development of non-farm uses like public lands and facilities (institutional uses).
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 209 of 361 3. SUNSTONE RIDGE LANDS IN CONTEXT
The question of how the Sunstone Ridge Development application “fits” with SLRD growth plans can be summarized in the following chart displaying the legal properties and their current OCP and RGS designations:
Legal Description Size Current OCP RGS Designation(s) Lot 1, DL 211, KAP87819, LLD 65 ha SPA /RR FGN 16 ha AGR (ALR portion) NSA Lot 2, DL 211, Plan EPP1353, LLD 27 ha SPA/RR FGN 9 ha AGR (ALR Portion) NSA
Block A, DL’s 7665 & 8784, KAP81444 168 ha SPA/RM/CWPA FGN & DL 8786, LLD
Area C OCP Land Use Designations RGS Designations SPA - Special Planning Area FGN – Future Growth Node AGR –Agriculture NSA – Non-settlement Areas RR – Rural Residential RM – Resource Management sub-zone CWPA – Community Watershed Protection Area
Location of Future Growth
The uphill portions of the Sunstone Ridge subject property are consistent with the designated Special Planning Area in the Area C and Future Growth Node in the RGS., therefore the location of the proposal conforms with the long-term future growth area recognized by the SLRD. An RGS Amendment would not be necessary to proceed with the Sunstone Ridge OCP amendment application for the portion of the property north of the Rail line.
However, the areas of the proposal which are located in the ALR, and designated Agriculture in the OCP and Non-Settlement Area in the RGS, do not conform with the RGS and do not fall under the area designated in the OCP as Special Planning Area. Once the RGS is adopted, there may be need for an RGS amendment (minor or major, as determined by the eligible members of the Board) to further pursue the aspects of the neighbourhood proposed in the ALR (i.e the independent school proposed on the Raven Crest property, and the proposed recreation centre proposed on the Biro / Sabre property) if the land remains within Area C. However, if the area is incorporated within the Village of Pemberton boundaries, and the development can be aptly accommodated under the Village’s Regional Context Statement (and approved by the Board), the requirement for an amendment to the RGS may be removed.
Scale of Future Growth
The Area C OCP states that “if the Pemberton and area community chooses to accommodate population growth comparable to those experienced over the last 20 years, additional developable land will be required”. The OCP states, “Densities equivalent to those included in the Pemberton Benchlands area (5.25 units per hectare) could be allocated in several ways to include a broad range of housing types from some acreage type lots to apartments. Total yield would be up to 2,125 dwelling units.”
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 210 of 361 The long term growth option recommended by the Subregional Land Use Planning Study (Option 4) was based on a projected growth rate of 4.7% over 20 years with a total number of units needed in the year 2027 equalling 3008 units. The predicted amount of land needed over the next 20 years to accommodate this type of growth rate includes 500 units in the Benchlands and 500 units in Pemberton as infill, plus the development of the new growth area south of Mosquito Lake (the 400 hectares of land identified in the Sunstone Ridge proposal which includes the Lil’wat Nation transfer lands, the Ravencrest lands, and Sabre/Biro lands), which would supply 2008 units.
The Sunstone Ridge Application proposes to provide between 2,100 – 2,500 units over a 30 year build-out. The Sunstone Ridge project is proposing approximately 100 – 500 units in excess of what the Stantec Report projected was needed in the next 20 years. Stantec’s preferred option over 20 years did include a predicted shortfall of 62 units, however even considering this shortfall this proposal exceeds the need by approximately 100 – 400 units in the next 20 years. However, this surplus may easily be absorbed over the next 10 years between 2027 and 2037.
It is important to note that the Stantec report did not explicitly anticipate the Signal Hill Development occurring within the Village of Pemberton, which proposes to supply 296 dwelling units, but it can be assumed that this number falls within the estimate of 500 units of Pemberton infill. If this assumption is not correct, the proposed Sunstone Ridge still exceeds the units needed by at least 100 in a twenty year time horizon.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 211 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 212 of 361 Information Report Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist for development review
Date: February 10, 2010
The Planning Department reviews development proposals using their professional experience and expertise, combined with the SLRD’s regulatory and policy documents which include the various zoning bylaws, Official Community Plans, agricultural plans, the draft Regional Growth Strategy and a variety of other documents, as applicable. In an effort to create a more systematic and comprehensive review process for development proposals with respect to environmental and socio- economic sustainability, the Planning Department has created the Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist for Development.
The checklist has been developed based on best practices, Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) criteria and Leadership in Environment and Design (LEED) criteria. In creating the checklist, the SLRD reviewed third party rating systems (LEED, Built Green, Green Globes) and 11 similar checklists that have been created in North America, including those done in Portland, Nelson, Port Coquitlam, Saanich, Whistler and Toronto.
The sustainability checklists reviewed vary in a number of ways. 60% of the checklists refer to environmental content only, with 40% including triple bottom line content (environment, economic and social). Several use descriptive statements, and about a third use a scorecard system, with another third using a checklist only. Just over one-third of communities have mandatory items or a minimum checklist score for attainment of approval and some require documentation and audits for enforcement. A small number of communities have some benefit associated with achieving checklist items (i.e. development cost charge reductions).
Based on the review of existing sustainability checklists and third party rating systems, the SLRD has created the Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist for Development which includes a triple bottom line approach. At this stage, the SLRD is not contemplating a point system or any mandatory requirements. The checklist is simply meant to reflect those components of sustainable development that the SLRD would like to encourage in new projects. The checklist also allows both the development community and the SLRD to visually see some of the sustainability metrics that a proposal includes and helps to identify gaps and areas for further focus.
As Planning Department staff work with the checklist over time, the checklist can be further refined, and consideration can be given to a point system if it is deemed necessary or beneficial. At this time, however, the checklist will simply be another project analysis tool.
A copy of the Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist for Development is attached to this report as Appendix “A”.
Submitted by: K. Needham Reviewed by: Steve Olmstead Approved by:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 213 of 361 THE SLRD SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY CHECKLIST
Why a Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist?
The SLRD Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist (the “checklist”) has been developed in order to give SLRD staff and the development community the ability to easily review and assess the sustainable components deemed to be important in a development proposal. At this time, the checklist is simply that – a checklist. It has not yet been assigned a grading or point system. Over time and through application, the checklist may be refined and made to be more prescriptive in nature.
Regional Growth Strategy Smart Growth Principles
The Squamish-Lillooet Regional District and member municipalities collaboratively developed and endorsed Smart Growth principles that are included within a Memorandum of Understanding established to guide the preparation of the RGS. These include:
1. Direct urban development towards existing communities (avoiding urban and rural sprawl); 2. Build compact, complete, mixed-use neighbourhoods; 3. Create walkable communities; 4. Promote a variety of low impact transportation options; 5. Advocate a range of affordable housing options; 6. Foster distinct, attractive, economically sustainable communities with a strong sense of place; 7. Protect and promote responsible stewardship of green spaces and sensitive areas; 8. Ensure the integrity of a productive agricultural and forestry land base; 9. Endorse energy efficient infrastructure; 10. Ensure early and ongoing public involvement that respects community values and visions; 11. Cultivate a culture of cooperation, coordination and collaboration between local governments, provincial agencies, federal agencies, and First Nations.
It is the above principles that have been used to guide the Smart Growth & Sustainability Checklist.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 214 of 361
361 of 215 Page 2010 22, February Agenda; Meeting Regular SLRD 1 6 8 4 3 5 7 2
Mandatory Requirement health services (hospital, doctor's office) child care facility community Short block lengths Minimal cul de sacs Provision of a neighbourhood jitney (for projects >100 units) Electric vehicle plug ins Indicate if the project is within a Regional Growth Strategy designated future Other amenities (describe) Supports alternative transportation use Traffic and speed controls by design Within 800 metres (10 minute walk) from: 500 + metres Walking distance to transit service in metres Located on a trail or cycling route TDM (transportation demand management) measures (describe): P Secure bicycle storage (for every residential unit) a public school neighbourhood store 200 500 metres under 200 metres Designated parking for van pools and car pools or car share spaces (for projects >3 units) Covered bike racks (for all commercial or industrial uses >500m2) settlement area. If no, then an RGS amendment may be required. communit Change rooms and end of trip facilities (for commercial or industrial uses >800m2) Pa Streets designed to encourage walking and cycling, while providing for vehicles Is LEED, ASHRAE or NET ZERO certification being pursued? If so, please describe the No need to complet type and level ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY r ovision of Car Share vehicle(s) (for projects >10 units) ths for cutting through y services services of cert ((library e the rest of the c librar ification: (based on the existing environment) y, , communit community ______hecklist y centre Criteria centre) ) e No Yes
Somewhat SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY
Unknown CHECKLIST FOR DEVELOPMENT N/A Describe, if necessary
361 of 216 Page 2010 22, February Agenda; Meeting Regular SLRD 24 17 14 13 23 20 10 18 15 21 22 19 11 16 12 9
Mandatory Requirement Water efficiency measures Mini round abouts On street parking Roads designed to minimize storm water run off (permeable shoulders, ditches, swales, Fish or aquatic habitat protection Indicate the percentage of existing trees to be retained on site Have preservation or enhancement areas been incorporated in the project? (describe) Has the site been previously disturbed? (describe) Drought resistant landscaping including xeriscaping, permaculture,etc. Waste diversion facilities (eg. On site waste and recycling, on site composting) On slopes of less than 40% Rocky knolls or visible outcrops Wildlife corridors Floodplain mitigation? (a requirement in floodplain areas) etc.) Is the proposal in an environmental development permit area? Describe: Indicate the amount of trees to be replaced in square metres Is there a plan in place for the reparation of cut and fill slopes? Indicated if there will be any site remediation works (describe, as necessary) Permeable surfacing (note the percentage of pervious surfaces) Light pollution mitigation (eg. Spill over lighting and off si Green roof (more than 60% of proposed roofs) On site stormwater drainage management Was an environmental assessment completed prior to the design work? On site detention (such as vegetated swales as opposed to "p Does the cut and fill plan leave enough space for tree buffering of upland slopes in order W Are any of the following environmental features present on the site? Riparian areas Wetland habitat Natural grassland areas Old Growth trees Significant trees to preserve vi ildlife (red or blue listed species) yp sual quality? (based on the existing environment) Criteria te glare avoidance) ipe and pump") e No Yes
Somewhat SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY
Unknown CHECKLIST FOR DEVELOPMENT N/A Describe, if necessary
361 of 217 Page 2010 22, February Agenda; Meeting Regular SLRD 26 25 28 27 29
Mandatory Requirement Outdoor lighting with motion detectors Water cisterns and rainwater/snowwater collection devices for irrigation 3% of materials substituted by salvaged materials High efficiency fixtures Natural ventilation Solar shading Net zero energy construction (eg. Passivhaus) Passive solar gain Water use reduction measures On site wastewater treatment High efficiency irrigation Use of non potable or reclaimed water for irrigation Solar thermal hot water Solar PV Geothermal Renewable energy alternatives Other (describe) 1 major building element (floors, walls, roofing, etc.) having >40% salvaged material, or > Ground heating or cooling High performance building envelopes Dual flush toilets (eg. At least 2 toilets are dual flush, maximum 6L per flush) Low flow/consumption fixtures (eg. Faucets <6.5L/minute at 415 kPa, showerheads Grey water heat recovery unit Wind turbines Off grid Energy reduction measures Other of exit, install an approved gr Greywater reuse (eg. Separate toilet and kitchen sink drains from all other drains to point Stormwater irrigation <7.5L/minute at 550 kPa Use and re use of Other (describe) District Energy (describe the proposed format) gp ma (based on the existing environment) terials and resources p g e ywater reuse system) Criteria e No Yes
Somewhat SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY
Unknown CHECKLIST FOR DEVELOPMENT N/A Describe, if necessary
361 of 218 Page 2010 22, February Agenda; Meeting Regular SLRD 32 37 30 34 31 38 36 35 33 40 39
Mandatory Requirement application (eg. Framing, plywood, floors, etc.) Low emitting materials are proposed (paints, carpet, sealants and adhesives) Locally Sourced Are the building footprints clustered to minim Use of materials that are certified for recycled content (>10% of flooring or >5% of other Non toxic finishing materials High volume fly ash concrete Use of environmentally sensitive or recycled materials Enhanced durab Use of several major materials (eg. Exterior walls or floors, windows, doors) and/or (eg. St Natural ventilation systems Heat and light control systems are proposed Flooring materials (eg. >30% of flooring with >10 year warranty) Roof materials (eg. >35 year warranty) Wall systems (eg. Cladding >40 year warranty) Use of one major renewable material made from plant fibre with less than 10 year rotation Renewable Content Other (describe) materials) Anticipated population of development Daylighting and views are considered Indoor Envi Roofing is Class A, non combustible, cladding is BC Fire Smart rated not greater than +1 Fire Resistance Other (describe) Use of certified sustainably harvested wood for one major structural or finishing Certified Wood systems (eg. Insulated panels, lighting, heating) produced in B.C. Anticipated price range of units per square foot: Anticipated population density per developed hectare SOCIO ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY raw, bamboo, organic cotton) ronment ility of construction materials al Quality (based on the existing environment) yjg Criteria ize sprawl and maximize greenspace? e No Yes
Somewhat SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY
Unknown CHECKLIST FOR DEVELOPMENT N/A Describe, if necessary
361 of 219 Page 2010 22, February Agenda; Meeting Regular SLRD 46 41 48 47 45 44 42 43
Mandatory Requirement Public Art Park (indicate total area) Open spaces (indicate the total area) Community gathering areas (indicate the total area) Play areas and tot lots Indicate if there are mixed uses proposed lights, no more than 10% of lamp lumens between 80 90 degrees of nadir) Does the proposed development include non market housing (affordable, seniors or Other amenities (describe) Edible trees and landscaping Live work units (indicate the number of units) Indicate if the following community buildings will be provided: W Indicate if any of the following amenities will be provided: Educational (describe) Commercial (indicate the size in square metres) Community meeting space Community kitchen Number of units: If yes: other)? reinforced walls and grab bars in bathrooms, accessible entries, etc.) Child care facility Community greenhouse Community garden As percentage of total units: Light pollution reduction measures for better living (eg. Cut off fixtures for outdoor Noise reduction measures Total rental units: Form of tenure (eg. Rental, co op, owner, secondary suite): Indicate if housing units are ground oriented (include total % ground oriented) Targeted population Indicate if any accessible or adapti gp a lking/bike trails (indicate total length of trails) (based on the existing environment) ve units are available (eg. With wider door openings, Criteria g(g e No Yes
Somewhat SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY
Unknown CHECKLIST FOR DEVELOPMENT N/A Describe, if necessary
361 of 220 Page 2010 22, February Agenda; Meeting Regular SLRD 53 52 56 7Innovation 57 49 54 55 50 51
Mandatory Requirement drains, police, fire) without requiring expansion? Community workshop for carpentry, etc. Will the project provide for any public education opportunities? (eg. training, this project? Please describe: Are there any other components of economic sustainability that will be advanced by Are view corridors preserved within the development? Community storage room Community craft room Is there something else that is unique or interesting about your project that is not included Community garden shed recreation, entertainment, education) Are community members or end users involved in the planning process? Does the project preserve agricul Does the project use existing infrastructure and servi Will there be long term jobs created after the project is complete? in this checklist that you'd like included? Please describe: If yes, how many long term jobs will be created? Does the project promote diversification of the lo jg pj (based on the existing environment) tural capability in the area? Criteria cal economy? (describe) ces (eg. Roads, water, sewer, (g e No Yes
Somewhat SMART GROWTH & SUSTAINABILITY
Unknown CHECKLIST FOR DEVELOPMENT N/A Describe, if necessary
PURPOSE BACKGROUND Local Government Act NEXT STEPS
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 221 of 361
FINAL PROPOSAL ARBITRATION – ACTION NEEDED italicized Decision from EAD including members to participate electoral area directors at April 12 EAD and the Provincial Meeting. government
2
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 222 of 361
Electoral Area Directors participate in the preparation or endorsement of the “Joint Issue Statement” as part of the SLRD Board. Electoral Area Directors make and submit EAD endorsement written “representation(s) of EAD “representation(s)” at April 12 EAD meeting
3
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 223 of 361 SLRD DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
Regular Regional Growth Strategies – Dispute Resolution Process Timelines for Final Proposal Arbitration; Local Government Act Regulation 192/98 Meeting
On Dec 15th, 2009 DOS Council passed a resolution indicating their support to end the non binding dispute resolution process. Agenda; Dec 15th March 9th April 6th June 8th
February START COMPLETION 22, 2010 84 days for parties to select a settlement process 28 days to select 63 days in total for final proposal arbitration COOLING OFF PERIOD an arbitrator process; including for the arbitrator to Note that after the arbitrator has made a render a decision decision, the parties have up to 60 days to reach an alternative agreement Olympic Winter Paralympic Games Winter Games th st (Feb 12th 28th) (Mar. 12 21 ) End of non binding dispute resolution * 14 days for the parties to choose to participate * SLRD to send a letter to the Minister to report on the 28 days for preparation of a joint end of the non binding dispute resolution process statement 42 days for participating parties to submit proposals Remaining time for arbitrator to review Page proposals and decide (up to 21 days)
224 Prepared by the Intergovernmental Relations and Planning Division, Ministry of Community and Rural Development, of
361 REVISED January 6, 2010 I:\IGov_Relations_Plan_Div\Regional Districts\Squamish Lilloeet\Timeline chart FPA with Olympic Games.docx Information Report Climate and Energy Action Plan February 2010 Progress Update
Date: February 10, 2010
In February, 2009, the SLRD Board endorsed the Climate and Energy Action Plan program with a budget of $60,000.
This report intends to update the SLRD Board about the following aspects of the Climate and Energy Action Plan program: 1) A grant awarded to the SLRD from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), under the Green Municipal Fund (GMF) in support of the Climate and Energy Action Plan in the amount of $27,225; 2) The status of the Oil Vulnerability Analysis; 3) The status of the Energy Resilience Task Force.
1) The FCM Grant for the Climate and Energy Action Plan
On January 28, 2010, the SLRD was successful in obtaining a grant from the FCM in the amount of $27,225. The grant money is based on the strength of the Climate and Energy Action Plan and the innovation and leadership demonstrated by the SLRD Board through this program.
2) The Oil Vulnerability Analysis
At the February 23, 2009 SLRD Board meeting, the Board sanctioned an oil vulnerability audit as part of the overall Climate and Energy Action Plan.
In December, 2009, an oil vulnerability audit (OVA) was conducted by Simon Snowden, of the University of Liverpool. It should be noted that the SLRD is the first local or regional government to undertake this kind of work in Canada. As OVA’s are quite complex, it was decided that Mr. Snowden should look at one sector only (agriculture). A Pemberton-based seed potato farm was selected for the study. Mr. Snowden conducted a rigorous review of the operations of the farm and used the data that he collected to perform his oil vulnerability audit. Mr. Snowden’s final report was submitted in January, 2010. It reveals some very interesting facts about farming vulnerabilities, both locally and regionally. In particular, the report notes that potato farming is highly vulnerable to oil price shocks and that “business as usual” is will not be an option in the future.
The OVA technique can be applied in the future to other sectors in the SLRD in order to address energy vulnerability.
The Pemberton Seed Potato Farm Oil Vulnerability Analysis report is attached to this report as Appendix “A”.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 225 of 361 Information Report Climate and Energy Action Plan February 2010 Progress Update
Mr. Snowden has prepared a short video that will be presented to the Board at the February, 2010 meeting, outlining the structure and findings of his study. He will also be available via conference call to answer any Board questions about his report.
3) The Energy Resilience Task Force
One component of the Climate and Energy Action Plan is the establishment of a task force to address regional vulnerabilities on a sectoral basis and to summarize task force findings in an Energy Resilience Task Force report. A terms of reference is complete, and the task force is set to form at the end of March, 2010 with a final report due to the Board by the end of 2010. The terms of reference are attached to this report as Appendix “B”.
Further updates on the status of the Climate and Energy Action Plan will be presented to the SLRD Board, as appropriate.
Submitted by: K. Needham Reviewed by: Steve Olmstead Approved by:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 226 of 361
!
! *+< > ? ^ ^ ` {} ~ {}}!
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 227 of 361
`
{}} {}}
^
`
^ `
}
^
` !!!{}}}
} > ^
^
^
^
^ `
< ^ {}}
`
^
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 228 of 361
` ^
~ ~ `
{}{
< ^
~
`
^
` ~
`
{ ^
`
~
^
^
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 229 of 361 ^
^ <
^
}} }
^ }} } {}
^
`
^
^
`
^
^
^
`
^
^ ^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 230 of 361
^ `
` ^
{} `
^ `
^ {
^
^
^ >
~
^
^ ¡ ` ^
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 231 of 361
^ ` `
^
^ `
^ `
` ^
` ^
^
^
^
^
¢**^*! ¢^!
^ }
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 232 of 361
^ `
^ ¢*^£
¢*}^{ ^
}
^ £
^ }
{ ¢*^
*
^
! ! "
\ + < ? @
¡
} } {}
! {{ }
^
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 233 of 361
^ }
¢ £}!^} ¢} ^ * ^
<
£ ^
} ^
<
¢*}}} ¢}}} ^
¢}}}
^
\ ^ ! ? ^ ` ? ! " | ` ! + <
^ ` +" {~ }
^ ` +" { | " } ` {! } ! ! +"
¡ {
¢*}£!^} ^
¢}{^*{ £ ^*
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 234 of 361 ^
^
! !
! ~
¡ ¡ ¤
¢}^}£ <
¢^ ^*
^
^
` ^
^ ` ? !
" ~ ~ !
¡ ¡ ¡{ ¤
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 235 of 361 ¢^
^{ ^
^
¡ ^
^
^
! ?
! ~ ~
¡ ¡ ¤
¡
`
< ^
^
~ ^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 236 of 361
^
`
^
¥^ <
`
`
` ^
^ <
^
`
`
` ^
` ^ `
^
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 237 of 361
^
^
^
^
` ^
^
` ^
^
^
¡
^
`
^
`
^ `
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 238 of 361
` `
^
< `
^
^
^
^
` ^
^
^
^
^
` ^
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 239 of 361 `
^
^
^
^
^
` ^ `
` ^
^
`
^ ¦
¥
` ` ^
^ `
^ ` `
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 240 of 361 {}}* {}}£
^
^
^
`
^
` `
^
~ ^
^
} ^ ¡
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 241 of 361
^
`
^
^ ^
`
^ ¡ `
^ ¦
`
^
~
` ^
~ ^
` `
^
~
^
^^ {}} ^ ^ § ¦ ^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 242 of 361 ^ {}} ^ ^ ^ ^
< ^ ^ ¨ ` ^ © ¦ ^ {}} ^ `
` ^ ~
^
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 243 of 361 < @
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 244 of 361 ? ` ` !
! !
$ @ " _ " " @ ! ! " # ! ` ! " \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $ '*++<+= *>><>>@ [\<=*@ ']*<^= *>><>>@
! { ` !
" _ $ @ ! " " @ | | ` " # | ! " | ! ! +" \ \ \ ^ ` +" { | " } \ \ \ ^ ` +" {~ } \ \ \ ! ? \ \ \ ^ ` ? \ \ \ ! \ \ \ ! " | ` \ \ \ \ \ \ ^ \ \ \ $ '^^}>~~<~+ *>><>>@ ]><\^@ '*~}\>=<^> *>><>>@
! { ` ! "@
" _ $ @ ! " " @ | | ` " # | ! " | | " \ \ \ @ ` @ | " \ \ \ @ ` ~ @ | " \ \ \ ! | | " \ \ \ @ ` @ \ \ \ ! " | \ \ \ \ \ \ ?" @ \ \ \ $ '^*}~>~<=\ *>><>>@ *+<\[@ ']}~^[<\\ *>><>>@
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 245 of 361 ! { ` ! "@
" _ $ @ ! " " @ | | ` " # | ! " | ` \ \ \ !" | \ \ \ \ \ \ " \ \ \ ! \ \ \ $ '*]}^^*<] *>><>>@ <~@ '~\<] *>><>>@
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 246 of 361 | ?
{!" | ? ! }
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 247 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force The Task Force’s charge will be: 1. To review current and credible data and information with respect to peak oil and energy production and related societal implications; 2. To seek community and business input on the impacts to various sectors and to propose “actionable” solutions; 3. To develop recommendations to the SLRD Board in 2010 on strategies that the SLRD can take to mitigate the impacts of declining energy supplies in areas including, but not limited to: transportation, tourism, business, energy and infrastructure, housing, food and agriculture, the environment, health care, social service, communications, land use, emergency planning and the delivery of SLRD services. 4. To propose methods of educating the public about this issue in order to create positive behavior change among businesses and residents in order to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Principles: The following principles will be employed by the Task Force: Recommendations will be actionable by the SLRD Bold ideas will be pursued Efforts will be made to refer to the actions and findings of other task forces Impacts on the environment, equity and the economy will be taken into account An open and inclusive approach that does not foreclose on options will be utilized Ensure that recommendations have a positive impact and promote resilience Membership: Stakeholders (12 15) representing, but not limited to: Energy, infrastructure and utilities Business and economic development The agriculture /food community (including farming, sales and distribution) Local environmental groups Construction sector Transportation sector Education sector
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 248 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force Tourism sector Social and emergency services SLRD Staff (2) Planning Public Works and Utilities The SLRD will seek stakeholders within each sector, through targeted invitation based on sectoral and geographic representation, and will seek to have at least 1 stakeholder representative from SLRD Electoral Areas A, B, C and D. Membership terms will last for the duration of the task force’s standing or up to 2 years. A person’s membership will cease if 3 consecutive meetings are missed. Alternates may attend when necessary with voting privileges. Sub committees and/or work groups will be struck and appointed as needed to address specific topics, issues or questions. Sub committees will address land use and transportation, food and agriculture, public and social services and overall economic issues. Chair: The Committee will have one Chair (from the Planning Department). Minutes: A facilitator will compile and circulate minutes to members within seven days of the meeting. Minutes will be included on the SLRD Board meeting agenda for information and any recommendations needing approval would be included in a separate report to the SLRD Board. Reports to: The SLRD Board of Directors Frequency of Meetings: Twice monthly for the first 4 months and at least once monthly thereafter, as needed. Meetings are to begin in late March, 2010.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 249 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force Additional working group or sub committee meetings or phone calls may be scheduled as required but it is likely that their work can be completed during regular meeting times. Review of Terms of Reference: To be reviewed annually or on an as needed basis. Proposed Timeline: Proposed meeting dates are noted on Wednesday afternoons as follows: Meeting 1: March 31 (10 – 3 meeting) Meetings 2 and 3: April 14, 28 Meetings 3 and 4: May 12, 26 Meetings 5 and 6: June 9, 23 Meeting 7: July 7 Future dates may be scheduled, as required.
Proposed regular meeting times are 4 pm to 6 pm with the inaugural meeting being held between 10 am and 3 pm.
Meeting 1: Inaugural meeting, introductions, review of terms of reference, rules of conduct, presentation by energy expert, global context, video.
Meeting 2: Review of meeting minutes, video, review of overall energy issues, discussion and review of other task force reports, review of next steps and need for further information.
Meeting 3: Review of meeting minutes, short video, brainstorming of issues, group review and discussion of other task force report findings, information sharing, sub committee break out sessions and planning.
Meeting 4: Review of meeting minutes, sub committee updates, group discussion, need for further information, visualization exercise, sub committee break out sessions and planning.
Meeting 5: Review of meeting minutes, sub committee updates, group discussion, need for further information, sub committee break out sessions and planning , discussion of next steps and need for further information.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 250 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force Meeting 6: Review of meeting minutes, sub committee updates, group discussion, any last ideas or information, submission of findings to the consultant for preparation of the first draft of the task force report. Review of meeting minutes, submission of sub committee findings to the SLRD and facilitator for preparation of the first draft of the task force report.
Meeting 7: Discussion of the first draft of the task force report.
Implementation and Monitoring
Following completion of the project, planning staff and the SLRD will incorporate action items on their annual work plan.
Why an Energy Task Force?
Problem Defined Desired Outcomes (key result if problem is addressed) (related Issues and key question)
Need to address climate change Reduced greenhouse gas emissions
Global liquid fuels are facing peak Strategies in place to address liquid fuel production and will not keep up with reductions demand within the next 5 years.
Regional transportation of people, Strategies for: goods and food will be affected by the Food security growing imbalance between supply and demand for liquid fuels Energy independence
Transportation based on efficient and renewable energy sources Building and community design that focuses on energy efficiency and renewable energy sources
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 251 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force Liquid Fuel for heating and electricity Local energy strategies that allow for will be affected by liquid fuel scarcity independence from the electricity grid
Business instability caused by A sustainable and successful business sector economic contraction and dependence on fossil fuels
Rising costs, unstable economic Vulnerable and marginalized populations circumstances and limited fuel supplies have a safety net. cause social instability
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 252 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force PEAK OIL – AN OVERVIEW
Peak oil theory was developed by M.King Hubbert, Chief General Geology consultant to Shell Oil. In 1956, he accurately determined that U.S. domestic oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970. Hubbert’s predictions were accurate, as U.S. oil production peaked in 1970. After that time, the U.S. became ever more dependent on imported oil. As a result, the U.S. became vulnerable to socio political upheavals, and was subject to an oil embargo in 1973, characterized by fuel shortages, and skyrocketing oil prices.
The theory that world oil production will reach a peak is the basis for peak oil theory. After the peak, the world will experience a decline in oil supply. World oil supply is finite, therefore decline is unavoidable. Peak oil is said to have occurred when about half or slightly more of the ultimately recoverable oil has been produced. Peak oil does not mean that no more oil exists, but that global production can no longer be maintained or increased. Declining oil production creates an inability for production supply to meet demand and therefore prices increase. This situation is compounded by increasing demand created by a growing world population base.
The theory of peak oil generally applies to peak natural gas (which has a similar production curve), although in the case of natural gas, the peaking time is thought to be later than that of oil. These fuels can in many cases be substituted for each other, and together, they account for close to 70% of the primary energy used in the world. In Canada, natural gas production is close to it’s peak, while in the U.S. gas production appears to have already peaked, creating a dependency on imported natural gas that must be liquefied for transport and then re gasified for distribution.
Some facts about Peak Oil
Predictions about the exact timing of oil and gas peaking vary, however, most researchers predict peaking to occur most certainly before 2020. The date of peak production is important, however, it is more important to begin to plan for the consequence of peak production rather to argue if or when it will occur, because it surely will occur sooner than later, and the implications deserve serious consideration.
There are a number of facts that support the imminent peak in world oil production. These include:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 253 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force 1. There can be no oil production without discovery. Production follows discovery by between 25 to 40 years. 2. World oil discoveries peaked in 1964 and have been in decline ever since. 3. In the mid 1980’s, discoveries fell below production and have continued to fall. The world is now drawing down its reserves. For every barrel of oil found, the world produces and uses 4 to 6 barrels. 4. Hubbert’s original model has been updated to show world peaking occurring this decade. Hubbert himself predicted a world peak in production in 2010. 5. There are no more “elephant” or super giant oil fields left. New discoveries are smaller, more remote, more challenging, deeper and more costly to develop. The easy oil has already been discovered. 6. The world’s geology has been extensively mapped and searched using extensive knowledge and technology. Many holes have been drilled. There will be few surprise finds in the future. 7. “Unconventional” oil, including tar sands are very expensive to develop, require massive amounts of natural gas to harvest, and have environmental implications that are unthinkable in terms of climate change, water pollution and ecosystems. 8. OPEC reserve estimates are unreliable because they are the basis for production quotas and there has been a tendency for OPEC member countries to provide inflated estimates, followed by deflated estimates. 9. More and more oil exporting nations are becoming oil importing nations as their production goes into decline. 10. Approximately 2/3 of oil producing nations are in decline, including the U.S., Mexico, the U.K., Norway, Indonesia, etc. 11. At least 2 of the 5 “elephant” fields in the world have peaked and are in decline. This includes Burgan in Kuwait and Cantarell in Mexico, which is in steep decline. There is some evidence that the Saudi Arabian fields are at or near peak.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 254 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force Recommended Reference Books on Energy, Peak Oil and Resilience for Task Force members:
Deffeyes, Kenneth, S., 2004. Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert’s Peak. Hill and Wang, New York.
Heinberg, Richard, 2005. The Party’s Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies. New Society Publishers, Canada.
Hirsch, Robert, 2005. Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, and Risk Management. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy. (NOTE: A summary of this report will be provided to the Task Force members prior to the first meeting).
Hopkins, Rob, 2008. The Transition Handbook: From Oil Dependency to Local Resilience. Green Books Ltd, Totnes, UK. (NOTE: This book will be provided to Task Force members prior to the first meeting).
Murphy, Pat, 2008. Plan C: Community Survival Strategies for Peak Oil and Climate Change. New Society Publishers, Canada.
Rubin, Jeff, 2009. Why Your World is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller: Oil and the End of Globalization. Random House Canada. (NOTE: this book nicely summarizes many issues).
Peak Oil Task Force Reports:
Descending the Oil Peak: Navigating the Transition from Oil and Natural Gas: Report of the City of Portland Peak Oil Task Force. March, 2007.
Twin Cities Peak Oil Resource Guide: Information and Ideas for Community Sustainability. The Twin Cities Peak Oil Working Group. June, 2007.
Oil Independent Oakland Action Plan. City of Oakland. February, 2008.
Berkeley Energy Descent 2009 2020: Transitioning to the Post Carbon Era Final Report. April, 2009. Berkeley Oil Independence Task Force.
Kinsale 2021: An Energy Descent Action Plan – Version 1.2005. By students of Kinsale Further Education College, Ireland.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 255 of 361 APPENDIX “B”
Terms of Reference for SLRD Energy Resilience (Peak Oil) Task Force
Some additional website resources on Peak Oil www.energybulletin.net www.theoildrum.com www.peakoil.net www.postcarbon.org www.communitysolution.org www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk www.futurescenarios.org
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 256 of 361 Information Report
Pavilion Lake Bylaw Enforcement Issue
February 10, 2010
PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to outline work to date and next steps regarding the travel trailer/campground bylaw enforcement issue at Pavilion Lake, Electoral Area B.
BACKGROUND
In August, 2007 the Regional Board passed a resolution directing:
THAT a letter be forwarded to the Interior Health Authority, expressing concern over adequacy of on-site sewage disposal for multiple travel trailers placed on single family lots in Area B (particularly Pavilion Lake), and requesting enforcement action in instances of non-compliance;
AND THAT DFO, Ministry of Environment and ILMB be requested to assist with enforcement.
AND THAT the building inspector be requested to undertake site-specific investigations of potential building/zoning infractions of properties at Pavilion Lake which have placed multiple travel trailers on single family properties.
Staff are presently searching SLRD records and files for correspondence relating to the first two parts of the above resolution. The Planning Research Clerk at the time performed bylaw enforcement duties “off the corner of his desk” and may corresponded with the Health Authority and other agencies via email. In any event, follow up will be required, as we have found no correspondence yet indicating if Interior Health or Ministry of Environment looked into the matter.
Previous correspondence related to the complaint includes
28 April 2008 - Bylaw Enforcement Letter sent to subject property and also 3 other properties at Pavilion Lake
02 May 2008 – reply from Mr. Ferraby on behalf of the property owners at Lot 90
08 July 2008 – second reply from Mr. Ferraby presenting information regarding the history of the property
08 July 2008 – Freedom of Information request from Mr. Ferraby for request for information about the complaint
06 May 2009 – email from Mr. Ferraby asking for update on status of complaints against property
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 257 of 361 27 May 2009 – letter from Marty Mahaffey making complaints against 78 Smith Road, next door to subject property from earlier complaints
Since assigning higher priority to work on the file last fall, staff have done the following:
Site visit and photos taken on November 9, 2009. Staff observed seven trailers and two vacant spaces at 489 Smith Road; four trailers and a mobile home at 19 Hayes Road and approximately 17 trailers at 90 Smith Road (re-inspection will be needed to confirm number and number of vacant spaces if any)
Research regarding provincial legislation and Zoning Bylaw 72 to determine what regulations existed, when they were in effect and what implications there are regarding the present enforcement issue. This has included a trip to the law library at the Robson Square Provincial Law Courts on January 22, 2010 to obtain and review campground regulations from the late 1960s which were in effect until the early 1980s.
Searching SLRD records for documents relating to the Pavilion Lake campground issue.
NEXT STEPS AND TIMELINE Step Action Target Date Follow up with agencies - Contact Ministry reps by February regarding what actions have telephone been taken, if any, and what - send follow up letters action can be pursued. Clarify historic usage and - Meet in with representative March present situation of the owners of 90 Smith Road - Obtain copy of company articles of incorporation, if possible - Re-inspection Determine if zoning - Compile documents and Late March–early April infractions exist prepare report - refer to SLRD solicitor Assess options - Analyze options and report April to Board Commence litigation - Authorize solicitor to Late April proceed with legal action
2
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 258 of 361 Information Report Indian Band Taxation Certificate Squamish Nation
Date: February 3, 2010
We had been received notice of Squamish Nation’s intent to impose independent band taxation on its Stawamus Reserve. Copies of the notice and accompanying paperwork are attached.
This should have no impact on the regional district as (i) the Stawamus Reserve lies entirely within the District of Squamish and (ii) the regional district does not provide any services to the Squamish Nation.
Submitted by: Paul Edgington, CAO
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 259 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 260 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 261 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 262 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 263 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 264 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 265 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 266 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 267 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 268 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 269 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 270 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 271 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 272 of 361 MEMBER NOTICE
TO: Mayor and Council / Chair and Board
FROM: Chair Harry Nyce, President
DATE: February 10, 2010
RE: LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS TASK FORCE – UBCM MEMBER CONSULTATION MEETING
On October 2, 2009, Premier Gordon Campbell announced a joint Task Force to make recommendations for legislative changes to improve the electoral process for local government elections across B.C. The Task Force has been asked to report out by May 30, 2010.
A six-member Task Force has been established, co-chaired by Bill Bennett, Minister of Community and Rural Development, and Harry Nyce, UBCM President. Other Task Force members include: Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey, UBCM First VP and Mayor Mary Sjostrom, UBCM Third VP. The two provincial appointees are MLAs Donna Barnett and Douglas Horne.
The Task Force is reviewing specific issues related to local government elections including: • Campaign finance, including contribution/spending disclosure and limits, and tax credits • Enforcement processes and outcomes • Role of the chief electoral officer (B.C.) in local government elections • Election cycle (term of office) • Corporate vote • Other agreed upon matters, (e.g. matters raised in UBCM resolutions such as eligibility of local government volunteers to be candidates)
Recognizing the tight timeline, the UBCM Executive wanted to ensure that members had an opportunity early on in the process to provide their input, beyond website feedback. As a result, we are inviting members to attend a one-day session on Friday March 12th. Members of the Task Force will be present to discuss the issues under consideration and listen to your comments. This one-day event is in addition to the sessions that are being offered to the Area Associations as part of their spring conferences.
This is an important opportunity for local governments to provide their input at this early stage in the Task Force’s deliberations. The session is open to elected officials and senior staff (as designated by their council/board). A registration form for the session is attached. Fees for this session are purely cost-recovery (ie. catering, room rental) in recognition of the tight fiscal climate.
Members are encouraged to go to the following website in advance of the session to learn more about the Task Force, topics under consideration and review discussion papers: www.localelectionstaskforce.gov.bc.ca
For those not able to attend the March 12th session, we would encourage you to submit your feedback and input through the on-line system that has been established on the Task Force website.
Your registration should be submitted as soon as possible. If you have any questions please contact Marie Crawford, Associate Executive Director at 604.270.8226 Ext. 104, or [email protected].
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 273 of 361 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS TASK FORCE UBCM Member Consultation
Friday March 12, 2010 9:00 am – 4:00 pm Conference Registration & Information
(Please Print)
Delegate Surname: ______First Name: ______
Delegate Title: ______(to appear on nametag)
Municipality/Regional District: ______
Address: ______
______
Phone: ______Fax: ______
Email: ______
REGISTRATION FEE: $50.00 (+ GST $2.50) = $52.50 (includes refreshment breaks and lunch)
PAYMENT: Please return this form with a cheque payable to UBCM for the full amount: Union of BC Municipalities 60-10551 Shellbridge Way Richmond, BC V6X 2W9 Fax: 604.270.9116
VENUE: Delta Vancouver Airport Hotel 3500 Cessna Drive Richmond, BC V7B 1C7 Phone: 1-800-268-1133 Email: [email protected] Web: www.deltaairport.ivancouver.com/
ACCOMMODATION:
A limited room block has been reserved for conference delegates at the Delta Vancouver Airport Hotel in Richmond. Please advise hotel staff that you are registering under the room block for the “UBCM” in order to receive a conference rate of $120.00 (single or double) per night. You are encouraged to book early, as the room block will be released very soon.
PLEASE CALL UBCM IMMEDIATELY IF YOU MUST CANCEL (604.270.8226)
Deadline for registration is: Monday, March 8, 2010
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 274 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Minutes January 25, 2010; 10:30 AM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Board: R. Oakley (Area A); S. Gimse (Area C); K. Melamed (Whistler); M. Macri (Area B); P. Heintzman (Squamish); J. Turner (Area D); G. Gardner (Squamish); J. Sturdy (Pemberton)
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO; L. Lloyd, Director of Administrative Services; S. Olmstead, Director of Planning & Development; L. Griffith, Community Planner; J. Lee, Environmental/Utilities Technician; A. Macdonald, Open Spaces Coordinator; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others: 1 Delegation and 1 member of the press
1 Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 10:34 AM.
2 Approval of Agenda
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the agenda be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
3 Committee Reports and Recommendations
3.1 Committee of the Whole Recommendations of December 14, 2009:
2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review:
Governance Project Budget
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Governance Project budget amount be retained as listed, and that a Committee of the Whole meeting be scheduled in January 2010 for Governance Issue Identification. CARRIED
3.2 Committee of the Whole Recommendations of January 11, 2010:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 275 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
1. Emergency Response Plan
It was moved and seconded:
THAT a thorough report on the 2009 emergency responses be prepared prior to the March 2010 Board meeting. CARRIED
2. Regional Transit Priority Setting
It was moved and seconded:
THAT Staff work to identify cost effective transportation solutions and service governance models for connecting communities within and adjacent to the SLRD; and that this service will reduce personal vehicle usage by enhancing transit options. CARRIED
3.3 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Recommendations of December 14, 2009:
It was moved and seconded:
1. Pemberton Valley Trails Association – Funding Request THAT the Pemberton Valley Trails Association’s request for funding be referred to Staff to prepare a report to the Board outlining priorities and funding, separately, for both local and regional trails.
2. Alternate Ways of Administrating Recreation in Pemberton THAT Staff look at options; legislative and otherwise, for a Service Review/Service Delivery of Recreation for Pemberton & District.
CARRIED
3.4 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Recommendations of January 12, 2010:
It was moved and seconded:
1. 2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 276 of 361 This is page 3 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
Pemberton & District Search and Rescue (1705) THAT the Pemberton & District Search and Rescue budget be approved as presented.
Television Rebroadcasting – Pemberton (2004) THAT the Pemberton Television Rebroadcasting budget be approved as presented.
Pemberton and District Museum (2202) THAT the Pemberton & District Museum budget be approved as presented.
Cemetery – Pemberton/Area C (2601) THAT the Pemberton/Area C Cemetery budget be approved as presented.
Refuse Grounds – Pemberton (1900) THAT the Pemberton Refuse Grounds budget be approved as presented.
CARRIED
3.5 Electoral Area Directors Committee Recommendations of December 15, 2009:
It was moved and seconded:
1. 2010 – 2014 Draft Financial Plan:
Civic Addressing (1202) THAT the Civic Addressing budget be approved.
Building Inspection (1400) THAT the Building Inspection budget be amended by reducing the transfer to reserve by $15,000 and reducing the requisition by $15,000.
Elections UBCM (1500) THAT the Elections UBCM budget be approved.
Electoral Areas Special Services (2900) THAT the Electoral Areas Special Services budget be approved.
Electoral Area A Select General Services (2901) Electoral Area B Select General Services (2902) Electoral Area C Select General Services (2903) Electoral Area D Select General Services (2904)
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 277 of 361 This is page 4 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT Electoral Areas A, B, C, and D Select General Services budgets be approved.
2. Ministry of Environment – Local Government and the Southern Interior Regional Drinking Water Team THAT the Ministry of Environment correspondence regarding the Southern Interior Regional Drinking Water Team be referred to Utilities & Environmental Services Staff for a report on information, implications and concerns with recommendations regarding Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s participation. CARRIED
3.6 Electoral Area Directors Committee Recommendations of January 11, 2010:
It was moved and seconded:
1. 2010 – 2014 Draft Financial Plan: Electoral Areas Community Parks (3000) THAT the Electoral Areas Community Parks budget be approved as presented.
2. UBCM Gas Tax – Community Works Fund Reserve THAT distribution of the UBCM Gas Tax – Community Works Fund Reserve be done by way of the Average of all Divisions calculation, including First Nations population, as presented in the revised report.
3. Development Variance Permit # 85 - 690 Shaughnessy Place, Britannia Beach, Electoral Area D THAT the Board approve a Development Variance Permit for Lot B, DLs 891 & 1897, Gp1, NWD, Plan BCP20021 to vary the provisions of SLRD Zoning Bylaw No. 540, 1994 to permit the construction of a single family dwelling at a height of 9.0m, and that the issuance of the permit be authorized pending favourable responses from referrals. CARRIED
3.7 Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Recommendations of December 16, 2009: Proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – follow-up to correspondence dated October 15, 2009 from J. Aikman, Ministry of Environment
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 278 of 361 This is page 5 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the December 16, 2009 Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee recommendation regarding: Proposed Pemberton Wetlands Wildlife Management Area – follow-up to correspondence dated October 15, 2009 from J. Aikman, Ministry of Environment be deferred, and that Staff be directed to prepare a report. CARRIED
4 Bylaws
4.1 Unweighted Corporate Vote
4.1.1 Bylaw 1153 - Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, 1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1153, 2009 - OCP amendment at Blackwater Creek, Electoral Area C
It was moved and seconded:
THAT Bylaw No. 1153, cited as ‘Electoral Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 689, 1999 Amendment Bylaw No. 1153, 2009’ be read a third time.
CARRIED
5 Staff Reports and Other Business
5.1 Unweighted Corporate Vote
5.1.1 Employee Recognition – Long Service Awards
Ms. Oberson was recognized for her 30 years of service. Mr. Olmstead was recognized for his 10 years of service.
5.1.2 2010 SLRD Committee Appointments
Policy Development & Review Committee:
It was moved and seconded:
THAT policy development & review be a matter for the Committee of the Whole.
Opposed: Directors Melamed and Heintzman CARRIED
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 279 of 361 This is page 6 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT Director Patricia Heintzman be appointed to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association and Director Susan Gimse be appointed as her alternate. CARRIED
Fraser Basin Council Director Ken Melamed was appointed to the Fraser Basin Council and Director Jordan Sturdy was appointed as his alternate.
Fraser Basin Council – Thompson Regional Committee Director Mickey Macri was appointed to the Fraser Basin Council – Thompson Regional Committee and Director Dennis Bontron was appointed as his alternate.
LMLGA Flood Control Director Jordan Sturdy was appointed to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association Flood Control committee.
Municipal Finance Authority Director Susan Gimse was appointed to the Municipal Finance Authority and Director Ken Melamed was appointed as her alternate.
Municipal Insurance Association Director Greg Gardner was appointed to the Municipal Insurance Association and Director Susan Gimse was appointed as his alternate.
Pemberton Library Board Director Susan Gimse was appointed to the Pemberton Library Board and Director Jordan Sturdy was appointed as her alternate.
Lillooet Library Board Director Mickey Macri was appointed to the Lillooet Library Board and Director Russ Oakley was appointed as his alternate.
Southern Pine Beetle Committee Director Mickey Macri was appointed to the Southern Pine Beetle Committee and Director Dennis Bontron was appointed as his alternate.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 280 of 361 This is page 7 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
South Coast/Mountain Regional Transportation Advisory Committee Director John Turner was appointed to the South Coast/Mountain Regional Transportation Advisory Committee, and Staff was directed to confirm the South Coast/Mountain Regional Transportation Advisory Committee still exits.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Board approves the appointment of Committee members for 2010.
CARRIED
5.1.3 Renewal of the Operation and Maintenance Agreement for the Lillooet Refuse Disposal Site
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Board endorse the renewal of the Lillooet Refuse Disposal Site Operation and Maintenance Agreement to Moha Contracting for an additional three years under the same conditions with an increase to the terms from $63,600 per year to $72,000 per year. CARRIED
Consider Delegation Out of Sequence
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the delegation, Willow Thornhill, be advanced in the meeting.
CARRIED
10.1 Willow Thornhill – Britannia Beach Trails
Ms. Thornhill spoke to the Board regarding the pedestrian walkway right of way in Britannia Beach over Lots 40/112.
5.1.4 Amendment of Pedestrian Walkway Right of Way in Britannia Beach over Lots 40/112, Plan BCP 20004, DL 891, NWD
It was moved and seconded:
1. THAT the right of way document over Lots 40 and 112, Plan BCP 20004, DL 891 (reference plan BCP20025), for public walkway purposes, be cancelled and replaced with a reconfigured right of way and reference plan as attached to this report; and
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 281 of 361 This is page 8 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
2. THAT the Chair and Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to sign the cancellation and new right of way documents. CARRIED
5.1.5 Terms of Reference: Sunstone Ridge NCP OCP Amendment / Rezoning process
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Terms of Reference be referred back to Staff for a Terms of Reference that establishes criteria for analysis of the development proposal, and a preliminary review of the proposal to advise the Board how it fits with SLRD growth plans.
Opposed: Director Sturdy CARRIED
The meeting was recessed at 12:25 PM and reconvened at 1:03 PM.
5.1.6 Regional Growth Strategy Dispute Resolution – Final Proposal Arbitration and Preferred Arbitrator
It was moved and seconded:
1. THAT the Board endorse the proposed timeline for settling the Regional Growth Strategy under final proposal arbitration attached to the Request for Decision dated January 18, 2010.
2. THAT the Board endorse the choice of Glenn Sigurdson, QC, as the preferred arbitrator to resolve the Regional Growth Strategy dispute by final proposal arbitration and that John Sanderson, QC be the Board’s second choice, in the event that Glenn Sigurdson becomes unable to perform this role.
3. THAT the preferred arbitrator be appointed by the Board at the March 22, 2010 Regional Board Meeting upon notice of confirmation of process by the District of Squamish. CARRIED
Mr. Olmstead and Ms. Griffith left the meeting at 1:19 PM.
5.1.7 Purchase of Recycling Equipment Lillooet Landfill
It was moved and seconded:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 282 of 361 This is page 9 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT the Board approve the purchase of an Excel Baler model EX62 from Ecotainer Sales in Surrey, BC for the Lillooet Recycling Facility at a price of $69,075. CARRIED
5.1.8 Area B Select Fund Grant
It was moved and seconded:
THAT $4770 from Area B Select Funds be authorized to the Cayoose Creek St’at’imc for the purchase of GIS software. CARRIED
6 Correspondence Requesting Action
6.1 Kerry Ness – Scout Lodge on Kwontlenemo (Fountain) Lake – Request for Funding
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Kerry Ness – Scout Lodge on Kwontlenemo (Fountain) Lake – Request for Funding correspondence be deferred to the February 2010 Board meeting.
CARRIED
6.2 Village of Pemberton and Lil’Wat Nation/Mount Currie Band – Winds of Change Request for Funding
It was moved and seconded:
THAT $2500 from Area C Select Funds be authorized to the Winds of Change Committee.
Opposed: Director Melamed CARRIED
It was moved and seconded:
THAT $2500 from General Select Funds be authorized to the Winds of Change Committee. DEFEATED
6.3 Southern Interior Local Government Association (SILGA) – Call for Resolutions for 2010 SILGA Convention
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 283 of 361 This is page 10 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT items 6.3 to 6.7 be received. CARRIED
6.4 Southern Interior Local Government Association (SILGA) – Call for Nominations for the SILGA Executive
6.5 Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA) – Call for Nominations for LMLGA Executive
6.6 Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA) – Annual General Meeting
6.7 Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA) – Call for Resolutions for 2010 Annual General Meeting
6.8 Municipal Finance Authority (MFA) – Request for Appointment of Member
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the SLRD notify the Municipal Finance Authority of the 2010 Squamish- Lillooet Regional District member appointment. CARRIED
7 Confirmation and Receipt of Minutes
7.1 Regular Board Meeting Minutes – December 14, 2009
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the December 14, 2009 Regular Board meeting minutes be adopted as circulated. CARRIED
7.2 Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes – December 14, 2009
It was moved and seconded:
THAT items 7.2 to 7.9 be received. CARRIED
7.3 Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes – January 11, 2010
7.4 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Meeting Minutes – December 14,
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 284 of 361 This is page 11 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
2009
7.5 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – December 15, 2009
7.6 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes – December 21, 2009
7.7 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes – January 7, 2010
7.8 Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – December 16, 2009
7.9 Bylaw 1153 Public Hearing Minutes – January 6, 2010
8 Business Arising from the Minutes
8.1 Director Macri – Non- compliance issues in Area B
9 Correspondence for Information
9.1 Coroner’s Report: Foreign Students and Recreation Activity
It was moved and seconded:
THAT items 9.1 to 9.7 be received. CARRIED
9.2 Resort Municipality of Whistler – SLRD Bylaw 1152 Consent Denied
9.3 Village of Pemberton – Eldergo! Senior Transportation Service Thank-you
9.4 UBCM – Community Tourism Programme (Phase 2)
9.5 UBCM – 2009 UBCM Administered Grants
9.6 Fraser Basin Council – Committee Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT Staff invite Dr. Jago, Chair, Fraser Basin Council, to address the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Board with a presentation, at his convenience. CARRIED
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 285 of 361 This is page 12 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
9.7 John Buchanan – Echo Lake Cabin Proposal
10 Delegations and Petitions
10.1 Willow Thornhill - Britannia Beach Trails
Considered earlier in the meeting
11 Decision on Late Business
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the late items be considered at this meeting. CARRIED
12 Late Business
12.1 Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Board defer appointments to the Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee (“AAC”) until the SLRD Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw No. 848-2003 has been amended to 2 year alternating terms for members and, removing Electoral Area C Director and a representative of the Village of Pemberton Council from the AAC membership requirement, as requested by the AAC. CARRIED
13 Directors’ Reports
13.1 Director Turner – Area D Alternate Director Change
Area D Alternate Director change from Mr. Nelson Bastien to Ms. Pam Tattersfield.
13.2 Director Heintzman – Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA) Sustainability Snapshot
13.3 Director Gimse – SLRD Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Bylaw
14 Board In-Camera Meeting
Resolution to move In-Camera
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 286 of 361 This is page 13 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Regular Board meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Board move In-Camera under the authority of Section 90 (1) (a) (c) of the Community Charter. CARRIED
The meeting was closed to the public at 2:05 PM, and re-opened to the public at 2:35 PM.
15 Termination
The meeting was adjourned at 2:35 PM.
Russ Oakley Leslie E. Lloyd Chair Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 287 of 361 Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes January 26, 2010; 9:00 AM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Committee: R. Oakley (Area A); S. Gimse (Area C); M. Macri (Area B); P. Heintzman (DoS); J. Turner (Area D); G. Gardner (DoS); J. Sturdy (VoP)
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO; L. Lloyd, Director of Administrative Services; S. Lafrance, Director of Finance; S. Olmstead, Director of Planning and Development; A. Macdonald, Open Spaces Coordinator; J. Lee, Environmental/Utilities Technician; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others:
1 Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 9:06 AM.
2 Approval of Agenda
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the agenda be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
3 New Business
3.1 2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review
1. Treaty Advisory PLTAC (1600)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the PLTAC Treaty Advisory budget be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
2. Treaty Advisory LMTAC (1601)
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 288 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Committee of the Whole meeting, held on January 26, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom at 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the LMTAC Treaty Advisory budget be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
3. Gold Bridge Community Complex (2107)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Gold Bridge Community Complex budget be approved as circulated. CARRIED
4. Sea to Sky Trails (3004)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Sea to Sky Trails budget be referred back to Staff.
CARRIED
Ms. Macdonald left the meeting at 9:55 AM.
5. Sea to Sky Economic Development (3101)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Sea to Sky Economic Development cost centre be renamed to Economic Development; and that $5000 be included in the Economic Development budget.
CARRIED
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT up to $5000 be allocated from the Feasibility Studies fund to facilitate discussions concerning feasibility of a regional economic
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 289 of 361 This is page 3 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Committee of the Whole meeting, held on January 26, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom at 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
development service.
CARRIED
6. 911 South (1764) Deferred to later in the meeting
7. General Government Services (1000)
Resolution to move In-Camera
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Committee move In-Camera under the authority of Section 90 (1) (a) (c) of the Community Charter, to exclude the Public other than the CAO; Director of Finance; and Director of Administrative Services.
CARRIED
The meeting was closed to the public at 10:22 AM. Mr. Olmstead and Ms. Cheng left the meeting at 10:22 AM.
The meeting was re-opened to the public at 10:40 AM.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the General Government budget be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
The meeting was recessed at 10:41 AM and reconvened at 10:53 AM.
Mr. Olmstead and Ms. Cheng returned to the meeting at 10:53 AM.
8. Land Planning & Zoning (1200) Refer back to Staff
9. Regional Growth Strategy (1201)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 290 of 361 This is page 4 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Committee of the Whole meeting, held on January 26, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom at 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT the Regional Growth Strategy budget be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
Mr. Olmstead left the meeting at 11:34 AM.
10. Solid Waste Management Planning (1300)
Mr. Lee joined the meeting at 11:35 AM.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Solid Waste Management Planning budget be approved as circulated. CARRIED
11. Regional Transit Planning & Infrastructure (3201) Refer back to Staff
12. 2010 Financial Plan Summary
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the 2010 Financial Plan Summary be received.
CARRIED
3.2 Governance Issues Identification
4 Termination
The meeting was adjourned at 11:58 AM.
Russ Oakley Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 291 of 361 Electoral Area Directors Committee Meeting Minutes February 8, 2010; 10:30 AM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Committee: R. Oakley (Area A); M. Macri (Area B); S. Gimse (Area C); J. Turner (Area D)
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO; L. Lloyd, Director of Administrative Services; S. Lafrance, Director of Finance; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others: 1 member of the public
1 Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 10:32 AM.
2 Approval of Agenda
The following was added to the agenda:
3.7 Area C Agricultural Area Plan
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the agenda be approved as amended.
CARRIED
3 New Business
3.1 2010 – 2014 Draft Financial Plan
Emergency Planning (1761)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Emergency Planning budget be approved in principle;
AND THAT the SLRD explore salaries of other Emergency Programme Managers, capable of filling in as an Emergency Operation Centre Director, in similar Regional Districts.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 292 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area Directors Committee meeting, held on February 8, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
CARRIED
3.2 2009 Select Services Funds and 2010 Select Services Funds
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the 2009 and 2010 Select Services Funds reports be received.
CARRIED
Ms. Lafrance left the meeting at 11:04 AM.
3.3 January Monthly Building Report
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the January Monthly Building report be received.
CARRIED
3.4 Bridge River Valley Economic Development Society
3.5 Pemberton Dinner Theatre, SLRD Table
It was moved and seconded:
THAT up to $400 from Area C Select Funds be authorized to the Spirit of BC Committee’s Pemberton Dinner Theatre for SLRD tables.
CARRIED
3.6 Managing Forest Fuels in the Wildland Urban Interface Report
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Managing Forest Fuels in the Wildland Urban Interface Report be referred to Staff for comment, and report to the Board at the March 22, 2010 Board meeting. CARRIED
3.7 Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan
It was moved and seconded:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 293 of 361 This is page 3 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area Directors Committee meeting, held on February 8, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Board attend the March 8th Electoral Area Directors Committee meeting or schedule a Committee of the Whole meeting before the end of March, to meet with Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Consulting and Quadra Planning Consultants to discuss implications of the draft Pemberton Valley Agricultural Area Plan. CARRIED
4 Correspondence
4.1 Bob Gray and Jake Ootes - Southern Interior Medevac Proposal
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Southern Interior Medevac Proposal correspondence be received.
CARRIED
5 Confirmation and Receipt of Minutes
5.1 January 11, 2010 Electoral Area Directors Committee Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the January 11, 2010 Electoral Area Directors Committee meeting minutes be approved as circulated. CARRIED
6 Business Arising from the Minutes
6.1 Kerry Ness Correspondence
Kwontlenemo Lake is Fountain Lake, not Pavilion Lake.
7 Electoral Area Directors Committee In-Camera Meeting
Resolution to move In-Camera
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Electoral Area Directors Committee move In-Camera under the authority of Section 90 (1) (c) of the Community Charter.
CARRIED
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 294 of 361 This is page 4 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Electoral Area Directors Committee meeting, held on February 8, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
The meeting was closed to the public at 11:29 AM The meeting was re-opened to the public at 11:30 AM.
8 Termination
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the meeting be adjourned. CARRIED
The meeting was adjourned at 11:31 AM.
Russ Oakley Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 295 of 361 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Meeting Minutes January 12, 2010; 9:30 AM [continued on January 21, 2010] SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Committee: S. Gimse (Presiding Chair); J. Sturdy; M. Blundell; L. Ames
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO; S. Lafrance, Director of Finance; L. Brown, Recreation Facility Supervisor; A. Macdonald, Open Spaces Coordinator; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others: 11 members of the public
1 Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 9:31 AM.
2 Approval of Agenda
The following were added to the agenda:
3.5 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Pemberton Festival 4.2 Fitness Centre Passes – Request for Funding 4.3 Jan Naylor’s Trails Letter
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the agenda be approved as amended. CARRIED
By consensus, the 2010 – 2015 Financial Plan item was considered first in consideration of the delegations.
3 New Business
3.4 2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review
Pemberton & District Search and Rescue (1705)
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 296 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee meeting, held on January 12, 2010 and January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Pemberton & District Search and Rescue budget be approved as presented. CARRIED
Television Rebroadcasting – Pemberton (2004)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Pemberton Television Rebroadcasting budget be approved as presented. CARRIED
Pemberton and District Museum (2202)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Pemberton & District Museum budget be approved as presented.
CARRIED
Library – Pemberton/Area C (2502)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Pemberton/Area C Library budget be referred to Staff for the February meeting.
CARRIED
Pemberton Valley Trails (3003)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Pemberton Valley Trails budget be referred back to Staff, for the February meeting, to provide a cost breakdown for each specific project.
CARRIED
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 297 of 361 This is page 3 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee meeting, held on January 12, 2010 and January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
The meeting was recessed at 10:48 AM and reconvened at 10:57 AM. Item 3.2 was moved up in the agenda.
3.2 Recreation Department Facilities’ Monthly Operating Budget
The meeting was recessed at 11:31 AM and reconvened at 11:39 AM.
3.4 2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review
Community Facility – Pemberton Recreation Centre Budget (2106)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Community Facility – Pemberton Recreation Centre budget be referred back to Staff. CARRIED
Cemetery – Pemberton/Area C (2601)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Pemberton/Area C Cemetery budget be approved as presented.
CARRIED
Refuse Grounds – Pemberton (1900)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Regional Board:
THAT the Pemberton Refuse Grounds budget be approved as presented.
CARRIED
3.5 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Pemberton Festival L. Ames provided a Draft Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Pemberton Festival.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 298 of 361 This is page 4 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee meeting, held on January 12, 2010 and January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
Adjournment
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the meeting be adjourned and that it be reconvened at 1:30 PM on January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom. CARRIED
The meeting was adjourned at 12:42 PM. The meeting reconvened at 1:25 PM on January 21, 2010 with the following in attendance:
Committee: S. Gimse (Presiding Chair); J. Sturdy; M. Blundell; L. Ames
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO(Recording Secretary); L. Brown, Recreation Facility Supervisor
Item 4.2 was moved up in the agenda.
4.2 Linda Brown – Fitness Centre Passes: Request for Funding
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the request from the Pemberton and Area Healthy Living Committee for a donation of 100 one time drop in passes for the Fitness Centre be approved.
CARRIED
L. Brown left the meeting at 1:35 PM
Item 3.1 was moved up in the agenda.
3.1 Pemberton Festival Policing Costs
3.5 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Pemberton Festival Discussion resumed
It was moved and seconded:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 299 of 361 This is page 5 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee meeting, held on January 12, 2010 and January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Pemberton Festival with revisions to Sections 7, 10, 11 and 12 be recommended to the board for approval.
CARRIED
3.4 2010 – 2014 Financial Plan Review
Fire Protection – Pemberton (Cost Centre 1700)
Pemberton Fire Truck Acquisition (1701)
Rescue Service – Pemberton/Area C (1702)
Recreation Commission – Pemberton (2100)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Pemberton Recreation Commission budget be recommended for approval as presented. CARRIED
Economic Development – Pemberton/Area C (3103)
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Pemberton/Area C Economic Development budget be recommended for approval as presented. CARRIED
3.3 Pemberton Recreation Commission Funds
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the report on Pemberton Recreation Commission Funds be received.
CARRIED
4 Correspondence
4.1 Richard Klinkhamer - Location of Pemberton Skateboard Park
It was moved and seconded:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 300 of 361 This is page 6 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee meeting, held on January 12, 2010 and January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT the correspondence from Richard Klinkhamer regarding the location of Pemberton Skateboard Park be received. CARRIED
4.3 Jan Naylor – Status of Highway 99 Trail
4.4 Signage – Community Centre
It was moved and seconded:
THAT Staff present original signage proposals and cost estimates for basic facility signage to the Committee. CARRIED
5 Minutes
5.1 December 14, 2009 Pemberton Valley Utilities and Community Services Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the minutes of the December 14, 2009 Pemberton Valley Utilities and Community Services Meeting be confirmed as circulated. CARRIED
5.2 December 15, 2009 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the minutes of the December 15, 2009 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee Meeting be received. CARRIED
6 Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 PM.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 301 of 361 This is page 7 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee meeting, held on January 12, 2010 and January 21, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
Susan Gimse Presiding Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 302 of 361 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes January 26, 2010; 6:30 PM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Committee: A. Crowley (Presiding Chair); S. Ellis; L. May; P. Read
Staff: L. Griffith, Community Planner; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others:
1 Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 6:36 PM.
2 Approval of Agenda
The following was added to the agenda:
4.1 (a) Sunstone Ridge Development Referral – Lisa Griffith
The agenda was approved with the addition.
3 Previous Recommendations to the Pemberton Valley Utilities and Services Committee:
1. Water Park for the Community 2. Children’s Summer Programming 3. Engineered Baseball Bleachers 4. Pemberton Water Park Update 5. Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Minutes 6. Baseball Bleachers at Signal Hill School
4 New Business
4.1 (a) Sunstone Ridge Development Referral – Lisa Griffith
Ms. Griffith gave an overview of the recreation component of the Sunstone
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 303 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton /Area C Recreation Advisory Committee meeting, held on January 26, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
Ridge Development
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Sunstone Ridge Development Referral be deferred to the February 2010 Recreation Advisory Committee meeting for the Developer to make a presentation to the committee. CARRIED Ms. Griffith left the meeting at 6:50 PM.
4.1 Pemberton Community Centre Rates
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services committee:
THAT the Pemberton Community Centre rate changes as presented by Ms Brown’s report be supported. CARRIED
4.2 Canada Day Recreation Survey
The Canada Day Recreation Survey results were discussed. They commended Ms. Brown in getting the leisure guide release date moved up in response to the survey’s results. The survey also indicated a desire for a pool and arena.
4.3 Additional Recreation Advisory Committee Members
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee:
THAT additional members be added to the Recreation Advisory Committee and that direction be given to the Recreation Advisory Committee in how this can be achieved in a timely manner. CARRIED
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 304 of 361 This is page 3 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton /Area C Recreation Advisory Committee meeting, held on January 26, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
4.4 Richard Klinkhamer Correspondence Regarding Pemberton Skateboard Park The correspondence was received.
5 Confirmation and Receipt of Minutes
5.1 December 15, 2009 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes The December 15, 2009 Pemberton/Area C Recreation Advisory Committee minutes were approved as circulated.
5.2 December 14, 2009 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee Meeting Minutes The December 14, 2009 Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services Committee meeting minutes were received for information.
6 Additional Items of Discussion
Pemberton Water Park The Committee discussed the email from Caroline Lamont regarding the Pemberton Water Park. They noted that there was no specific mention of a water park at the Speak Up Pemberton sessions.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services committee:
THAT the Pemberton Water Park should remain a recreation priority in Pemberton. CARRIED
Engineered Baseball Bleachers
It was moved and seconded:
THAT it be recommended to the Pemberton Valley Utilities & Services committee:
THAT an update on the Engineered Baseball Bleachers at Signal Hill Elementary School be provided to the Recreation Advisory Committee.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 305 of 361 This is page 4 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton /Area C Recreation Advisory Committee meeting, held on January 26, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
CARRIED
7 Adjournment
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the meeting be adjourned. CARRIED The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 PM.
Anne Crowley Presiding Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 306 of 361 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes January 18, 2010; 4:30 PM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Commission: P. Vacirca (Presiding Chair); S. Gimse; J. Sturdy; L. Lundy; L. Ames; S. Ryan
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant
Others: J. Brooksbank (VoP)
1 Call To Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:33 PM.
2 Approval of Agenda
The following changes were made to the agenda:
1. THAT the order of 3.1 and 3.2 be reversed. 2. THAT item 3.1 (a) be added as the Pemberton & District Economic Development Logo
By consensus, the agenda was approved with the changes.
3 New Business
3.1 Pemberton/Area C Economic Development Website
The revised website changes will be uploaded by Wednesday January 20, 2010.
3.1 (a) Pemberton & District Economic Development Logo
Ms. Lundy circulated samples of Pemberton & District Economic Development logos.
3.2 “Diversity in the Corridor” 2010 Olympic Event Update
Director Sturdy gave an update of the “Diversity in the Corridor” 2010 Olympic Event
It was moved and seconded:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 307 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission meeting, held on January 18, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom at 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT $20,000 from Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission funds be contributed to the “Diversity in the Corridor” event.
Director Gimse left the meeting at 6:05 PM.
4 Termination
Due to a lack of quorum, the meeting was adjourned at 6:06 PM.
Paul Vacirca Presiding Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 308 of 361 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes January 25, 2010; 4:00 PM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Commission: P. Vacirca; S. Gimse; L. Ames; M. Blundell; J. Sturdy; A. Helmer; S. Ryan
Staff: P. Edgington, CAO; L. Lloyd, Director of Administrative Services; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others: J. Brooksbank (VoP) and 1 member of the public
1 Call To Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:50 PM.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the notice of meeting be waived.
CARRIED
2 Approval of Agenda
The following was added to the agenda:
3.1.(a) Post Correspondence from Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the agenda be approved as amended.
CARRIED
3 New Business
3.1 Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010 Update
It was moved and seconded:
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 309 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission meeting, held on January 25, 2010, in the SLRD Boardroom at 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
THAT a total of $10,000 from Pemberton/Area C Economic Development Commission funds be authorized to the “Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010” event, which includes the budget of up to $5000 to contract with a media relations firm as previously authorized by the Commission at their December 21, 2009 meeting.
CARRIED
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the purchase of 1000 business cards be approved for the “Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010” event. CARRIED
3.1 (a) Post Correspondence from Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010
3.2 Chamber of Commerce and Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Relationship
4 Minutes
4.1 January 7, 2010 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Meeting Minutes
4.2 December 21, 2009 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the minutes from the January 7, 2010, and December 21, 2009 Pemberton /Area C Economic Development meetings be adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
5 Termination
The meeting was adjourned at 5:34 PM.
Anna Helmer Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 310 of 361 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes February 1, 2010; 10:00 AM Whistler Municipal Hall, Flute Room 4325 Blackcomb Way, Whistler BC
In Attendance:
Commission: A. Helmer; P. Vacirca; L. Lundy; L. Ames; S. Gimse; J. Sturdy
Staff: S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others: J. Berry (VoP); J. Brooksbank (VoP)
1 Call To Order
The meeting was called to order at 10:50 AM.
2 Approval of Agenda
3 New Business
3.1 “Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010” Update
By consensus, the new Economic Development logo was approved.
The Economic Development URL will be changed from www.edcpemberton.com to www.venturepemberton.ca.
Discussion of what sectors the information booths should represent at this event.
3.2 Pemberton/Area C Economic Development Website Update
4 Termination
Next meeting: February 9, 2010 at 5:00 PM.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:55 AM.
Anna Helmer Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 311 of 361 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes February 9, 2010; 5:00 PM SLRD Boardroom 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC
In Attendance:
Commission: A. Helmer; S. Gimse; L. Ames; J. Sturdy; P. Vacirca
Staff: L. Lloyd, Director of Administrative Services; S. Cheng, Administrative Assistant (Recording Secretary)
Others: J. Brooksbank (VoP)
1 Call To Order
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM.
2 Approval of Agenda
Item 3.2 was removed from the agenda.
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the agenda be approved as circulated. CARRIED
3 New Business
3.1 “Celebrate Squamish and Pemberton at Canada Olympic House – Discover Opportunities Beyond 2010” Event Update
4 Minutes
4.1 February 1, 2010 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the February 1, 2010, and January 25, 2010 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development meeting minutes be approved as circulated.
CARRIED
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 312 of 361 This is page 2 of the minutes of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Pemberton /Area C 2010 Economic Development Commission meeting, held on February 9, 2010 in the SLRD Boardroom, 1350 Aster Street, Pemberton BC.
4.2 January 25, 2010 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Meeting Minutes
4.3 January 18, 2010 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development Meeting Minutes
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the January 18, 2010 Pemberton/Area C 2010 Economic Development meeting minutes be approved subject to confirmation of item 3.2. CARRIED
5 Termination
The meeting was adjourned at 5:25 PM.
Anna Helmer Chair
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 313 of 361 Squamish Lillooet Regional District
Minutes of an Electoral Area C Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting of the Squamish Lillooet Regional District held in the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Offices, Pemberton BC, on Wednesday, January 20, 2010 at 7:00 PM.
In attendance:
Committee: B. McLeod (Chair); R. Kuurne; H. Naylor; J. Helmer; A. Zayac; P. Bradner; J. Sturdy; S. Gimse; J. Giese (arrived late)
Regrets: D. Millerd; M. Van Loon
Staff: Planner L. Griffith (notes)
Guests: Kim Sutherland, Regional Agrologist, Ministry of Agriculture and Lands; Andrew Beaird & Brian Young on behalf of Sunstone Ridge Group; and six members of the public.
1 Call to Order
Chair B. McLeod called the meeting to order at 7:10 PM.
2 Approval of the Agenda
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Agenda be approved. CARRIED 3 Minutes of previous meetings
It was moved and seconded:
THAT the Minutes of the December 16th, 2009 Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) Meeting be approved.
CARRIED
4 Business arising from the minutes
The Chair had requested a status update on the PWWMA item from the December agenda. As the December AAC minutes had not yet been received by the Board, the Planner was unable to give an update until the next meeting.
5 Referral items and updates
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 314 of 361 5.1 OCP amendment/Neighbourhood Concept Plan for Sunstone Ridge development (Ravenscrest, Sabre/Biro Lands and Lil’wat Nation Transfer Lands) – Early and Ongoing Consultation
Andy Beaird, Agent, introduced the neighbourhood concept plan and asked for preliminary feedback from the AAC.
Issues raised included the protection of ground water recharge, drainage, irrigation, mitigation of external impacts, concern with Edge Planning, use of ALR lands for an amenity package, the need for an agriculture plan; inconsistency with the Draft Agricultural Area Plan policy direction; and the need to add the Dyking District to the list of groups included in early and ongoing consultation. It was suggested that the applicants be required to undertake an agricultural impact assessment & ensure the impacts are mitigated or off-set in favour of agriculture.
5.2 OCP Amendment / Rezoning for Copperdome Lodge
Planner L. Griffith informed the AAC that an application to rezone and re-designate the property has been received from the owners of the Copperdome Lodge in order to legitimize the school use and expand the tourist commercial use. The Planner advised that the property is surrounded on four sides by ALR land, but was not subject to the Agricultural Land Commission regulations. The Committee had many concerns with the application, and heard from adjacent land owners public who also expressed concerns with the impacts of the use on farm operations.
It was moved:
“THAT the AAC recommends to the Regional Board that the Regional Board oppose the application for an OCP Amendment / Rezoning for the Copperdome Lodge, given: - The incompatibility of the proposed use and adjacent active farm operations; - The lack of oversight and the lack of (and insufficient room for) an acceptable buffer between a proposed tourist commercial use and the adjacent surrounding farm operations; - a history and continued risk of confrontation, complaints and litigation; - a perceived bio-security risk that could negatively impact surrounding farm operations; and - the change would not result in a net benefit to agriculture.”
CARRIED
5.3 Update on Farm Home Plate Bylaw
Planner L. Griffith informed the AAC that staff are preparing a comprehensive mail-out
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 315 of 361 including a draft bylaw, a primer on the purpose of the bylaw, and information on other jurisdictions which will be sent out in March prior to a public open house. The Committee discussed the desire for more input before the mail-out occurred and
It was moved that
“The AAC request that an extra-ordinary meeting to further explore the wording of the bylaw be arranged with staff for February 2010; and that all members of the 2009 Committee be also invited to join the discussion.”
CARRIED
5.4 Application to modify Crown land lease – Geoff & Brenda McLeod
The Committee sought clarification on the intent of the application from AAC Chair B. McLeod before she excused herself from the discussion due to conflict of interest.
It was moved that:
“THAT the AAC recommend to the Regional Board that the Board support the amendment to the grazing license provided that fencing can be installed that does not negatively impact the integrity of the dyke.”
CARRIED 6 Late Items
The AAC Chair brought up the issue of one year appointments to the elected officials present at the meeting and asked that the AAC’s earlier motion of January 2009i to change the term of AAC volunteers back to a two year alternating term be re-considered.
7 Next Meeting
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday February 24 at 7:00pm at the SLRD Board Room.
Termination: The meeting adjourned at 9:35 PM.
B. McLeod Chair L. Griffith, Recording Secretary
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 316 of 361
MEMBER NOTICE
TO: Mayor and Council Chair and Regional District Board Administrator
FROM: UBCM Secretariat
DATE: February 8, 2010
RE: RCMP CONTRACT UPDATE
The UBCM organized a meeting on Wednesday, January 20, 2010 for municipalities with an MPUA to discuss the RCMP contract renewal negotiations and obtain feedback on their concerns regarding the contract. Two representatives from each municipality were invited to attend the meeting (elected official and staff person) in an effort to ensure a focused discussion. Attached is a summary of the issues raised by local government representatives at the meeting and a matrix of the issues for your review and comment.
Municipalities over 5,000 population that have chosen to be policed by the RCMP are required to enter into a Municipal Police Unit Agreement (MPUA) with the province for the use of RCMP services. There are currently 60 municipalities that have an MPUA with the province. This agreement has traditionally mirrored the agreement that has been reached between the federal government and the provinces/territories.
Kevin Begg, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and the Chair of the Provincial and Territorial Contract Advisory Committee and Murray Dinwoodie, City Manager/Administrator, Surrey and the UBCM Local Government Representative on the provincial negotiating team made presentations on the status of the RCMP contract renewal negotiations. A copy of their powerpoint presentations are available on the UBCM website: http/www.ubcm.ca – Resources&Links - Documents - Policy Topics - Community Safety - RCMP Contract Discussions.
Kevin Begg, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and the Chair of the Provincial and Territorial Contract Advisory
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 317 of 361 Committee outlined the key provincial themes of the contract renewal and indicated that these aligned closely to the key local government themes:
Provincial Themes Local Government Themes • Partnership Partnership and Governance • Accountability Accountability • Cost Containment Affordability
He indicated that a companion document to the RCMP contract would be developed which would be an operational guide for the contract, clarifying the administrative and other details related to it. He also suggested that the province was looking at the establishment of a local government advisory committee to it on the RCMP contract and at other ways that it might assist in containing police costs.
He outlined the expected timeline for the ratification process: 1. June 2010 – Agreement in Principle on Master Agreement between province/territories and federal government 2. July – October 2010 Communication with Municipalities re: outcomes and changes 3. November 2010 – Request for ratification by local governments
Kevin Begg, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and the Chair of the Provincial and Territorial Contract Advisory Committee offered to provide an update on the RCMP contract negotiations at the local Area Association meetings.
The UBCM Executive has approved the establishment of a small advisory committee of politicians to assist Murray Dinwoodie, who is the UBCM Local Government Representative on the provincial negotiating team, as negotiations on the RCMP contract renewal progress.
If you have any questions or wish to provide additional feedback or comments please contact Ken Vance, Senior Policy Advisor (Ph: 604-270-8226 Ex-114; E- mail: [email protected]).
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 318 of 361 RCMP CONTRACT RENEWAL NEGOTIATIONS MEETING
SUMMARY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMENTS
Outlined below is a brief summary of some of the issues/concerns raised at the meeting:
• Upset that the province is not looking at major changes to the cost-sharing formula under the contract • Frustration about the increasing cost of police services • Concern over the increased costs of PRIME-BC and the way the issue was dealt with – lack of consultation, no notification before downloading the costs of PRIME • Frustration when there are surprises in what local government is required to pay for policing – Integrated Police Units, PRIME-BC • Need to address the issue of fairness and equity over the delivery and financing of police services between municipal police forces and provincial police forces when providing police services to small communities and rural areas – the need for the province to provide the resources needed to ensure that the provincial force can provide the services required • Need for two sets of negotiations - one set between the federal and provincial government and a second set between the province and local government • Concern over the costs of integrated police services • Province is not providing value for money in monitoring federal costs being downloaded on municipalities • Concern over the management system and the increasing overtime costs for RCMP services – increased reporting requirements, evidence taking, court time, vacancy rates, and the use of local police resources for federal initiatives • Question was raised about what happens when there are differences between about the province and local government about the contract – What happens when interests do not converge? How does the province deal with these issues? • Need for flexibility in the MPUA, particularly as it relates to joint detachments (i.e. where two local governments are providing RCMP police services together) • Questions around the cost of RCMP training were raised and why local government is required to pay for this training • Need to consider the ability of local government to pay for police services • Questions around the contract process were raised – Are we being effectively represented; Why would BC agree to participate in joint negotiations? How can we negotiate when two key issues are not negotiable - cost share formula and PRIME-BC • Need to be able to identify how the money for police services is being spent and have the ability to audit the costs • Integrated police services are federal and provincial issues • Contract needs to ensure that local governments are not used as a dumping ground for police costs that the federal and provincial government can no longer afford • Questions were raised about – What happens if someone does not want to sign the RCMP agreement? – need clear direction on what exactly is the process if a municipality chooses not to ratify the proposed contract (Police Act lays out notification process –
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 319 of 361 requires approval of provincial minister to implement own police force or contract from another community for police services) • Unclear how Provincial First Nation police works – required to supply 24/7 service, but only one Provincial police officer is dedicated to provide the service • RCMP police funding has been a concern over the last 20 years – everybody in the province should pay for policing, no different from education and health care taxation levies • Is the rural contribution 35% of overall cost of providing police services to rural areas and will this change/when? • Municipalities need clear direction on what exactly is the process if a municipality chooses not to “ratify” the proposed contract – Do they plan to have a municipal police force in place by April 1, 2012 or must they give two years notice and plan to have a municipal police force in place sometime between November 2012 and early 2013? • When exactly will the contract be finalized? • Need to clarify ownership of assets • Each detachment should provide municipalities with a 5 year plan (especially for anticipated staffing needs) so that municipalities can effectively plan financially • Provide options for reporting and setting of community priorities between the Council and the OIC, to allow a circular feedback of communication in accessing a communities needs from both a municipal perspective and a policing perspective • Equal representation between bureaucrats and politicians on any future Committee that might be established at the provincial level to deal with input and feedback on the RCMP contract • Downloading of costs on city how to deal with issue that province and local government do not agree – need options • Cost sharing – the percentage split has to change – it won’t be long before we’re at our limit for paying. Unfortunately the only recourse will be to reduce members • Cost sharing formula is far and away the most urgent matter to deal with. Both Ontario and Quebec have provincial police forces. If we cannot achieve an agreement on cost sharing very soon, suggest it’s time to investigate the provincial model, only enter into a shorter agreement regarding the RCMP providing police services. • Many issues and questions discussed today are areas of conflict, disagreement, and concern between municipalities and the province. These should be resolved prior to municipalities endorsing an agreement with the federal government. • It appears at the negotiating table that municipalities only have an observer with the negotiators being the federal and provincial representatives. How do we know if municipal interests are being adequately addressed especially when there is a conflict between the federal and provincial government. What about appropriate representation for municipalities on provincial/municipal issues • The province is currently negotiating a final agreement with the feds. The municipalities will be asked to ratify a sub-agreement, it is obvious from today’s comments the sub-agreement should include all financial ramifications, policing policies and costing. One agreement that provides the local government with a way to effectively budget • Accountability – Audit and performance measurement, interested to see how this is implemented – the RCMP cannot handle this today. Equity – the province has the
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 320 of 361 responsibility for funding rural policing and taking over serious crimes of all local governments • Council will be interested in seeing meaningful progress on the following, before they are able to support a new police contract: Independent oversight of complaints against police; Mechanism for resolving policing issues between province and municipalities – entrench provincial commitment to keep up with resources; entrench revenue sharing; work towards greater provincial financial commitment towards policing • How will local governments be kept informed as to the progress of these approaches and the response by the federal government to them? Will local governments be able to provide additional feedback? If so how and when should this be done? • Develop a draft document of the contract: - negotiation of the split (cost-sharing formula): everyone should pay (per capita?) - detachment boundaries defined: clarity regarding “integrated detachments” - capital planning essential & 5 year financial plan - communication in respect to municipal budget timing and changes that impact municipalities - formulas for determining officers/capita and auditing outcome of service provided - accountability and transparency is essential - clarity around who signs the agreement in our area and city - reservist policies need incorporation - review the changes for cadet costs at depot – all should pay • Most important is the opportunity to participate, even if only as a watching brief. We need to further direction to allow local government to be an active negotiator – as largest stakeholder; - Pursue the emphasis on local costs outstripping ability to pay; - Pursue the importance of local priorities; - Continue pressure for better/advance communication from the province and federal government to local government; - No question that policing has changed senior governments need to consider courses of action which can seriously affect police duties (Example – moving many mentally ill from institutional care without adequate provision for further care has affected costs of policing and other services.); - Follow-up adequately the issues between the province and local government – Do we get to negotiate these?
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 321 of 361 RCMP CONTRACT
MATRIX OF ISSUES AND STATUS
Outlined below is a draft list of issues of interest to local government that are being considered in the RCMP Contract renewal negotiations.
The report outlines the issue, government responsibility and a snap shot of the positions being taken and the status of the issue.
(Note: Fed-Federal Government; Prov-Provincial Government; Loc-Local Government)
Issue Government Position Status Responsibility Federal/Provincial Complaints Oversight Fed/Prov. Fed-support Under discussion concept Prov-independent oversight under provincial jurisdiction Cost Share Formula Fed/Prov Fed – no changes, Provinces are (Fed/Prov – 30/70) seeking increase reviewing federal in cost base proposal to Prov – looking at maintain current cost containment formula RCMP Contract Fed/Prov – with Fed-support Under discussion Management Committee local government concept observer Prov-establishment of active committee to address potential contract issues
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 322 of 361
Issue Government Position Status Responsibility Federal/Provincial/Local Federal Policing Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-responsible for Fed-no additional security, criminal financial code, drugs, First resources to Nations deliver service Prov-recognize issue Currently not part Loc-lack of staffing of discussions and resources at local level to provide service OIC Selection Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-recognize Under discussion need for input – need to Prov-support local formalize input process in Loc-local input into contract and OIC selection be outline details required Staff Vacancy Rates Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-consider Under discussion Prov-supports need for better management of human resources Loc-want better reporting and management of staff resources Audit Function Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-support Under discussion concept Prov-necessary to verify value for money Loc-needed to ensure accountability Financial Planning & Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-support Under review – Reporting concept need to identify Prov-support need details (5 year Loc-required plan, detailed
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 323 of 361 accountability financial costs measure etc.) Accommodations Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-must meet Under discussion federal standards Prov-recognize need for dispute process in the event that an agreement cannot be reached and 5 year capital and financial plan Loc-require agreement on space requirements and 5 year capital plan Assets & Equipment Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-decides when Under discussion equipment is replaced and owns assets Prov-support need for a clear definition and development of asset management plan and consultation Loc-ownership of assets is based on percentage paid by each party; development of business case and asset management plan Staff Support Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-determines Needs more support staff discussion required Prov-no position Loc-require mutual agreement on staffing
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 324 of 361 Cadet Training Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-charges cost Under discussion of recruit training -actual costs of back to user of recruit training service Prov-supports need to examine costs Loc-cost of training should be paid by the contractor(RCMP) Emergency Deployment of Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-can use 10% Under review Members for international summits etc. Prov-recognize need for clear reporting Loc-want clear reporting of member use and recovery of full cost (overtime to back fill etc.) Term of Contract Fed/Prov/Loc Fed-20 year Under discussion agreement – list of issues Prov-20 year that will be agreement; 5 year subject to 5 year review of certain review have not issues been identified Loc-20 year agreement; 5 year review of cost sharing and other issues
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 325 of 361
Issue Government Position Status Responsibility
Provincial/Local Provincial Force Prov/Loc Prov-responsible Prov-no for policing rural additional areas, small financial communities, and resources to First Nations; deliver service recognize in some areas staffing may Currently not part not meet service of discussions needs Loc-lack of staffing and resources at local level to provide service Cost Share Formula Prov/Loc Prov – support cost Prov-no (Prov/Loc – 30/70 5,000 to containment and additional 15,000 pop; 10/90 over more effective financial 15,000 pop) management resources to Loc – looking at deliver service cost relief current trends in police Currently not part costs are not of discussions affordable (Prov/Loc – 50/50 5,000 to 15,000 pop; 30/70 over 15,000 pop) RCMP Contract Prov/Loc Prov-support Under discussion Management Committee concept – details to be for British Columbia Loc-important to worked out address accountability and other contract issues Joint RCMP Detachments Prov/Loc Prov-needed to Currently not part - provincial force and ensure cost of discussions local RCMP operate out of effective and the same office efficient operations
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 326 of 361 Loc-no accountability over how resources are utilized and paid for; understaffing at fed/prov level
Community Priority Setting Prov/Loc Prov-support Under review- concept need to identify Loc-important what will be measure to ensure required local accountability over service Local Government Contact Prov/Loc Prov-support Under review- measure need to identify Loc-required to contacts and ensure appropriate communication level of process accountability is maintained Local Complaints - RCMP Prov/Loc Prov-support Under review- general concept need to identify Loc-clear process what is needed for addressing to address local concerns; problem reporting process Regional Integrated Prov/Loc Prov-recognizes Under review- Teams need to review need to identify issue what is needed Loc-funding should to address be provided by problem Fed/Prov; lack of accountability in management of teams PRIME Prov/Loc Prov-recognizes Under review- need to review need to identify issue what is needed Loc-no to address consultation or problem notification of fee
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 327 of 361 increase; no accountability over management of PRIME and future fee increases Termination of Agreement Prov/Loc Prov-Police Act Needs more • requires discussion municipalities over 5,000 population to provide policing • provides for 3 types of police services – own force, contract with another municipality; contract with the province for RCMP • type of police service requires ministerial approval Loc-agreement for RCMP services requires 2 years notice to terminate and notification from the municipality to the province
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 328 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 329 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 330 of 361 Steve Higginbottom Community Relations Coordinator 15th floor, 333 Dunsmuir Street Vancouver, BC V6B 5R3 e-mail: [email protected] Phone: 604 623-3593
February 2, 2010
His Worship Mayor Jordan Sturdy Village of Pemberton Sent by e-mail: [email protected]
Director Susan Gimse Squamish Lillooet Regional District Sent by e-mail: [email protected]
Director Wendy Bales Fraser Valley Regional District Sent by e-mail: [email protected]
Dear Mayor Sturdy, Director Gimse, Director Bales:
Re: Southern Stl’atl’imx Communities Grid Connection Project
I am pleased to advise you of some significant milestones with regards to the Southern Stl’atl’imx Communities Grid Connection Project (SSCGC). This important project will provide grid service to four Stl’atl’imx communities along the Lillooet River: Skookumchuck, Baptiste Smith, Port Douglas, and Tipella.
BC Hydro submitted a rate application to BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) on December 1, 2009. The first set of BCUC Information Requests has been received and BC Hydro has provided final responses. BC Hydro is currently awaiting further direction from BCUC pending their review of the responses.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) review by federal and provincial regulators has concluded and the determination for the project has now been signed. This is a significant milestone as it now enables construction to begin. The forestry clearing contract will be awarded soon, and it is expected that work along the Lillooet West Forest Service road will commence shortly thereafter. Substation construction will also begin very shortly now that the CEAA determination has been signed.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 331 of 361 No power outages or lengthy traffic delays are expected during construction and all necessary safety precautions (including flaggers and signage) will be utilized. I will advise you of construction start dates once they have been finalized.
All four communities are expected to be connected to the grid and fully energized by December 2010.
If you have any questions or concerns about this project, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Steve Higginbottom
cc: Donald Cochrane, Project Manager, BC Hydro
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 332 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 333 of 361 AGENDA Thompson Regional Committee Meeting 10:00am - 12:00pm, Tuesday February 9th, 2010 Thompson Regional Office - Boardroom
Objectives
1. Discuss regional projects, existing and new 2. Provide input for Operations Committee, and feedback from it 3. Prepare for future Board meetings
Agenda Items
1. Welcome and introductions 2. Old business from 12 January 2009 a. Regional Action Plan 3. Committee Members’ reports 4. Operations Committee a. Operations Committee report and feedback b. Report on Board of Directors meeting (January 27th – 28th) 5. Coordinator’s report a. New funding WEBs (Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices) b. Current initiatives Stewards Workshop Air and Water Engagement Initiative WEBs (Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices) c. FYI Upcoming Event: Rural Tourism Conference at Quaaout Lodge April 6-8 2010, hosted by Thompson Rivers University and partners 6. Next Meeting: March 9th 2010 @ 10:00 am (Regional Office)
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 334 of 361 Attachment 2.1
DRAFT RECORD OF DECISIONS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, January 6, 2010
In Attendance: Charles Jago Bob Smillie Jennifer Vigano Bob Patterson David Barratt Dan Millar Alan Osborne Paul Kluckner
Staff: David Marshall Gail Wallin Diana Dilworth Marion Town
Regrets: Bob Purdy Ken Melamed George Saddleman Jerry Petersen
The meeting convened at 9:05am. 1. Approval of the Agenda The agenda was amended to add a new Item 5, Policy Development Update and a new Item 6, 2006-2011 Strategic Plan/Annual Operating Plan
Decision 10-01-01 THAT the Agenda for the Operations Committee Meeting of January 6, 2010 be approved as amended.
2. Approval of Draft Record of Decisions Item 2, Approval of Draft Record of Decisions, use "reword" rather than "remove" Item 6, Regional reports - Cariboo - "Invasive" plants rather than "Interface" plants. Item 6, Thompson Report add wording to decision "THAT the Operations Committee meeting minutes be distributed, in a draft form, to members of the Operations Committee for approval prior to distributing to all directors and to regional staff for further distribution non- Director members of their regional committees."
Decision 10-01-02 THAT the Record of Decisions from the Operations Committee Meeting of December 9, 2009 be approved.
3. Chair and Executive Director Report The Chair reported that: Discussions are taking place at the staff level regarding potential new corporate sponsorships. The Executive Director reported that: He attended a meeting with GVSS Regional Manager and the new Assistant City Manager for the City of Vancouver; The meetings are taking place to discuss options and potential continued funding under the Living Rivers Trust Fund. The Society held its AGM on December 18th and it was well attended; Members approved the recommendation to appoint Emily Jubenvill as the Limited Term Director representing youth; The process to identify potential Limited Term Directors representing financial interests is still underway;
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, January 6, 2010 Page 1 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 335 of 361 Attachment 2.1
An expanded steering committee of the Collaborative Watershed Governance Initiative had a very productive meeting on December 17th; Options are being explored to pursue funding from the federal department of Transportation; Negotiations are currently taking place with Rio Tinto Alcan on the development of a new multi-year funding agreement; The Finance Committee is meeting on January 7th to address financial management of both the 2009/10 and 2010/11 fiscal years; Discussions are ongoing with Regional Districts regarding their appointments of representatives to the Board of Directors and it is anticipated that the majority of current local government representatives will be reappointed. 4. Board of Directors Meeting, January 2010 Discussion ensued regarding the revised agendas that were distributed for the Board Workshop, Consent Agenda and Business Agenda. Of particular note was the format and potential outcomes of the Board Workshop. Committee members provided input and recommendations to ensure a productive and successful working session. It was noted that staff presentations on key program areas will be critical to providing a framework for both plenary and small-group discussions and staff should be encouraged to solicit feedback and participation from non-Directors in the development of their presentations. It was acknowledged that Director Michael Clague has been invited to participate in the introduction to the session, highlighting the relationship of personal/social/ community well-being to economic and environmental sustainability.
Decision 10-01-03 THAT the Consent and Business Agendas be approved as revised; AND THAT the Workshop Agenda be revised as per feedback from Operations Committee. Action: Executive Director and Manager, Council Operations
5. Policy Development Update The Committee was advised that policy development is ongoing, with a particular focus on human resource policies at this time. For the upcoming Board meeting, there will four items being addressed by the Governance Committee: Terms of Reference (new), Human Resources Committee Terms of Reference (revised), Youth Advisory Committee Policy (new), Project Charge-Out Rates Guiding Principles for the development of Human Resource Policies 6. 2006-2011 Strategic Plan/Annual Operating Plan It was reported that the Board Book for the upcoming Board of Directors meeting will include a brief reporting out against the top priority areas in the 2009/2010 Annual Operating Plan. Additionally, both a summary overview and a detailed Annual Operating Plan will be provided for the priority areas for 2010/2011. 7. Regional Updates Cariboo Region Bob Patterson noted:
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, January 6, 2010 Page 2 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 336 of 361 Attachment 2.1
The region is working on a fee-for-service project, with the CRD, regarding arts and culture and economic development opportunities; The Cariboo Chilcotin Ecosystem Restoration Committee has been addressing grasslands restoration and is looking to expand into non-grassland restoration opportunities; A report related to the Chilcotin Range Strategy was prepared in the fall with recommendations related to the impacts of cattle grazing; Work continues to progress on the Williams Lake Interface Fire project. Greater Vancouver Sea to Sky Region Marion Town noted: The Regional Committee Directors are all very busy, most of them consumed with responsibilities related to the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games; A significant amount of work is focused on the researching and writing of the regional indicators report as well as sponsorship; As previously noted, a very productive meeting was held with the new Assistant City Manager for the City of Vancouver; of particular interest is his background in leading an innovative climate change initiative during his previous tenure with the City of Chicago and the potential for a similar initiative in Vancouver. Thompson Region Bob Smillie noted: The Regional Committee will be meeting this week. Fraser Valley Region David Barratt noted: The region is processing on several actions related to watersheds and collaboration with local groups and organizations; Agricultural indicators work continues in partnership with the Agriculture Council and the Province of BC; Collaborative work is taking place on the development of an economic development plan for communities within the Sto:Lo Nation. Upper Fraser Region Charles Jago noted that: Staff member Terry Robert is now located in the Upper Fraser Region as the Regional Manager; Flood control meetings will be taking place in Vanderhoof next week. 8. Basin Wide Updates Federal Government Paul Kluckner noted that: With the prorogation of Parliament, it is a quiet time until the next Throne Speech to be tabled on March 3rd Provincial government Alan Osborne noted that: It is now illegal to use electronic devices such as cellphones in vehicles, without technology that allows them to be used “hands-free”.
First Nations No report was available. 9. Next Meeting/ Adjournment.
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, January 6, 2010 Page 3 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 337 of 361 Attachment 2.1 The meeting adjourned at 10:25am. Next meeting is scheduled for 9:00am on Wednesday, February 10, 2010.
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, January 6, 2010 Page 4 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 338 of 361 Fraser Basin Council Thompson Region Committee Meeting January 12th, 2010
In Attendance:
Mickey Macri Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Committee Member Rene Talbot Columbia-Shuswap Regional FBC Director District Dave Whiting Community Mapping Network Committee Member Herman Halvorson Public Director FBC Director Kim Perreault Thompson Youth Committee Member John Taylor Thompson-Nicola Regional District FBC Director Tom Owen Thompson Rivers University Committee Member Bob Smillie Public Director FBC Director Bob Harding Fisheries and Oceans Canada Committee Member Mike Simpson Fraser Basin Council Staff Phil Hallinan Fraser Basin Council Staff Erin Vieira Fraser Basin Council Staff
Attachments: Record of Decisions, Operations Committee Meeting for December 9th 2009 Final Minutes, Thompson Regional Committee Meeting, December 8th 2009 Draft Thompson Regional Action Plan
Meeting commenced at 10:00 am
1. Welcome and Introductions Thompson Regional Manager Mike Simpson welcomed all present. Agenda and minutes accepted 2. Old business from November Action items from December’s regional committee meeting; Phil Hallinan has been apprised of the interested expressed by Regional Districts to provide an update on the SLIPP project. Presentations to Regional Districts are planned, beginning with a presentation to CSRD at the end of January. Thompson Region staff have developed a list of regional issues to potentially inform a Regional Action Plan. See item 8. 3. Presentation by Kim Perreault: “Walkability” project Kim gave an update on the Walkability project that is being done at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 339 of 361 Fraser Basin Council Thompson Region Committee Meeting December 8th, 2009
In Attendance:
John Taylor Thompson-Nicola Regional District FBC Director Mickey Macri Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Committee Member Glen Farrow City of Kamloops Committee Member Rene Talbot Columbia-Shuswap Regional FBC Director District Denis Delisle Columbia-Shuswap Regional Committee Member District Herman Halvorson Public Director FBC Director Ted Bacigalupo Columbia-Shuswap Regional Committee Member District Bob Smillie Public Director FBC Director Bob Harding Fisheries and Oceans Canada Committee Member Tom Owen Thompson Rivers University Committee Member Mike Simpson Fraser Basin Council Staff Erin Vieira Fraser Basin Council Staff
Attachments: Record of Decisions, Operations Committee Meeting for November 12th 2009
Meeting commenced at 10:00 am
1. Welcome and Introductions Thompson Regional Manager Mike Simpson welcomed all present. Agenda and minutes accepted 2. Old business from November Action items from November’s regional committee meeting: Alumni event to recognize Phil Hallinan’s contribution to the Thompson Region: an informal luncheon with the regional committee will be held in January, immediately following the regional committee meeting. Erin will provide details in the near future. When draft minutes of the Thompson Regional Committee are circulated, they will henceforth include a copy of the finalized Record of Decisions of the previous month’s Operations Committee meeting 3. Committee Members’ Reports Mickey Macri Squamish-Lillooet Regional District is in the midst of its annual budgeting process
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 340 of 361 Area B is developing an Agricultural Area Plan in partnership with the District of Lillooet and the Investment Agriculture Foundation of BC Rene Talbot Columbia-Shuswap Regional District is in the midst of its annual budgeting process There have been many retirements and subsequent replacements of staff at the CSRD The Official Community Plan for Ranchero – Deep Creek is coming to a close Residents of the CSRD are supportive of the composting applications in Westwold and Silver Creek being declined Areas C and F have adopted a fireworks ban for the safety of the general public and prevention of forest fires; Area E will implement a ban in the near future
Denis Delisle The Official Community Plan in the North Shuswap is complete The CSRD will develop a neighbourhood Official Community Plan for Scotch Creek The new Adams River bridge is complete and will serve residents and tourists well The CSRD has taken on the issue of docks and buoys in Shuswap Lake. Barriers to the issue include lack of enforcement by Transport Canada, and the inability of the CSRD to trump provincial legislation regarding docks and buoys. There has been a slow-down of activity and sales at the West Beach development
Herman Halvorson Director Halvorson reminded the Committee that NORD took a waterways resolution to the UBCM Convention, pertaining to all waterways in BC and all regional jurisdictions. The resolution speaks to many of the issues that Shuswap Lake faces. The Lower Shuswap River is having a comprehensive mapping process completed; this will be a useful tool for decision making NORD has contributed tourism funds to Kingfisher Interpretive Centre Society for its infrastructure; it has build washrooms and showers at the facility Many planning processes are underway at NORD, including a review of Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation; Regional Growth Strategy; Local Area Plan for Kingfisher-Mabel; and a Park Plan Review for Fortune Parks The Armstrong-Sicamous CPR line issue is still not resolved
Ted Bacigalupo Mr. Bacigalupo urged representatives of Regional Districts to support an amendment to sewage regulations that would prohibit all private sources from discharging into Mara, Shuswap, and White Lakes, not just that portion of Mara Lake in the CSRD Action Item: NORD and CSRD will follow up to ensure that the regulation amendment is for all of Mara Lake
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 341 of 361 Implications of a new high-water mark on Shuswap Lake will affect private and public land ownership, and the ability of the Province to create more parks and access Mr. Bacigalupo expressed interest in having more regular communications regarding the SLIPP process and suggested that the facilitator of SLIPP engage in regular presentations to Regional District boards, which would help to garner support for the process Action item: staff will ensure that Phil Hallinan is aware of this request for a travelling ‘road show’ to regional districts.
Glen Farrow The Sustainability Plan is moving forward is ongoing; there will be a public forum held in March Water meter funding applications were not successful. The City of Kamloops will continue to pursue the issue; it recognizes that it needs the support of its residents Waste disposal fees at the City landfill are increasing to match the fee structure of the Thompson-Nicola Regional District. New revenue from landfills will be allocated to greater waste diversion programming. There was discussion that waste gypsum could be used for animal bedding, or transported to Edmonton for recycling. Bob Harding Fisheries and Oceans Canada (in partnership with the CSRD and SLIPP) is doing a three-phase mapping program at Shuswap Lake that consists of (1) Foreshore Habitat Inventory Mapping; (2) Aquatic Habitat Indexing; (3) development of foreshore and lakeshore guidance documents using the information gathered in phases 1 and 2. The documents, in particular, will be a very useful tool for local government decision-making, and for the development of Regional Growth Strategies and Local Area Plans. Map products are available for public consumption on the Community Mapping Network website: http://www.cmnbc.ca/ DFO, in partnership with local governments, stewardship groups and First Nations are extending the three phase mapping process to the Lower Shuswap River and Mabel Lake. The fieldwork for phases 1 and 2 is complete; reporting will be completed by February 2010. No funding has been secured for phase 3. John Taylor Peter Milobar was acclaimed as the Chair of the TNRD; Director Ronaye Elliott was elected to be Vice-Chair The TNRD Board approved funding for up to $100K for a Utility System Acquisition Strategy. Director Taylor expressed a need for provincial Utility System Acquisition Strategy model that could serve as a template for local governments; this could result in significant savings of time and resources.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 342 of 361 The TNRD will conduct a water conservation plan for all water systems in the regional district; this plan is required to be in place before it can apply for grant funding from the Province
Tom Owen Dr. Tom Owen is the Director of Environment and Sustainability at Thompson Rivers University Dr. Owen expressed an interest in joining the Regional Committee The Thompson Regional Committee welcomed Dr. Owen to the Committee
4. Operations Committee Report
Operations Committee Report for November 12th, 2009 Director Bob Smillie reported that FBC is currently engaged in four governance projects: (1) Collaborative Watershed Governance Initiative; (2) First Nations Environmental Heath Information Network; (3) Northern Rockies Partnership; (4) Sto:lo Tribal Council Economic Strategy Diana Dilworth has returned to FBC, effective November 16th, following a leave of absence There are several options for the timing of release of the Snapshot 5 and the State of the Fraser Basin Conference; one of these options is a delay in the timing of the release (e.g. Fall of 2010; early 2011, or later). It is important that the Snapshot report and the Conference meet the standard set by the Snapshot and Conference of 2009. The Operations Committee has approved-in-principle to proceed with continued secretariat services related to the operation of the Debris Trap The Youth Committee is working to find a Youth Director for the Board; additionally, suggestions for a financial resources Director are being sought. 12 Director positions are up for renewal or termination in 2010. The Provincial Caucus reported a new Cabinet Committee on Climate Action and Clean Energy with four Green Energy working groups on Procurement and Regulatory Reform; Carbon Pricing; Community Relations; and First Nations and Resource Development The next meeting of the Operations Committee will be held on December 9th, 2009 The next meeting of the Fraser Basin Council’s Board of Directors will be held on January 27th and 28th at the Pacific Palisades Hotel in Vancouver. The 27th will be an afternoon Board Workshop on the Long Term Sustainability Vision Plan; the 28th will be a full-day Business Agenda. 5. Coordinators’ Reports a. New Funding Stewards Workshop: The contract with Environment Canada under the Air Quality Health Index is being finalized. This will provide an additional $11K funding to the Stewards Workshop in addition to the $8K contribution from DFO.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 343 of 361 Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices (“WEBs”) – FBC has an agreement-in-principle with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to partner on climate station work in the Salmon Valley; the value of this work is approximately $290K to be distributed over three and a half years. FBC staff are working to finalize a proposal to the Fraser Salmon and Watersheds Program to complement this work. b. Current Initiatives Stewards Workshop – currently in the scoping phase of event planning. Staff will seek input from the Regional Committee. Regional committee members are invited to participate in the development and implementation process. It is anticipated that the workshop will be held in late February or early March 2010. Air and Water Engagement Initiative – this project is funded by the Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport. Erin is the lead on the project and has been conducting a series of interviews with Regional District elected officials and staff, as well as staff of Health Authorities. Interviews are wrapping up and reporting will begin in the near future. Shuswap Lake Integrated Planning Process (SLIPP) – Phil Hallinan is the staff lead on this project. There was clear and consensual support for SLIPP, not just for Shuswap Lake, but as a process that can be used to integrate planning and approvals for development and recreation pressures on all lakes in Southern Interior, and indeed the province. Ted Bacigalupo emphasized the need for a SLIPP ‘road show’ to local governments to seek support and endorsement. Ted also suggested presenting a generic resolution, with the wording in place, for regional districts and municipalities to adopt. Bob Harding reported that Fisheries and Oceans Canada is working in partnership with Integrated Land Management Bureau to do enforcement work relating to trespass infrastructure (e.g. wharves and docks) impacting fish habitat. 6. Other Business Alumni Event – a luncheon will be held on January 12th, immediately following the regional committee meeting, to recognize the contributions of Phil Hallinan to the Thompson Region. Details are forthcoming. Regional District presentations – the invitations stands for the Chair of FBC to make a presentation to Regional District Boards on the role and initiatives of the Council within the Fraser Basin and the Province. These presentations could potentially include an update on the SLIPP process; Action Item: FBC staff will bring this forward to Bob Purdy who is coordinating Charles Jago’s schedule for these presentations. Regional Action Plan – the concept of reinstituting a Regional Action Plan was brought forward at November’s committee meeting. This will be discussed in more detail at January’s committee meeting.
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 344 of 361 Action Item: Erin and Mike will pull together a list of regional issues that arose at this meeting, and that are ongoing for review of the committee at the January meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 12:00 pm
Next Meeting of the Thompson Regional Committee: January 12th @ 10:00 – noon Thompson Regional Office “Alumni Event” for Phil Hallinan to follow after the meeting
Other upcoming Events: Fraser Basin Council Board of Directors Meeting January 27th (afternoon) and 28th (full day) 2010 Pacific Palisades Hotel, Vancouver
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 345 of 361 Walkability is a measure of how easy or difficult it is to walk in an area or use walking as a primary means of transportation. Walkable areas or communities typically have high population densities with a discernable center, slow traffic, mixed land uses, and parks and public spaces. Walkability is a sustainability indicator worthy of measuring because it identifies opportunities for improvement and has inherent linkages to human health and well- being. While walkability can be measured in a number of ways, Kim has been working on a GIS walkability assessment and the production of various walkability maps for the City of Kamloops. These maps will be a useful tool to local decision-makers regarding making improvements to walking infrastructure and identifying opportunities to enhance the walkability of the City. 4. Presentation by Phil Hallinan: Shuswap Lake Integrated Planning Process: Governance Framework Terms of Reference Phil gave an update on the SLIPP (Shuswap Lake Integrated Planning Process) project and presented new information pertaining to the SLIPP governance framework The SLIPP has established a strategic plan to address challenges facing Shuswap and Mara Lakes A formal and inclusive governance framework for SLIPP is required to expand the project to the entire Shuswap watershed; to formalize representative governance structure; to establish a secure funding model; and dedicate support required to manage the implementation of the strategic plan The governance framework, therefore, would include four components: (1) legal entity; (2) funding model; (3) governing body; and (4) operational processes There are three options available for the legal status of the governance framework: (1) Partnership; (2) Local Service Organization; and (3) Non-profit Organization Next steps for the SLIPP governance framework will be to select the legal entity and draft constitution and bylaws (early 2010), define the service area of SLIPP (early 2010), and draft roles and responsibilities of the governing body (mid 2010) 5. Committee Members’ Reports Herman Halvorson The Local Area Plan for Kingfisher is proceeding, as per approval at the NORD Board meeting on January 6th NORD has embarked on an Emergency Preparedness Plan to respond to emergency issues such as forest fires, floods, and drought Southern Interior Beetle Action Coalition has been extended for three years The pending closure of medical clinics in the Enderby and Mara area concern local residents Kim Perreault
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 346 of 361 Nothing further to report in addition to the Walkability Project
John Taylor Chair appointed committees will be made at the TNRD Board of Directors meeting on January 21st The Blue River community water system will receive infrastructure upgrades; a Building Canada Fund is providing 2/3 of the funds for this project TNRD has developed a policy for conducting criminal record checks TNRD has sent a letter to the City of Kamloops in support of their renewal application for additional Hotel Room Tax within the City Tom Owen The Thompson Rivers University Environmental Sustainability Speaker Series presents, “Copenhagen: A Post Mortem” featuring James Hunt and TRU student Tria Donaldson. The presentation will be made on Thursday, January 14th at 7 pm in the Alumni Theatre Upcoming speakers in the Speaker Series will also include Ken Ogilvie, former executive director of Pollution Probe. This event will take place on January 25th at the BC Open Learning Agency building on TRU campus. Visit www.tru.ca/sustain to view the Environmental Sustainability events calendar Bob Harding Bob shared a copy of a recent media article on DFO’s and ILMB’s (Integrated Land Management Bureau) action on derelict docks on Shuswap and Mara Lakes. The docks in question have been identified by SLIPP and the province’s Report All Poachers and Polluters program; they detrimentally affect fish habitat, pose impediment to public access, and lost revenue to the government (where commercial dock structures are concerned). Mapping reports for the Lower Shuswap River are on track; it is anticipated these will be complete in February Mickey Macri Supportive of the action that DFO is taking on docks in the Shuswap region, as wharves and other infrastructure in the Pavilion Lake area have posed problems in the past Mickey has been sharing information and promoting SLIPP at the SLRD Board SLRD is looking to hire a full-time emergency coordinator Recent UBCM announcements include a potential upcoming Environment Conference for local governments that could provide regulatory updates, identify gaps in the management of environmental issues, and outline tools that local governments can use in decision-making processes; UBCM is in the process of
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 347 of 361 surveying its members on this matter. Other announcements include the recent launch of a Living Water Smart ‘blog’ online (www.livingwatersmart.ca) and the posting of a public consultation paper on Cosmetic Use of Pesticides (www.env.gov.bc.ca/epd/ipmp/regs/cosmetic-pesticides/consultation.htm) for which feedback and comments are being solicited. Rene Talbot The CSRD has elected a new Chair, Ron Oszust (Electoral Area A, Golden- Columbia) and vice-Chair, Ted Bacigalupo (Electoral Area C, South Shuswap) Dave Whiting Thompson Rivers University Agricultural Science class has a service learning component, and it has approached Dave to solicit ideas for student projects. In particular, it is in need of projects that have an agriculture and GIS component to them. If any committee members have needs or ideas, please contact Dave at [email protected]. Bob Smillie Based on community feedback regarding the approval of Aboriginal Cogeneration Corporation’s gasification proposal, it seems apparent that there is an opportunity for FBC to get involved to enhance this type of process 6. Operations Committee Report Operations Committee Report for January 6th, 2010 Staff have returned to a full 5-day workweek, effective December 1st 2009 The Executive Director reported that: o The city of Vancouver has a new Sustainability Manager o The Living Rivers Trust Fund funds will be allocated over two years, rather than one o The FBC Society met on the 18th of December; the meeting was well attended. Emily Jubenvil has been appointed as the Limited Term Director representing Youth. o FBC is the secretariat for the Collaborative Watershed Governance Initiative; an expanded steering committee met on December 17th o Funding opportunities are being pursued from the federal department of Transportation o Sponsorship by Rio Tinto Alcan has been renewed The upcoming Board meeting in Vancouver will consist of a Visioning workshop on January 27th, and the usual business meeting on January 28th Policy development is ongoing with a particular focus on human resource policies 7. Coordinator’s Report a. New Funding
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 348 of 361 Environment Canada Air Quality Health Index: Stewards Workshop - the contract with Environment Canada has been finalized. This funding agreement will provide $12K to the BC Interior Stewards Workshop, which will leverage the $8K contribution from Fisheries and Oceans Canada. It is anticipated that all expenses associated with the event, including labour, will be covered. Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices (“WEBs”) - FBC has an agreement-in-principle (contract forthcoming) with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to partner on climate station work and irrigation best management practices in the Salmon Valley. The value of this work is $440K (not $290K as reported in December) and will be distributed over three and a half years, to the end of fiscal year 2013. Regional staff have also submitted a proposal to the Fraser Salmon and Watersheds Program, in the amount of $70K, to leverage this work; feedback on the proposal is expected in mid-March 2010. b. Current Initiatives Stewards Workshop – Mike and Erin are working with an organizing committee, consisting of representation from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, to develop the 6th annual BC Interior Stewards Workshop. The event will be held in Lillooet, February 24th and 25th. An agenda is in development, and will include a component on the Air Quality Health Index as well as an educational presentation on communications tools for stewards. Air and Water Engagement Initiative – this project is funded by the Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport. Erin is the lead on the project. To date, a series of telephone interviews with local government elected officials and staff have been completed. Reporting is underway. WEBs – Mike and Erin met with Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada staff early in January to go over the workplan and budget of the project. Largely, FBC will provide administration services for the project as well as some project-related work such as organizing and delivering community workshops, raising awareness and education about irrigation management practices, and developing communications materials. 8. Other Business a. Regional Action Plan – Mike and Erin have developed a list of regional sustainability issues that could potentially inform the development of a Regional Action Plan. Please refer to the on-table item, “Thompson Regional Action Plan” for more information. Action Item – committee members are asked to review the principles for involvement, the potential roles, and draft ideas in the Regional Action Plan, and prioritize ideas that have funding possibilities for the next meeting. b. Maternity Leave – Erin will be going on maternity leave in early April 2010 (exact date to be determined). Mike and Erin will be seeking a replacement for her for up to a 1-year term. Advertisement for the position will be done via word-of-mouth, if any committee members know of suitable candidates please contact Mike at [email protected].
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 349 of 361 Meeting adjourned at 12:00 pm
Next Meeting of the Thompson Regional Committee: February 9th, 2010 @ 10:00 am – 12:00 pm Thompson Regional Office
Other upcoming Events: Fraser Basin Council Board of Directors Meeting January 27th (afternoon) and 28th (full day) 2010 Pacific Palisades Hotel, Vancouver
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 350 of 361 Attachment 2.1
DRAFT RECORD OF DECISIONS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, December 9, 2009
In Attendance: Charles Jago David Barratt Bob Smillie Paul Kluckner Jerry Petersen Bob Patterson Jennifer Vigano George Saddleman Dan Millar
Staff: David Marshall Gail Wallin Bob Purdy Marion Town Diana Dilworth
Regrets: Alan Osborne Ken Melamed
The meeting convened at 9:00am.
1. Approval of the Agenda The agenda was approved as circulated.
Decision 09-12-01 THAT the Agenda for the Operations Committee Meeting of December 9, 2009 be approved.
2. Approval of Draft Record of Decisions Item 8, Regional Updates was amended to remove a bullet from the Cariboo Chilcotin Report and amend reference in the Thompson Report to note “gasification to energy” in place of gas.
Decision 09-12-02 THAT the Record of Decisions from the Operations Committee Meeting of November 12, 2009 be approved.
Business Arising: Item 5, Debris Trap: The Committee has asked for an update regarding discussions taking place regarding the operation of the Debris Trap.
Decision 09-12-03 THAT staff be requested to provide a status report on discussions taking place regarding debris trap operations. Action: Director, Corporate Development and External Relations
3. Chair and Executive Director Report The Chair reported that: The Human Resources Committee held a very productive, first, meeting and it was agreed to proceeed with the development of a philosophy/framework document for Board discussion at the January 2010 meeting. Positive actions are taking place related to financial management of the Council. At the last In- Camera session of the Board a list of items was provided to the Executive Director and a full status report is expected at the next In-Camera Meeting. The Executive Director reported that: A meeting of the Joint Flood Hazard Management Program met this week to review strategies and plans.
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, December 9, 2009. Page 1 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 351 of 361 Attachment 2.1
As a fee-for-service project, the First Nations Environmental Health Innovative Network (FNEHIN) hosted a forum in Prince George, attended by 10 participants from across Canada, to focus on a governance model for the network. The first meeting of the Northern Rockies Partner Working Group has been delayed until early January 2010. Effective December 1, 2009, staff at the Council returned to a five-day work week. The Annual General Meeting of the FBC Society is scheduled for Friday, December 18th and it is anticipated that all members will be in attendance in person. The Collaborative Watershed Governance Initiative Steering Committee meeting is scheduled for December 17th. The Province is being represented by MLA John Slater, the Parliamentary Secretary for Water Allocation. An agreement is being signed for the Regional Adaptation Collaboration (RAC); the project is worth $3.3M over 2.5 years. Progress is being made on an agreement with the Sto:Lo Nation regarding the development of an Economic Development Strategy; there are 13 First Nations within the Sto:Lo. Four candidates are currently being vetted for the Limited Term Directorship (Youth) while identifying candidates for the Finance position is currently underway. A task committee addressing visioning/long term strategic objectives will be meeting immediately following the Operations Committee and it is anticipated that a full report will be provided to the Operations Committee at its January meeting. 4. State of the Fraser Basin Conference/Snapshot 5 Reference was made to a briefing note that was provided to the Operations Committee with options for consideration. It was agreed by Committee members that the Council has neither the personnel or financial resources to do a full report at this time.
Decision 09-12-04 THAT a briefing note be prepared for consideration by the Board of Directors with a number of options including a modified Option D (Regional Focus) that takes into account the engagement of Municipal, Regional and First Nations governments; AND THAT further information be provided in the briefing note regarding options for timing of publication of the Snapshot Report and hosting of Conference events. Action: Senior Manager, and Manager, Council Operations
5. Board of Directors Meeting, January 2010 Discussion ensued regarding the agendas for the Board Workshop, Consent Agenda and Business Agenda. Question arose regarding the content and expected outcomes of the Workshop.
Decision 09-12-05 THAT the Consent and Business Agendas be approved as revised; AND THAT a working session be scheduled for the Chair and select staff, on December 18th, to develop the Workshop Agenda Action: Executive Director and Manager, Council Operations
6. Regional Updates Cariboo Region Bob Patterson noted: The Regional Adaption Collaboration initiative, undertaken as fee-for-service, is providing climate change adaptation lens to regional growth strategies. A Wildlife Mitigation fee for service project is being undertaken with a forum being held in Fort St. John for approximately 50 participants.
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, December 9, 2009. Page 2 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 352 of 361 Attachment 2.1
The Williams Lake Interface Fire Program held a recent meeting with stakeholders to reflect on the program. Cariboo staff are leading First Nations coordination regarding Interface Plants. The Regional Committee has begin planning for the June 2010 Board Meeting which is scheduled to be held in the Cariboo. Potential is for tours to be focused on local and regional projects.
Greater Vancouver Sea to Sky Region Marion Town noted: A very productive joint meeting was held with the Regional Committees of the GVSS Region and the Fraser Valley Region on the topic of regional indicators reports Sponsorship opportunities are being explored to publish the regional indicators report Staff are optimistic regarding additional salary-recovery opportunities.
Thompson Region Bob Smillie noted: The Regional Committee met for the first time, with Mike Simpson. The BC Interior Stewardship Workshop is receiving full funding for its February 2010 event. The Air and Water Engagement Project is progressing with public interviews at this time. SLIPP appears to be stalled and the issue seems to be funding; it is anticipated that the model will be implemented provincially at some time. The Committee has requested clarification regarding distribution of Operations Committee meetings, particularly to non-Directors who are sitting on regional committees.
Decision 09-12-06 THAT the Operations Committee meeting minutes be distributed, in a draft form, to members of the Operations Committee and to regional staff for further distribution non-Director members of their regional committees. Action: Manager, Council Operations, Regional Staff
Fraser Valley Region David Barratt noted: The Regional Committee had a meeting last week that was very productive in terms of dialogue around the current challenges facing the Council. The Committee felt that at all levels of government, administrators were looking for practical approaches to implementing sustainability and this is encouraging for FBC.
Upper Fraser Region Jerry Peterson noted that: The region is in a transition mode with staff changes taking place. The Nechako Watershed Council has been meeting and their was a recent review of the 1997 agreement between Alcan and the NWCC. A workplan and draft budget is being prepared for consideration at the next NWCC Board meeting in March 2010. (The Chair reported that he attended the recent NWCC meeting and was alarmed about the future of the NWCC given the lack of prospects for funding and current financial situation).
9. Basin Wide Updates Federal Government Paul Kluckner noted that: Financial restraints within the federal government continue to challenge operations.
Provincial government Jennifer Vigano noted that: Fiscal restraint continues to be a primary focus of the government. The Olympic Games are the focus of a number of departments and staff. Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, December 9, 2009. Page 3 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 353 of 361 Attachment 2.1
Political focus is on the dialogue(s) taking place in Copenhagen. In regards to the discussions on the green economy, December 31st is the deadline for a public call for input to the Cabinet Committee on Climate Change
Decision 09-12-07 THAT staff ensure that a submission is presented to at least one of the task forces that are receiving input. Action: Executive Director
First Nations George Saddleman noted that: There hasn’t been a lot of dialogue between the First Nations Directors and there is a need to reengage the group.
8. Next Meeting/ Adjournment.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00am.
Next meeting is scheduled for 9:00am on Wednesday, January 6th (note that this is a week earlier than usual).
Fraser Basin Council Operations Committee Meeting, December 9, 2009. Page 4 of 4
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 354 of 361 Thompson Regional Action Plan Draft Concept and Preliminary Ideas As at 7 Jan 2010
Following discussion at Thompson Regional Committee meetings in November and December 2009, there is interest in the Council working on grass-roots projects that arise from within the Thompson Region that address regional needs to a greater extend, in addition to delivering basin-wide programs. In general, external funding would be needed for FBC staff to be involved in these projects – however this would need to be explored on a project-specific basis.
Principles for FBC to be involved in regional projects: Address at least 2 of 3 components of sustainability (environmental, economic, social) Inclusive of all interests, and involve multiple jurisdictions and a variety of interests FBC’s role is neutral, and the project does not result in advocacy, or take a position Consistent with principles of the Charter for Sustainability
FBC’s traditional roles: Catalyst or initiator of processes Neutral facilitator of process, including conflict resolution Secretariat support or coordination of multi-stakeholder processes Project management related to the above Researcher or analyst Educator or communicator of sustainability to stakeholders and the public
Potential topic areas for FBC involvement in Thompson Region: Waterways: o Infrastructure (i.e., docks and wharfs, buoys, etc.) and coordinating multiple levels of government (i.e., ILMB, Coast Guard/Transport Canada, DFO, local governments, etc.) to ensure compliance o Conflicts between motorized and non-motorized recreationalists; issues of safety o Environmental concerns arising from boat wake, pollution, development, etc. Recreation and impacts on the natural environment (i.e., forest fire hazards from fireworks, recreation infrastructure such as rail lines) Solid waste management, recycling (e.g. agricultural plastics), and composting Development of land and impacts on the natural environment (e.g., expand use of integrated planning processes for lakeshore developments as a transferrable model for other areas) Coordinating regional growth strategies between levels of governments Water utility infrastructure Water metering and domestic water conservation Water use conflicts between fisheries and agricultural producers “Waste to energy” gasification plants and impacts on air quality Independent Power Producers: (1) abundance of applications for micro hydroelectric facilities in some geographical locations and impacts to fisheries; (2) concern with road infrastructure and invasive species associated with wind farms, particularly on rangeland
SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 355 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 356 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 357 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 358 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 359 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 360 of 361 SLRD Regular Meeting Agenda; February 22, 2010 Page 361 of 361