November 14 2012 Utilities Ctte Agenda
1.1
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING UTILITIES COMMITTEE
9:00 a.m. Wednesday, November 14, 2012 2nd floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.
A G E N D A
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.1 November 14, 2012 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Utilities Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for November 14, 2012 as circulated.
2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
2.1 October 10, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Utilities Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held October 10, 2012 as circulated.
3. DELEGATIONS No items presented.
4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.
5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF
5.1 Tap Water and Conservation Campaign: Water Wagon Report and Lawn Sprinkling Communications Designated Speaker: David Hocking That the Board receive for information the report titled Tap Water and Conservation Campaign: Water Wagon Report and Lawn Sprinkling Communications, dated October 25, 2012.
5.2 Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds: Engagement and Consultation Program Results Designated Speaker: Marie Griggs That the Board receive for information the report titled Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds: Engagement and Consultation Program Results, dated November 6, 2012.
5.3 Initial Triple Bottom Line Analysis Results of the Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects Designated Speakers: Jeff Carmichael and Stan Woods That the Utilities Committee receive for information the report titled Initial Triple Bottom Line Analysis Results of the Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects, dated November 2, 2012.
UC-1 5.4 Adoption of the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds Designated Speaker: Stan Woods That the Board adopt the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated October 2012 and direct staff to submit the Plan along with water licence applications for the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower projects to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights.
5.5 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Hawthorne Grove Park in the Corporation of Delta Designated Speaker: Inder Singh That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 4026 Arthur Drive in Delta.
5.6 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Augustinian Monastery in the Corporation of Delta Designated Speaker: Inder Singh That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 3890 Arthur Drive in Delta.
5.7 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Delta Works Yard in the Corporation of Delta Designated Speaker: Inder Singh That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 5404 64th Street in Delta – the Delta Engineering Works Yard.
5.8 Corporation of Delta Request to Extend Regional Sewer Service Outside of the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Containment Boundary, and to Amend the Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Millennium Pacific Greenhouses at 3760 Arthur Drive Designated Speakers: Heather McNell and Inder Singh That the GVRD Board resolve that the proposed extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta is consistent with Regional Growth Strategy provisions; and That the GVS&DD Board, subject to the GVRD Board resolving that the proposed extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta is consistent with Regional Growth Strategy provisions, approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta to include the building footprint of the proposed temporary farm worker housing for the duration that the temporary structures are in place, and the building footprint only for the existing greenhouse buildings (based on domestic wastewater flows only).
5.9 Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012 Designated Speaker: Ray Robb That the Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012; b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012.
5.10 Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Implementation Status Designated Speaker: Robert Hicks That the Utilities Committee receive for information the report titled Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Implementation Status.
UC-2 5.11 Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Project Update Designated Speakers: Fred Nenninger and Marie Griggs That the Board receive for information the report titled Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Project Update, dated October 29, 2012.
5.12 Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project – Project Status Designated Speaker: Mark Ferguson That the Board receive for information the report titled Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project – Project Status, dated October 29, 2012.
5.13 Manager’s Report Designated Speaker: Tim Jervis That the Utilities Committee receive for information the Manager’s Report dated October 29, 2012.
6. INFORMATION ITEMS No items presented.
7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.
8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING That the Utilities Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for November 14, 2012 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e ) and (k) as follows:
“90 (1) A part of a Committee meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following:
(e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district; and
(k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a regional service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public.”
9. ADJOURNMENT Staff Recommendation: That the Utilities Committee conclude its regular meeting of November 14, 2012.
UC-3 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT UTILITIES COMMITTEE
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Utilities Committee held at 9:04 a.m. on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.
PRESENT: Chair, Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Vice Chair, Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam (arrived at 9:11 a.m.) Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Councillor Jonathan Cote, New Westminster Director Helen Fathers, White Rock Councillor Charlie Fox, Langley Township (departed at 10:40 a.m.) Councillor Robin Hicks, North Vancouver District Councillor Trish Panz, West Vancouver Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver (arrived at 9:09 a.m.)
ABSENT: Director Ernie Daykin, Maple Ridge Director Linda Hepner, Surrey
STAFF: Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Administrative Officer’s Department Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department Doug Humphris, Manager, Operations and Maintenance Department Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board Secretariat and Corporate Information Department Jim Rusnak, Assistant Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer’s Department Albert van Roodselaar, Manager, Utility Planning Department
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.1 October 10, 2012 Regular Meeting Agenda
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for October 10, 2012 as circulated. CARRIED
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Utilities Committee held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 1 of 6 UC-4 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
2.1 September 12, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held September 12, 2012 as circulated. CARRIED
3. DELEGATIONS
3.1 Kim Stephens, Partnership for Water Sustainability in BC re: Rainwater Management in a Watershed Sustainability Context Kim Stephens, Partnership for Water Sustainability in BC, provided members with an update presentation regarding rainwater management in a watershed sustainability context highlighting: actions for on-site rainwater management and collaborative initiatives including the Water Balance Model Express for land owners and the Inter-Regional Education Initiative.
9:09 a.m. Director Stevenson arrived at the meeting. 9:11 a.m. Director Stewart arrived at the meeting.
The delegate requested that Metro Vancouver collaborate with the Partnership pursuant to Strategy 3.2 in the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan and offered to inform municipal councils about the benefits of sharing and leveraging.
Members considered the need to identify staff time and resources needed to collaborate with the Partnership.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee refer to staff the request from delegate Kim Stephens to collaborate with the Partnership, as it relates to Strategy 3.2 of the Integrated Water Resource Management Plan and opportunities to inform municipal councils about the benefits of sharing and leveraging. CARRIED
Presentation material titled “Rainwater Management in a Watershed Sustainability Context” is retained with the October 10, 2012 Utilities Committee agenda.
4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.
5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF
5.1 2013 Utilities Committee - Programs and Priorities Report dated October 4, 2012 from Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department, providing the 2013 programs and key priorities under the purview of the Utilities Committee for discussion and/or amendment for Board consideration at the Board Budget Workshop.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Utilities Committee held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 2 of 6 UC-5
Members were provided a presentation regarding Metro Vancouver’s 2013 draft budget highlighting: the capital planning process; revenue sources and allocation of funds; capital expenditures; water expenditures and revenue; blended water rate; liquid waste expenditures and revenues; sewer and drainage levy; budget/rate drivers; long range capital program; and proposed 2013 staffing changes.
Discussion ensued regarding: · Analysis of Metro Vancouver assets with respect to value and depreciation · Revisiting the amortization period; concerns regarding future impact on overall annual cost · Consideration of one water rate versus two (peak and off-season) · Challenges with comparing water rates to other major cities based on Metro Vancouver’s unique two-tier water structure and differing municipal water billing structures · Proposed staffing changes and 2012 consultant expenditures · Municipal responsibilities and jurisdiction related to water conservation initiatives · Metro Vancouver’s efforts re-evaluating water metering and lawn sprinkling
Request of Staff Staff was requested to provide the Utilities Committee with a brief rationale regarding proposed 2013 staffing changes to respond to media inquiries.
Presentation material titled “Metro Vancouver 2013 Draft Budget” is retained with the October 10, 2012 Utilities Committee agenda.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee endorse the proposed programs and key priorities as set out in the report dated October 4, 2012, titled “2013 Utilities Committee - Programs and Priorities”, as the basis for the budget to be considered at the Board Budget Workshop on October 17, 2012. CARRIED
5.2 GVS&DD Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012 Report dated September 21, 2012 from Jeff Gogol, Environmental Regulatory Planner, and Ray Robb, Regulation and Enforcement Division Manager, Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department, recommending adoption of Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (“GVS&DD”) Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012 and consequential amendments to the GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007.
Members were provided a presentation regarding the food sector grease interceptor bylaw highlighting: issues; consultation; proposed changes; communications and outreach.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Utilities Committee held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 3 of 6 UC-6 In response to questions regarding the bylaw, members were informed about: · The inclusion of inspection fees in the bylaw · Working with member municipalities to develop consistent messaging · Enforcement roles for Metro Vancouver and municipalities · Potential issues from discharges in one municipality affecting another · The high number of infractions per inspection · High percentage of traps being under-sized based on inspections · Efforts to work with restaurants case-by-case to complete timely upgrades · The need for more multi-lingual inspectors · Financial implications to restaurants to upgrade and maintain traps · Interest by service providers to offer regular, organized services at a reduced rate
Presentation material titled “Grease Interceptor Bylaw” is retained with the October 10, 2012 Utilities Committee agenda.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVS&DD Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012”; b) introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012”; c) reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012”; and d) reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012”. CARRIED
5.3 Summer 2012 Water Supply Performance Dan Donnelly, Water Treatment and Systems Control Division Manager, Operations and Maintenance Department, and Stan Woods, Senior Engineer, Utility Planning Department, providing the Utilities Committee with a preliminary review of water use and water supply system performance during summer 2012.
Members were provided with a presentation regarding summer 2012 water supply performance highlighting: annual consumption; total storage for Metro Vancouver usage including Coquitlam Lake; comparison of hourly water flows from July 29th and 30th from 2009 and 2012; purpose of changes to lawn sprinkling regulations; a comparison of peak summer sprinkling between 2010 and 2012 and conclusions.
Presentation material titled “Review of Water Supply and Water Use for Summer 2012” is retained with the October 10, 2012 Utilities Committee agenda.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Utilities Committee held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 4 of 6 UC-7 It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee receive the report dated October 2, 2012, titled “Summer 2012 Water Supply Performance” for information. CARRIED
10:40 a.m. Councillor Fox departed the meeting.
5.4 Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures to August 31, 2012 Frank Huber, Deputy Manager, Engineering and Construction Department, and Phil Trotzuk, Financial Planning and Operations Division Manager, Finance and Administration Department, reporting on the status of utilities capital expenditures to August 31, 2012.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Committee receive the report titled “Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures to August 31, 2012”, dated October 2, 2012 for information. CARRIED
5.5 Managers’ Report Report dated October 2, 2012 from Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department, updating the Utilities Committee on the Utilities Committee 2012 Work Plan and the Integrated Resource Recovery Study Update: Vancouver Sewerage Area Study.
Regarding the Committee’s 2012 Work Plan, members were informed that a new agreement with BC Hydro for acquiring additional allocation of Coquitlam Lake water and the GVS&DD cost allocation model will roll over into the first quarter of the Committee’s 2013 Work Plan. Members were further informed about: · An October 25th, 2012 media event marking 50% completion of the Coquitlam UV Disinfection Facility · A public media release regarding 2012 Metro Vancouver water consumption · Staff working with the City of Vancouver on opportunities and challenges with realizing integrated resource recovery for the Iona Wastewater Treatment Plant
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee receive the “Managers’ Report”, dated October 2, 2012 for information. CARRIED
6. INFORMATION ITEMS No items presented.
7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.
8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No items presented.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Utilities Committee held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 5 of 6 UC-8
9. ADJOURNMENT
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Utilities Committee conclude its regular meeting of October 10, 2012. CARRIED (Time: 10:57 a.m.)
______Janis Knaupp, Darrell Mussatto, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees
6614612 FINAL
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Utilities Committee held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 6 of 6 UC-9 5.1
Utilities Committee Meeting: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: David Hocking, Corporate Communications Division Manager, Corporate Relations Department
Date: October 25, 2012
Subject: Tap Water and Conservation Campaign: Water Wagon Report and Lawn Sprinkling Communications
Recommendation:
That the Board receive for information the report titled Tap Water and Conservation Campaign: Water Wagon Report and Lawn Sprinkling Communications, dated October 25, 2012.
1. PURPOSE
To provide the Utilities Committee with a report on the Metro Vancouver Water Wagon and its 2012 engagement activities, and a review of the communications materials used to convey the changed lawn sprinkling regulations in 2012 and the recommended approach for 2013.
2. CONTEXT
Water Wagon 2012 Report
Metro Vancouver’s Tap Water Campaign centers on the use of a water wagon and Tap Water Team to engage citizens at community events across the region, primarily during the summer months. 2012 is the second year Metro Vancouver’s water wagon and Tap Water Team has been at outdoor community events across the region. The water wagon is staffed by an outreach team trained to provide the public with tap water information and educational messages.
The Tap Water Outreach Program objectives are to safely and effectively provide tap water at regionally representative events, to highlight the region’s water quality, to highlight water conservation and encourage tap water over bottled water, to provide Metro Vancouver’s tap water messaging to diverse audiences, to disseminate information about relevant Metro Vancouver campaigns, and appropriately respond to additional inquiries raised by event attendees.
The water wagon’s second season started again at the largest event for the season, the Rio Tinto Alcan Dragon Boat Festival in Vancouver’s False Creek on June 16th and 17th. Building on the Dragon Boat Festival launch, the Tap Water Team has been delivering tap water education and messaging to Metro Vancouver residents throughout the summer. An estimated 300,000 people attended the 19 different events served by the water wagon over 25 days.
UC-10 Throughout the season, the water wagon enabled the Tap Water Team to conduct one-on- one conversations based on the program objectives with over 3,000 people. The team served water to over 8,500 people and collected 100 tap water pledges.
The Water Wagon and the Tap Water Team attended a broad range of events (Attachment 1) that included sports competitions (e.g. Dragon Boat Festival, BC Senior Games and Highland Games), music festivals (e.g. Blues and Roots festival, Pitt Meadows Country Festival), community days (e.g. Canada Day, Barn Raising), ethnic festivals (e.g. LatinCouver, Caribbean Festival, TaiwanFest, Korean Festival), and environmental protection (e.g. Coho Walk, World River’s Day). The wide breadth of events allowed Metro Vancouver to connect with a diverse cross section of people with varying views and background information about Metro Vancouver’s tap water.
The chart below summarizes the outreach achieved compared to 2011.
2011 2012 Estimated attendees 270,000 300,000 Events 16 19 Event days 26 25 Staff Hours 550 589 Attendees using water wagon 6616 8574 Total conversations 2677 3002 · with adults 2196 2519 · with kids 481 483 ESL conversations n/a 476 Municipalities visited 9 12
The water wagon schedule was subject to change throughout the summer due to event cancellations. The main reason for a cancellation was difficulty meeting the access requirements to water and power for the water wagon. Despite the shifting schedule, Metro Vancouver was able to maintain regional representation and increase the number of events attended, the number of attendees using the water wagon, the number of total conversations and the number of municipalities visited (including the Tsawwassen First Nation).
The water wagon outreach can be grouped into two general categories – informing audiences of the nature and some details of Metro Vancouver’s water supply, and attempting to change behaviour: encouraging bottled water drinkers to use tap water. As in the experience of the previous year, encouraging behaviour change is challenging for some audiences.
For general information sharing, the Tap Water Team encouraged young and old audiences to participate in games and discussions on Metro Vancouver’s water quality and water conservation messages, including lawn sprinkling regulations. In addition, the team promoted other sustainability-related initiatives – such as the need for greater recycling, and the use of MetroVancouverReycles.
Overall, the feedback from the public and event organizers was very good. People were pleased to see Metro Vancouver providing water at community events and learn more details about the quality of our region’s water. Many people thanked the Tap Water Team for the quality of their work – in answering questions, having fun, and conveying Metro Vancouver’s messages. UC-11 Water Conservation and Lawn Sprinkling Communications
At its April 12, 2012 meeting, the Utilities Committee received a report on the planned approach to communicate water conservation and the changed lawn sprinkling regulations. The report outlined preparatory work that included:
· Testing with the public on the best approach to communicate the new lawn sprinkling regulations. A conservation message was deemed to be most effective.
· A March workshop with the Municipal Water Conservation Coordinators. Key messages were developed with a conservation theme to inform the public of the new sprinkling regulations.
· The recommended approach was presented and discussed at a joint session of the Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC) Water Sub-committee and the Municipal Water Conservation Coordinators later in March, and with REAC in April.
The resulting key messages were: “You only need one hour per week for a healthy lawn” and “Our water – mountain fresh. Don’t waste a drop”.
The resulting advertisements, hose tags, fridge magnets and media release are attached. In late May, the ads were placed region-wide in local newspapers with the highest readership. All communication materials were shared with member municipalities.
The cool first half of the summer kept the demands on the water system relatively low, and therefore the advertisements were not repeated, as had been previously agreed to with the Water Communications Coordinators and REAC. However, the extremely dry period during August and September did not result in significant stresses to the system, as was outlined in the report, Summer Water Supply Performance, presented to the Utilities Committee in October. That report showed that there was a noticeable decrease in evening water use and in overall water consumption.
The conclusion of that report is that while more years of data are needed, indications show the new regulations were effective in reducing demand, particularly in the evenings. Similarly, one could assume that the communications materials appear to be effective.
For this reason, a similar approach to communicating the conservation and lawn sprinkling messages will be followed in 2013 beginning with a meeting with the Water Conservation Coordinators to assess the results of 2012
Financial Considerations
The Tap Water Campaign and the use of the Water Wagon to engage and educate residents on the quality of Metro Vancouver drinking water, and the water conservation and lawn sprinkling communications were included in the 2012 budget approved by the Board and are reflected in the 2012 Corporate Communications program.
Senior governments usually require a water conservation programming, including education campaigns, as a condition of infrastructure funding grants.
UC-12 3. ALTERNATIVES
None presented.
4. CONCLUSION
The water wagon is a high profile vehicle for community outreach with residents on Metro Vancouver’s role as a water purveyor and the issue of sustainable water management. During its second season, Metro Vancouver was able to maintain regional representation and increase the number of events attended, the number of attendees using the water wagon, the number of total conversations and the number of municipalities visited. The water wagon enabled the Tap Water Team to conduct one-on-one outreach with over 3,000 people and serve water to over 8,500 at events attended by approximately 300,000. The water wagon is an effective catalyst for conversations regarding a spectrum of Metro Vancouver related topics, including the quality and safety of our water and the need for conservation.
The 2012 water conservation and lawn sprinkling communications were developed jointly with member municipalities in order to communicate the new sprinkling regulations. The focus of the materials was a message centered on conservation. While the early part of the summer was cool and wet, the last two months were extremely dry. Even with the extended dry period, there was a decline in peak time of day use and overall consumption of water.
A preliminary review of the work in 2012 suggests that a similar approach be followed in 2013.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Metro Vancouver Tap Water Team – 2012 Summary 2. Media release: Help preserve our precious water this summer 3. Hose tag and fridge magnet 4. Newspaper advertisement
6711300
UC-13 5.1 ATTACHMENT 1
Metro Vancouver Tap Water Team 2012 Metric Summary Estimated People % That used # ESL Event name Date Location attendance Adults Children who used fountain Conversations Speakers at event wagon (estimate)
Rio Tinto Alcan Dragon Boat Festival Vancouver 40,000 180 175 5 15 430 20% 6/16 Rio Tinto Alcan Dragon Boat Festival Vancouver 40,000 307 246 61 45 1,659 25% 6/17 National Aboriginal Day 6/21 Tsawassen 150 39 32 7 0 36 75% Highland Games 6/23 Coquitlam 5,000 63 55 8 0 487 40% LatinCouver 6/30 Vancouver 35,000 66 66 0 4 182 65% Canada Day 7/1 Port Coqutlam 5,000 145 100 45 0 375 40% Carribean Festival 7/14 Maple Ridge 10,000 280 260 20 10 655 60% Party at the Pier 7/15 North Vancouver City 15,000 173 138 35 15 108 80% Aldergrove Fair Days 7/21 Aldergrove 5,000 188 169 19 2 241 50% Aldergrove Fair Days 7/22 Aldergrove 5,000 49 27 22 1 37 90% Country Festival 7/28 Pitt Meadows 5,000 280 252 28 10 416 70% Country Festival 7/29 Pitt Meadows 5,000 ------Korean Festival 8/4 Coquitlam 1,500 101 66 35 90 189 60% Blues and Roots Festival 8/11 Burnaby 10,000 134 133 1 2 1,300 20% BC Senior Games 8/23 Burnaby 1,500 139 137 2 7 990 40% BC Senior Games 8/24 Burnaby 1,500 0 0 0 0 0 0% Taiwanese Festival 9/1 Vancouver 35,000 362 340 22 200 725 65% Taiwanese Festival 9/2 Vancouver 35,000 ------Taiwanese Festival 9/3 Vancouver 35,000 ------University Neighbourhood Association University 500 147 59 88 50 340 60% Barn-Raising 9/8 Endowment Lands Coho Walk 9/9 West Vancouver 5,000 55 50 6 5 54 70% University Wesbrook Village Festival 500 110 66 44 10 27 50% 9/22 Endowment Lands World River's Day 9/26 Burnaby 150 31 31 0 0 30 75% RiverFest – Inspired by the Fraser 9/29 New Westminster 1,500 101 81 20 0 142 30% River and Trails Festival 9/30 Port Coquitlam 150 52 37 15 10 151 2% TOTAL 297,450 3,002 2,519 483 476 8,574 -
6567644 UC-14 Metro Vancouver Tap Water Team 2012 Regional Representation
Event name Date Location Sub Region Rio Tinto Alcan Dragon Boat Festival 6/16 Vancouver Vancouver/Electoral Area A Rio Tinto Alcan Dragon Boat Festival 6/17 Vancouver Vancouver/Electoral Area A Surrey/Delta/White National Aboriginal Day 6/21 Tsawwassen Rock/Tsawwassen Highland Games 6/23 Coquitlam Tri Cities LatinCouver 6/30 Vancouver Vancouver/Electoral Area A Canada Day 7/1 Port Coqutlam Tri Cities Carribean Festival 7/14 Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge North Vancouver Party at the Pier 7/15 City North Shore City and Township of Aldergrove Fair Days 7/21 Aldergrove Langley City and Township of Aldergrove Fair Days 7/22 Aldergrove Langley Country Festival 7/28 Pitt Meadows Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge Country Festival 7/29 Pitt Meadows Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge Korean Festival 8/4 Coquitlam Tri Cities Blues and Roots Festival 8/11 Burnaby Burnaby/New Westminster BC Senior Games 8/23 Burnaby Burnaby/New Westminster BC Senior Games 8/24 Burnaby Burnaby/New Westminster Taiwanese Festival 9/1 Vancouver Vancouver/Electoral Area A Taiwanese Festival 9/2 Vancouver Vancouver/Electoral Area A Taiwanese Festival 9/3 Vancouver Vancouver/Electoral Area A University Neighbourhood Association Barn-Raising 9/8 U.E.L. Vancouver/Electoral Area A Coho Walk 9/9 West Vancouver North Shore Wesbrook Village Festival 9/22 U.E.L. Vancouver/Electoral Area A World River's Day 9/26 Burnaby Burnaby/New Westminster RiverFest – Inspired by the Fraser 9/29 New Westminster Burnaby/New Westminster River and Trails Festival 9/30 Port Coquitlam Tri Cities Richmond and Surrey use their own water wagons to service events
UC-15 8 Sub-Regions Events Days 1. TRI CITIES 34 · Anmore 00 · Belcarra 00 · Coquitlam 12 22 · Port Coquitlam · Port Moody 00 2. NORTH SHORE 22 · North Van City 11 · North Van District 00 00 · Bowen Island 00 · Lions Bay 11 · West Van 3. CITY AND TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY 12 · Langley City 00 · Langley Township 12 · Abbotsford 00 4. SURREY / DELTA / WHITE ROCK / TSAWWASSEN 11 · White Rock 00 · Surrey 00 · Delta 00 · Tsawwassen 11 5. BURNABY / NEW WEST 35 · Burnaby 24 · New West 11 6. PITT MEADOWS / MAPLE RIDGE 23 · Maple Ridge 11 · Pitt Meadows 12 7. RICHMOND 00 · Richmond 00 8. VANCOUVER / ELECTORAL AREA A 58 · Vancouver 36 · Electoral Area A 22
UC-16 5.1 ATTACHMENT 2
May 31, 2012
HELP CONSERVE OUR PRECIOUS WATER THIS SUMMER
A region-wide ban on lawn sprinkling during summer evenings comes into effect on June 1.
Mornings-only lawn sprinkling regulations adopted by all municipalities in Metro Vancouver will help the regional district deliver enough water throughout the region during peak demand periods.
The demand for water doubles during the hottest days of summer, to as much as two billion litres of water a day.
“Our mountain-fresh water is precious,” said Board Chair Greg Moore. “Don’t waste a drop.”
Currently, there are no watering restrictions for flowers, vegetables, shrubs and trees.
From June 1 to September 30, lawn sprinkling is only permitted before 9 a.m. in the morning:
- Even numbered residential addresses may sprinkle lawns Monday, Wednesday or Saturday mornings between 4 a.m. and 9 a.m.
- Odd numbered residential addresses may sprinkle lawns on Tuesday, Thursday or Sunday mornings, between 4 a.m. and 9 a.m.
In other words, residents have three opportunities a week to water their lawn. However, Metro Vancouver recommends that residents water their lawns a maximum of just one hour a week.
“You only need to water a lawn one hour a week to keep it healthy,” Moore noted. “Please don’t waste water on lawns.”
Darrell Mussatto, Chair of Metro Vancouver’s Utilities committee, said morning-only lawn sprinkling will help reduce the demand for water during evenings. Lawn sprinkling is no longer permitted during evenings, when the demand for water for dishwashers, clothes washing, showers and other domestic uses is at its daily peak.
“Because air temperatures are lower, less water is lost to evaporation when sprinkling in the morning,” Mussatto said.
“This will conserve our water and help flatten the spikes in water consumption during summer evenings. If businesses and residents continue to conserve water, Metro Vancouver can push back the date when we have to build higher dams, bigger pumping stations and bigger water mains. Morning-only lawn sprinkling will help minimize additional costs, for both taxpayers and the environment.”
UC-17 Cont’d.../2
Some tips to minimize the quantity of water that’s wasted on lawns:
- A healthy lawn only needs to be watered for one hour, once a week, or less if it rains.
- Most lawns only need 2.5 cm or 1 inch of water each week. Put an empty tuna can out on the lawn when you sprinkle. Turn off the sprinkler when the tuna can is full of water.
- Water your lawns and gardens early in the morning to reduce evaporation.
- Leave grass clippings on your lawn. This reduces evaporation and the need to water your lawn.
- Replace lawns with ornamental grasses and other drought-resistant plants that require little or no watering.
- Some residents are choosing to let their lawn go dormant during the summer. When it rains again, a yellow lawn “greens up” after a few days of cloudy, wet weather.
Many municipalities offer useful outdoor and indoor water conservation kits. Please contact your municipality to purchase one.
More information is available on the regional district’s website, www.metrovancouver.org. For a direct link to information about water conservation and the region’s water supply, treatment and distribution system, click here
A 30-second Public Service Announcement video about water sprinkling is posted on the Media Room pages of www.metrovancouver.org. For a link to the video, click here
For more information, please contact Metro Vancouver at 604-432-6200
UC-18 5.1 ATTACHMENT 3
UC-19 UC-20 5.1 ATTACHMENT 4
UC-21
5.2
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Marie Griggs, Public Involvement Division Manager, Engineering and Construction Department
Date: November 6, 2012
Subject: Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds: Engagement and Consultation Program Results
Recommendation:
That the Board receive for information the report titled “Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds: Engagement and Consultation Program Results,” dated November 6, 2012.
1. PURPOSE
This report summarizes the engagement and consultation program and the input received on the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds (JWUP) between October 2010 and November 2012.
2. CONTEXT
The purpose of the JWUP process is to explore whether and how hydropower generation from the existing reservoirs can be accommodated within Metro Vancouver’s commitment to sustainable management by: continuing to supply clean, safe drinking water, protecting fish habitat, and adapting to climate change. Other community interests such as recreation, culture and heritage, and safety have been reviewed within the context of the JWUP process.
Metro Vancouver established a process for developing the JWUP in accordance with the thirteen steps outlined in the provincial Water Use Plan Guidelines. The process integrated technical study and evaluation with structured decision-making and public consultation.
On September 21, 2012 the Board directed staff to proceed with engagement and consultation on the key elements of the JWUP before final consideration of the JWUP by the Board in November 2012. The results of the process were considered in the drafting of the JWUP, which is also in the meeting agenda for Committee and Board approval.
2.1 Program Overview As per the provincial Water Use Plan Guidelines, Metro Vancouver’s engagement and consultation program for the JWUP process included outreach to the following audiences:
UC-22 6650440 · the public, · potentially affected First Nations, · Metro Vancouver members, and · government agencies and ministries.
The program components in Section 2.2 describe the activities that took place between October 2010 and November 2012. A variety of supporting communications activities were undertaken to inform the public as well as to gather input (see Section 2.4). A summary of the program is provided in a document titled Engagement and Consultation on the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watershed: Report on Activities and Feedback October 1, 2010 to November 6, 2012. The document is available by contacting the Metro Vancouver Information Centre at 604-423-6200.
2.2 Program Components The following sections provide an overview of the engagement and consultation program components.
2.2.1 Public Two public meetings were held, the first in October 2010 and the second in October 2012. There were approximately 125 people in attendance at the 2010 meeting, and approximately 70 people at the 2012 meeting. Participants at the meetings included residents, political representatives, and representatives of environmental, recreational, community and business organizations and universities. Both public meetings were held in the evening at a central location in the City of North Vancouver. Opening remarks were made by the Chair of the Committee (former Water Committee – October 2010 and Utilities Committee – October 2012). They were followed by presentations from the Province and Metro Vancouver. In 2012, a presentation was also made by the facilitator of the Joint Water Use Plan Consultative Committee (CC) on the recommended elements of the JWUP. An open house followed the presentations at the 2010 public meeting and participants were invited to read panels and provide comments and written feedback in areas including drinking water, fish and wildlife, recreation, culture and heritage, and hydropower. At the 2012 public meeting, facilitated table discussions were held following the presentations, where participants were given a discussion guide and invited to provide their feedback on the key elements of the draft JWUP including hydropower, reservoir operations, monitoring and communications and implementation schedule. During the public comment periods following the events, a total of 19 pieces of correspondence were received via email, mail, and feedback forms. A summary of the feedback obtained is provided in Section 2.3.
2.2.2 First Nations In April 2010, letters were sent and follow-up phone calls were made to 52 potentially affected First Nations and tribal councils/associations whose traditional territory lies within, overlaps with, or who have interest in territory within the subject area of the JWUP. The letter informed those First Nations of the public meeting and offered other opportunities for input, as well as the deadline for the receipt of input during the first comment period.
6650440 UC-23 Correspondence was received from the Tsleil-Waututh and Squamish Nations. Both First Nations indicated an interest in providing representatives on the CC. The Tsleil-Waututh Nation also emphasized the need for a bilateral agreement with Metro Vancouver on stewardship and potential socio-economic initiatives that may emerge from the planning process. The Squamish Nation noted the need to discuss aboriginal interests and the potential impacts of the JWUP process on those interests with Metro Vancouver through a process separate from the public process. The Squamish Nation participated as a member of the CC from January 2011 to July 2012, noting that it would take the recommendation of the CC into consideration when reviewing the draft JWUP. In addition, senior representatives from Metro Vancouver and the Squamish Nation met in March 2011 to discuss how they wished to be engaged during the JWUP process. In October 2012, following the endorsement by the CC of the key elements of the JWUP, Metro Vancouver sent letters to 48 potentially affected First Nations and tribal councils/associations. The number of affected First Nations had been reduced based on feedback following 2010 correspondence on the JWUP. The letter offered opportunities for input, as well as the deadline for the receipt of input during this comment period.
Metro Vancouver also approached the Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nation to meet and provide input on the recommended elements of the JWUP. At the time of writing this report, there are meetings scheduled with the Katzie First Nation and Squamish Nation on November 8 and 20, 2012, respectively. A table containing First Nations issues and comments raised during the engagement and consultation periods and Metro Vancouver responses can be found by visiting http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/water/planning/JWUPDocs/FirstNationsIRTable.pdf.
2.2.3 Metro Vancouver Members In September 2010, Metro Vancouver sent memoranda to inform the following committees about the initiation of the JWUP process: Municipal Water Conservation Coordinators, Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC) and the REAC Water Subcommittee. The CAO provided a verbal report to the Regional Administrative Advisory Committee (RAAC) about the JWUP process on September 22, 2010. Staff presented information about the JWUP process and public meetings to the regular meetings of the Municipal Water Conservation Coordinators and REAC. Starting in late 2010, and on an ongoing basis, the REAC Water Subcommittee has received regular updates on the JWUP process. Prior to the public meeting in 2012, Metro Vancouver sent memoranda to the Municipal Water Conservation Coordinators, REAC, and the REAC Water Subcommittee regarding the upcoming public meeting on the draft elements of the JWUP. Staff also presented on the JWUP process and upcoming public meeting to REAC on October 5th, 2012.
Municipal involvement also included staff from the District of North Vancouver and the District of West Vancouver participating as members of the CC.
2.2.4 Government Agencies and Ministries In September 2010, a JWUP Steering Committee (SC) was formed, which consists of applicable regulatory agencies and ministries with a mandate to provide advice to Metro Vancouver on the content and process for developing the JWUP. The SC membership can
6650440 UC-24 be found in Attachment 1. During the JWUP process, the SC met on an as needed basis to provide advice on scope and schedule issues that emerged during the project.
2.2.5 Consultative Committee Following the October 2010 JWUP public meeting, individuals interested in volunteering on the CC submitted expressions of interest, and subsequently were asked to submit an application form. In December 2010, the SC selected the members of the CC based on a set of selection criteria. The CC had representatives from government agencies; community, recreational and environmental associations; First Nations; and participating Metro Vancouver municipalities. The membership and affiliation lists are found in Attachment 2. Documented terms of reference guided the process and deliberations of the CC. The CC represented a broad spectrum of interests affected by the operations of the Capilano and Seymour water control facilities, such as drinking water, fisheries, wildlife, environment, recreation and culture. The CC was supported by Technical Working Groups for areas where additional knowledge was required including fish and recreation. The mandate of the CC was to identify and explore water use options, and alternatives to current operating practices, such as hydropower generation. The committee followed a structured planning process according to the provincial Water Use Plan Guidelines. The recommended package agreed to at their eighth meeting included changes for how much water should be released from Cleveland and Seymour Falls, monitoring studies, and other options related to the existing dams and control structures, and the proposed hydropower facilities.
The CC held 4 meetings in 2011 and 2012 respectively: January 19th, February 24th, March 31st, July 14th, 2011, and February 2nd, March 15th, May 31st, and July 19th, 2012. At its final meeting in July 2012, the CC unanimously endorsed a package of recommendations for the JWUP.
2.3 Public Input The following is a summary of the JWUP issues and comments raised by public participants during JWUP consultation (October 2010 to November 2012). A table containing issues and comments raised during the engagement and consultation periods and Metro Vancouver responses can be found by visiting http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/water/planning/JWUPDocs/PublicIRTable.pdf .
Public Priorities and Information
Drinking water supply: Participants emphasized the supply of clean and safe drinking water must continue to be Metro Vancouver’s top priority.
Public ownership: Several participants emphasized the need to keep water ownership and control within the public domain.
Need for more information and public consultation: A participant asked that the projects be submitted to a public referendum, considering the magnitude, and wanted more information about the outreach to request public input on the JWUP.
6650440 UC-25 Hydropower Generation and Proposed Hydropower Projects
Using spill water to generate electricity: Many participants were generally supportive of capturing energy from the dams. Concerns were raised from several people that power generation at Capilano and Seymour may prompt Metro Vancouver to pursue or allow future projects such as additional dams, run-of-river or independent power projects in the watersheds.
Amount generated and use of hydropower: Additional information about how much power and how the power generated will be used was requested. Participants inquired as to whether power generation would occur at a constant rate or be based on the amount of water available.
Costs: Participants were concerned about the cost to taxpayers to produce power at the dams. Several participants noted the environmental costs related to power, including transmission, construction and transportation must be considered.
Use of revenue obtained: Information was also requested regarding how the revenue from power generation will be used. A suggestion for the revenue included paying for fisheries restoration in the watersheds.
Environmental concerns: A participant inquired as to how Metro Vancouver accounts for its carbon footprint for any power facilities and several respondents wanted to ensure that hydropower generation will not change the temperature, quality and quantity of the water. Several participants raised concerns about climate change impacts and drought management plans.
Energy Self-Sufficiency: Participants expressed concern that population growth will negate energy self-sufficiency efforts. One respondent was concerned that the projects may not increase energy self-sufficiency due to the low water levels in the Capilano River during summer months. Participants encouraged Metro Vancouver to consider wind and solar power generation to supplement hydropower generation to achieve zero net energy.
Net cost of supply: A participant suggested that with the projected increases in wastewater rates for the region, the net cost of all Metro Vancouver projects and services needs to be managed for the overall benefit of the region’s residents. Some participants suggested hydropower generation and water supply should be cost-neutral. One respondent felt the cost and maintenance of power generation will exceed the benefits.
Education opportunities: Participants highlighted the potential for education opportunities related to hydropower generation in the watersheds and encouraged Metro Vancouver to consider this in their plans.
Alternative plans: Two participants asked about previous plans to produce hydropower in the Capilano River and why they did not proceed. One participant asked if a new Joint Water Use Plan would be developed if hydropower was found to be not economically viable.
Reservoir Operations and Environmental / Fish Flow Releases
Proposed increased flow regimes: Several participants asked why Metro Vancouver could not commit to immediately increasing flows in the Seymour River as the proposed levels are not linked to the proposed hydropower projects.
6650440 UC-26 Fish and wildlife: Several participants indicated that Metro Vancouver needs to ensure safe passage of fish in the watersheds and that hydropower generation must not negatively impact fish and wildlife. Some participants were concerned that changes in water flow may harm fish. Others suggested the power projects may present an opportunity to increase water flow in order to benefit fish populations.
Recreation: Participants highlighted the significance of public recreation areas at both Capilano and Seymour. It was noted that any hydropower projects should not diminish the recreational experience, either visually with structures or power lines, or by restricting access. River users requested advance notification of water releases from the dam and a release schedule to assist with planning recreation activities.
Culture and heritage: Two participants suggested that Metro Vancouver must maintain salmon runs in North Shore streams to preserve the culture and heritage of local First Nations.
Flood control and safety: A participant recommended Metro Vancouver should use the revenue from power generation to protect dams and water supply from natural disasters and to reduce the risk of flooding downstream.
Proposed Monitoring and Communications Activities
Communication of flow data: Several participants asked for clarification as to what real time flow data meant and how it could be accessed.
Monitoring fish populations and watershed health: Longer-term monitoring for fish was requested along with monitoring for minimum flows. A participant asked if existing monitoring stations would be used.
Funding monitoring activities: Information on the source of funding for monitoring activities was requested.
Implementation Schedule
Construction plans: Two participants raised concerns about budgeting and completion timetables on other Metro Vancouver projects and sought assurances regarding forecasting of the proposed hydropower projects. One participant commented that additional site investigation could prevent additional costs/delays due to ground conditions.
2.4 Supporting Communication Activities The engagement and consultation program was supported by a range of activities aimed at increasing awareness of the opportunity to become involved in the JWUP process and encouraging input. The deadline for receipt of input was incorporated in all of the outreach which included the following communication activities: · placement of advertisements in region-wide and local North Shore newspapers · distribution of notification flyers via e-mail to approximately 6,500 individuals and organizations on the JWUP and Sustainable Region Initiative SRI databases · notification to government agency and ministry staff · distribution of notification flyers to North Shore municipalities via Canada Post · media release and interviews with elected officials and staff · correspondence received via email, mail and feedback forms 6650440 UC-27 · materials posted on the Metro Vancouver JWUP website: http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/water/planning/Pages/JointWaterUsePlanSeym our-CapilanoWatersheds.aspx
3. ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives provided.
4. CONCLUSION
On September 21, 2012, the Board directed staff to proceed with the engagement and consultation process on the key elements of the draft JWUP and to provide the results when presenting the completed plan for Board approval. This report outlines the activities and findings of the engagement and consultation program which occurred between October 2010 and November 2012. Overall feedback received during the process was supportive of the draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watershed (JWUP). Further still, the Consultative Committee, representing a range of interests affected by the operations of the Capilano and Seymour water control facilities, unanimously endorsed a package of recommendations for the JWUP. Subject to the JWUP’s approval by the GVWD Board, the final engagement and consultation report will be included with the JWUP submission to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights for regulatory review.
Attachment 1: JWUP Steering Committee Membership Attachment 2: JWUP Consultative Committee Membership and Affiliation Lists
6650440 UC-28
Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds Steering Committee Members
Representative Organisation
Pieter Bekker, Manager Water Utility Regulation and Water Use Planning, Ministry of Environment
Julie Berardinucci, Regional Manager Water Stewardship, Lower Mainland, Ministry of Environment
Greg Wilson, Biologist Environmental Stewardship, Lower Mainland, Ministry of Environment
Corino Salomi, Area Manager Land Use Section, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Al Lill, Manager Living Rivers Georgia, Basin/Vancouver Island
Albert van Roodselaar, Department Utility Planning Department, Manager Metro Vancouver
Stan Woods, Senior Engineer Utility Planning Department, Metro Vancouver
4900082 Page 1 of 1 March 3, 2011 UC-29
Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds Consultative Committee Members
Public Groups
Beaver Canoe Club and Recreational Canoeing Association of British Columbia - Ellen Hong Ellen is a lawyer who currently sits on the executive board of the Beaver Canoe Club – which offers skills clinics on the Seymour River and offers education for paddlers. The Recreational Canoeing Association of BC provides certification and safety standards for canoeing and is involved in projects on the Seymour River including habitat, paddling and access enhancements, consultation on Large Woody Debris, flow gauge installation, bridge works and has some involvement on the Capilano River.
British Columbia Federation of Drift Fishers – Eric Carlisle Eric is a professional writer, avid fisherman of both the Capilano and Seymour Rivers and director of the B.C. Federation of Drift Fishers. The Federation of Drift Fishers strives to be the voice of the river angler.
Lynnmour South Inter-River Community Association – Norman Daniel Norm has an elementary and secondary school teaching background and is a member of his local community association. Norm is also an active member of the Seymour- Capilano Water Utility Projects Community Monitoring and Advisory Committee (CMAC).
Seymour Salmonid Society – Brian Smith Brian is a fish and wildlife biologist who has worked with the Seymour Salmonid Society for over 11 years and is currently manager of the Seymour Fish Hatchery. The Seymour Salmonid Society operates the Seymour River Fish Hatchery and Education Centre.
Steelhead Society of British Columbia and BC Federation of Fly Fishers - Poul Bech Poul has a forestry and fisheries background and is a director with the Steelhead Society of British Columbia. The Steelhead Society of B.C. aims to protect, enhance and restore wild salmon and steelhead habitat.
Vancouver Kayak Club – Tom Hoskin Tom is a biologist who is actively involved in North Shore river issues and is the secretary of the Vancouver Kayak Club. The Kayak Club is an organization of whitewater kayaking enthusiasts who organise trips, training and education for paddlers in the Lower Mainland area.
6686153 Page 1 of 2 08/11/2012
UC-30
Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds Consultative Committee Members
First Nation/Government/Agency
Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) - Corino Salomi, Area Manager, Oceans, Habitat & Enhancement Branch, Lower Fraser Area
District of North Vancouver - Fiona Dercole, Manager, Public Safety Section alternate Michelle Weston
District of West Vancouver - John McMahon, Manager of Utilities, Engineering and Transportation
Living Rivers Georgia Basin and Vancouver Island – Bill Cafferata, Chair, Partnership and Steering Committee. Forester and Retired Chair of the Forest Practices Board
Metro Vancouver – Albert van Roodselaar, Manager, Utility Planning Department
Metro Vancouver – Stan Woods, Senior Engineer, Facilities Planning, Utility Planning Department
Ministry of Environment (MoE) – Greg Wilson, Fisheries Biologist and Project Manager, Fish and Wildlife Section alternate Duane Jesson, Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations
Squamish Nation – Chief Bill Williams, Lead Negotiator Aboriginal Rights and Title alternates Randall Lewis and Tim O’Hara
6686153 Page 2 of 2 08/11/2012
UC-31 5.3
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Jeff Carmichael, Division Manager, Utility Planning Department Stan Woods, Senior Engineer, Utility Planning Department
Date: November 2, 2012
Subject: Initial Triple Bottom Line Analysis Results of the Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects
Recommendation:
That the Utilities Committee receive for information the report Initial Triple Bottom Line Analysis Results of the Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects, dated November 2, 2012.
1. PURPOSE
To provide initial triple bottom line analysis results for the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects as part of the Joint Water Use Plan (JWUP) process, as requested by Committee.
2. CONTEXT
The Utilities Committee received updates on the JWUP process and proposed hydropower projects at their meetings on July 11, 2012, and on September 12, 2012. At the latter meeting, the Committee requested information on the economic feasibility of the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects.
Initial Triple Bottom Line Analysis Results
An initial economic analysis has been completed for hydropower production at Capilano Reservoir. Although the capital cost estimates are very preliminary, the project is expected to have positive economic returns under a variety of conditions (Attachment). The project offers environmental benefits that contribute to Metro Vancouver’s Sustainable Region Initiatives for energy generation, greenhouse gas emission reductions, fish-related improvements, and recreational impacts, as well as potential operational benefits.
Initial economic analysis for hydropower production at Seymour Reservoir has also been completed (Attachment). These cost estimates are also very preliminary. This project may be economically viable in the future, but does not appear to be viable under current economic conditions. The project also offers similar environmental and social benefits to those listed above.
Based on the triple bottom line criteria described above, Metro Vancouver is, through the report titled Adoption of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds, recommending GVWD Board approval to apply to the Comptroller of Water UC-32 Rights for conditional water licences for the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects as part of the complete Joint Water Use Plan (JWUP) submission package.
Applying for conditional water licences is an initial step in the process of potential hydropower production. More detailed and increasingly accurate triple bottom line assessment of these potential projects, including economic assessment, will take place to ensure that they are only implemented if they continue to be economically viable and/or contribute to Metro Vancouver’s broader sustainability goals for the region.
3. ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives are presented.
Financial Implications
If either of these projects is undertaken, Metro Vancouver will use reserves or borrow funds to pay for their construction. Generated electricity would likely be sold to BC Hydro, creating revenues. Those revenues would quickly pay back borrowed funds for the proposed Capilano hydropower project and leave Metro Vancouver with a source of revenue after debt repayment. The proposed Seymour hydropower project would pay back the borrowed funds much more slowly, so is a less attractive investment.
4. CONCLUSION
The initial economic analysis for hydropower production at the Capilano Reservoir as part of the JWUP process demonstrates that the proposed project is economically viable under a reasonably robust set of future conditions. The potential Seymour Reservoir hydropower project may be economically feasible in the future, but does not appear to be under current conditions. Both potential projects provide environmental and operational benefits. More detailed and increasingly accurate triple bottom line assessments of these potential projects will take place to ensure that they are only implemented if they are economically viable and/or contribute to Metro Vancouver’s broader sustainability goals for the region.
ATTACHMENT
Capilano and Seymour Hydroelectric Projects: Initial Economic Results (6645523)
6630763 UC-33 ATTACHMENT. Capilano and Seymour Hydroelectric Projects: Initial Economic Results
Capilano Reservoir Potential Hydropower Project
Estimated Capital Cost $75 ‐ $90 million Estimated Annual Operating Cost $0.75 ‐ $0.9 million Estimated Annual Benefits $6 ‐ $10 million Estimated Payback 10 to 15 years Estimated Net Present Value positive $5 to $20 million
Seymour Reservoir Potential Hydropower Project
Estimated Capital Cost $25 ‐ $40 million Estimated Annual Operating Cost $0.25 ‐ $0.4 million Estimated Annual Benefits $1.4 ‐ $2.3 million Estimated Payback 20 to 35 years Estimated Net Present Value minus $5 to minus $20 million
UC-34 5.4
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Stan Woods, Senior Engineer, Utility Planning Department
Date: November 6, 2012
Subject: Adoption of the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds
Recommendation:
That the Board adopt the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated October 2012 and direct staff to submit the Plan along with water licence applications for the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower projects to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights.
1. PURPOSE
To have the GVWD Board adopt the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated October 2012 (Attachment 1) as the basis for staff to submit a complete JWUP submission to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights for regulatory review.
2. CONTEXT
In September 2012, the Board directed staff to proceed with public engagement on the Key Elements of the Joint Water Use Plan (JWUP) for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds (Attachment 2) and provide the results of this consultation when presenting the Plan for Board adoption. A separate report provides details on the Public Consultation and Engagement on the Key Elements of the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds. Since January 2011, Metro Vancouver has been working with key interested parties through a Consultative Committee (CC). At a meeting on July 19th the JWUP CC unanimously endorsed a JWUP package of recommendations as documented in the attached Executive Summary of the JWUP CC Report (Attachment 3). Staff have used it to identify the key elements of the attached JWUP to be submitted to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights.
2.1 Regulatory and Process Considerations in Developing the JWUP
Starting in 2007, the Board directed staff to consult with the Province and DFO on ways to improve the survival rate of salmonid smolts migrating out of Capilano Reservoir, address other fisheries issues in both Capilano and Seymour watersheds and explore hydropower opportunities in both watersheds. These early discussions identified the potential for a hydropower project on Cleveland Dam to make use of the existing dam infrastructure to produce hydropower, while also benefitting some of the fisheries issues in the Capilano watershed. One of the objectives in the JWUP process was to allow Metro Vancouver to explore the hydropower opportunities in both watersheds at a conceptual or feasibility stage of UC-35
engineering and at relatively low cost. It is proposed that Metro Vancouver apply as part of the complete JWUP submission package to the Comptroller of Water Rights for conditional water licences for the proposed Capilano and Seymour hydropower projects. Provincial staff have indicated that financial information on the proposed Capilano and Seymour hydropower should not be included in the submission package, as financial information is not considered in the JWUP review. At their last meeting on July 19, 2012 the JWUP Consultative Committee not only unanimously endorsed a JWUP package of recommendations but also asked Metro Vancouver to expedite the Capilano Hydropower Project because of the significant benefits associated with it. In July, the JWUP Steering Committee (composed of regulatory agencies) also asked Metro Vancouver to expedite the Capilano Hydropower project. The attached JWUP includes a commitment by Metro Vancouver to consider opportunities to expedite the Capilano Hydropower project.
2.2 Proposed Key Elements of the JWUP
The package of recommendations endorsed by the JWUP Consultative Committee includes all of the key elements of a JWUP. Staff used the JWUP package endorsed by the CC to create the key elements of the JWUP presented to the GVWD Board in September and the attached JWUP. The JWUP includes the following: · Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects · Proposed Reservoir Operation and Environmental/Fish Flow Releases · Proposed Monitoring and Communications Activities · Proposed Implementation Schedule
2.3 Expected Benefits of Implementing the JWUP
Assuming the JWUP is approved by the Board and the regulatory agencies, once fully implemented; it would provide the following expected benefits, relative to the existing situation: · Metro Vancouver would have gained regulatory approval and public support for its activities in the two watersheds; · the capacity to reliably supply clean, safe drinking water would be maintained at current levels, in the June to November period, even in dry years with low reservoir inflows; · improved passage around Cleveland Dam of out-migrating Steelhead trout and Coho salmon smolts; · after commissioning of the new smolt capture facilities the level of effort involved with the smolt monitoring program is expected to decrease; · improved water temperatures in the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam to enhance aquatic productivity; · improved conditions for fish in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam under most conditions (on average approximately a doubling of the fish habitat in the summer); · improved ability to control the rate of change in water flow from the Capilano Reservoir (ramping rates) to reduce the risk of stranding fish in the lower Capilano River;
UC-36 6667959
· reduction of greenhouse gases by generation of clean electricity from the water that would otherwise spill from the existing Capilano and Seymour Reservoirs; · a net reduction in operating costs for the drinking water system (given the revenue from the proposed hydropower projects); · significantly improved flows for angling, kayaking and canoeing in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam; · improved conditions for fish in the lower Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam under most conditions; and · improved flows for angling and kayaking in the Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam.
2.4 Next Steps
One of the key deliverables in the Board’s 2012 Action Plan is to complete the JWUP for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds this year. To meet this time line, work continues on completing the JWUP and the associated documents that are needed as part of a complete JWUP submission to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights. The JWUP submission package will include the following documents: · a complete Joint Water Use Plan (with appendices); · a report documenting the work of the consultative committee and their endorsed JWUP package of recommendations; · project definition reports for the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower projects along with water licence applications for the Hydropower projects; and · a summary of the public consultation and engagement process and results. Should the Board adopt the JWUP and its submission to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights, the Province has indicated it expects to take about 6 months to complete its regulatory review. Staff will keep the Board updated on the progress of the regulatory review and of any significant issues that may arise.
3. ALTERNATIVES
The Board may:
1. Adopt the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated October 2012 as the basis for staff to complete a JWUP submission package including water licence applications for the proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower projects to the Provincial Comptroller of Water Rights for regulatory review. or 2. Adopt the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated October 2012, but direct staff to modify the JWUP submission package to only include the proposed Capilano Hydropower project. Triple bottom line analysis under today’s conditions indicates that the overall benefits of the proposed Seymour Hydropower project are limited and the Board may decide not to apply for a water licence for hydropower production at Seymour at this time. or 3. Refer the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds back to staff with direction on which issues need further consideration.
UC-37 6667959
Alternative 1 is recommended, since the necessary information is already available for license applications for both Capilano and Seymour.
4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 Expected Costs of Implementing the JWUP
The costs for Metro Vancouver to monitor and report compliance with the JWUP would be higher than the existing situation. However, these costs are considered appropriate when compared to the monitoring costs of other water use plans adopted in other locations in British Columbia and considering the gained benefit of hydropower. Through the JWUP process, Metro Vancouver has explored the hydropower opportunities in both watersheds at a feasibility stage of engineering. Assuming the Comptroller of Water Rights approves the JWUP, Metro Vancouver expects to initiate additional preliminary engineering studies of the proposed Capilano hydropower project and, based on the favourable economics, proceed to the detailed engineering design phase of the proposed Capilano hydropower project including identification of the specific assessments needed to minimize and mitigate the potential impacts of the construction and operation of the project. The proposed Seymour Hydropower project would not be considered for implementation until the Capilano Hydropower project is completed. The JWUP maintains the capacity to reliably supply clean, safe drinking water under the stressed conditions that are used to design the drinking water system (e.g., the June to November period, of dry years with low reservoir inflows). Analysis also shows that the change in fish flows from December to May still maintains drinking water supply at or above required levels.
5. CONCLUSION
The JWUP Consultative Committee, consisting of Metro Vancouver, provincial and federal agencies, municipalities with lands adjoining the watersheds, First Nations, and other stakeholders, has endorsed the key elements of the JWUP for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds. Feedback from the public on the key elements of the JWUP was generally supportive of the plan endorsed by the JWUP Consultative Committee. This report recommends Board adoption of the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds as the basis for staff to complete a JWUP submission package to the Provincial Comptroller of water rights for regulatory review.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated October 2012 (6667431).
2. Key Elements of the Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds dated August 8, 2012 (6668001). 3. Executive Summary, Consultative Committee Report, Capilano - Seymour Joint Water Use Plan dated October 25, 2012 (6675884).
UC-38 6667959
ATTACHMENT 1
2012 Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds
UC-39
Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds
OCTOBER 2012
UC-40 Acronyms
B.C. Province of British Columbia CC Consultative Committee of the JWUP CMS or m3/s Cubic meters per second
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent DFO Department of Fisheries and Ocean El. Elevation ft Feet ft3/s Cubic feet per second GHG Greenhouse Gases GVWD Greater Vancouver Water District GW h Gigawatt hours
HB ∙ Howell-Bunger JWUP Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds km Kilometre km2 Square kilometres kV Kilovolt LSCR Lower Seymour Conservation Reserve m Metre M m3 Million cubic meters
MAD∙ Mean annual discharge ML/d Million litres per day MW Megawatt
Water Licences: #C Conditional Water Licence #F Final Water Licence
Page i
UC-41 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF WORKS ...... 1 2.1 Capilano Watershed ...... 1 2.1.1 Location ...... 1 2.1.2 The Capilano System ...... 1 2.1.3 Existing Works and Operations ...... 1 2.1.4 Existing Licensed Rights ...... 2 2.1.5 Proposed Hydropower Facility ...... 2 2.2 Seymour Watershed ...... 5 2.2.1 Location ...... 5 2.2.2 The Seymour System...... 5 2.2.3 Existing Works and Operations ...... 5 2.2.4 Existing Licensed Rights ...... 6 2.2.5 Proposed Hydropower Facility ...... 6 3.0 HYDROLOGY OF THE CAPILANO-SEYMOUR BASIN ...... 8 3.1 The Capilano Watershed ...... 8 3.2 The Seymour Watershed...... 9 3.2.1 Seymour River Watershed ...... 9 3.2.2 Reservoir Watershed ...... 9 3.2.3 Lower Seymour River Watershed ...... 9 4.0 OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR EXISTING (BASE CASE) FACILITY ...... 10 4.1 Role of Facilities in the GVWD System ...... 10 4.2 Water Use at Capilano-Seymour Facilities ...... 10 4.3 Emergencies and Dam Safety ...... 10 4.3.1 The Capilano Facility ...... 10 4.3.2 The Seymour Facility ...... 11 4.4 Operation of Works for Proposed Diversion and Use of Water ...... 11 4.4.1 Capilano Reservoir Levels ...... 11 4.4.2 Seymour Reservoir Levels ...... 11 4.4.3 Flood Mitigation Provisions ...... 11 4.4.4 GVWD Withdrawals ...... 12 4.4.5 Fish Flow Release ...... 12
Page ii
UC-42 4.4.6 Ramping Rates ...... 13 5.0 PROPOSED JWUP MONITORING PACKAGE ENDORSED BY THE CC ...... 13 5.1 Monitoring Activities Unique to the Capilano Watershed ...... 13 6.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JWUP RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 14 7.0 EXPECTED WATER MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS OF THE JWUP ...... 14 7.1 Raw Water Quantity and Quality ...... 14 7.1.1 The Capilano System ...... 14 7.1.2 The Seymour System...... 14 7.2 Drinking Water Quantity and Quality ...... 14 7.3 Riparian Rights ...... 14 7.4 Fisheries ...... 14 7.4.1 The Capilano System ...... 14 7.4.2 The Seymour System...... 15 7.5 Wildlife Habitat ...... 15 7.6 Flood Mitigation Provisions ...... 16 7.7 Recreation ...... 16 7.7.1 The Capilano System ...... 16 7.7.2 The Seymour System...... 16 7.8 Culture ...... 16 7.9 Industrial Use of Water ...... 16 7.10 Other Licensed Uses of Water ...... 16 7.11 Electrical Power Generation ...... 16 7.11.1 The Capilano System ...... 16 7.11.2 The Seymour System...... 17 7.12 First Nations Considerations ...... 17 7.13 Archaeological Considerations ...... 17 7.14 Net Cost of Water Supply ...... 17 8.0 RECORDS AND REPORTS...... 18 8.1 Compliance Reporting ...... 18 8.2 Non-Compliance Reporting ...... 18 8.3 Monitoring Program Reporting ...... 18 9.0 PLAN REVIEW ...... 18 10.0 NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES ...... 18
Page iii
UC-43 APPENDIX A: PROPOSED HYDROPOWER PROJECT DESCRIPTION...... 19 APPENDIX B: HYDROLOGY OF CAPILANO WATERSHED ...... 20 APPENDIX C: HYDROLOGY OF SEYMOUR WATERSHED...... 21 APPENDIX D: RAMPING RATES ...... 22 APPENDIX E: WATER LICENCES ...... 23 APPENDIX F: MINIMUM DAM RELEASES ...... 24
Page iv
UC-44 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Description of Capilano Hydropower Project Concept ...... 3 Table 2: Description of Seymour Hydropower Project Concept ...... 6
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Conceptual Layout of Capilano Hydropower Project ...... 5 Figure 2: Conceptual Layout of Seymour Hydropower Project ...... 8
Page v
UC-45 1.0 INTRODUCTION The operating conditions proposed in this plan reflect the recommendations provided by the Capilano- Seymour Joint Water Use Plan (JWUP) Consultative Committee (CC). The basis for the proposed terms and conditions to be authorized under the Water Act for the beneficial use of water at the Capilano and Seymour reservoirs are set out in this document. Future reference to this facility includes all the works including: Cleveland Dam, Seymour Falls Dam, associated reservoirs, Capilano Powerhouse and Seymour Powerhouse. Metro Vancouver has established a process for developing the JWUP in accordance with the thirteen steps outlined in the provincial Water Use Plan Guidelines. The process integrates technical study and evaluation with structured decision-making and public consultation. Since January 2011, Metro Vancouver has been working with key interested parties through a CC, to develop the key elements of a JWUP that reflects the unique characteristics of the Capilano and Seymour watersheds. The JWUP CC has developed a consensus outcome and unanimously endorsed the final report. Refer to the Capilano- Seymour Joint Water Use Plan: Consultative Committee Report (October 2012) for details on the consultative process, interests, objectives, performance measures, values associated with operating alternatives, and details of the proposed monitoring program. Through the Water Use Plan interest based process, a recommendation was reached whereby fisheries, domestic water, and recreation interests were all improved over current operations. The proposed conditions for the operation of Metro Vancouver’s facilities would not come into effect until ordered under the British Columbia Water Act. 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF WORKS 2.1 Capilano Watershed 2.1.1 Location The Capilano River basin is a mountainous catchment located in the Western South Coast Region of British Columbia. The Capilano River originates at Capilano Mountain, situated 33 km north of the Burrard Inlet and flows southward. 2.1.2 The Capilano System The Capilano River Watershed drainage area is 212 km2 with approximately 7% of its area below the Cleveland Dam. Capilano River has a total length of 33 km, having 6 km downstream of the dam. There are eleven main tributaries in this system, examples of which are Eastcap Creek, Sister Creek, Brothers Creek, and Hollsgate Creek. The alpine reservoir for the Capilano system is Palisade Lake. The usable storage capacity of Capilano Reservoir is 55 M m3 with an additional 8.5 M m3 of storage available at Palisade Reservoir. ∙ ∙ 2.1.3 Existing Works and Operations Capilano Reservoir The Capilano Reservoir is part of the Greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD) Watershed and has restricted public access. The Capilano Reservoir is normally full during the fall, winter and spring months. During these periods the reservoir fills to its maximum storage capacity with water spilling from it.
Page 1
UC-46 Palisade Reservoir The Palisade Reservoir has a usable storage capacity of 8.5 M m3. Palisade Lake can be used for inflow augmentation during the dry season. It can help to maintain the lake level of Capilano Reservoir during dry periods and improve source water quality by adding clear,∙ cold and well-oxygenated water. Capilano Fish Hatchery The Capilano Fish Hatchery is located approximately 340 m downstream of the Cleveland Dam on the East bank of the Capilano River. The fish hatchery uses water from the same intake as the domestic water supply, as well as groundwater seepage from drainage tunnels originating from the East Abutment of the dam. All water used by the hatchery is discharged directly back into the Capilano River. Capilano Raw Water Pump Station, Twin Tunnels & Energy Recovery System
Raw water from the Capilano Reservoir with a water elevation range of 118.5 m to 145.9 m would be pumped approximately 7.1 km through a future tunnel (estimated completion is early 2014) to the inlet blending of the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant at an elevation of 194 m. The Capilano Raw Water Pump Station controls the flow directed from Capilano to the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant. Treated drinking water is stored in the filtration plant clearwell with a portion to be returned through a twin tunnel by gravity to an energy recovery turbine located above the break head tank at the Capilano Reservoir service area. The treated water then enters the distribution system to supply the Capilano service area directly, or is pumped again to service higher elevations in the Capilano area (Prospect Reservoir and Glenmore Tank) by way of a Cleveland Dam Pump House at the base of the Cleveland Dam. Water from the Capilano Reservoir also provides the hydraulic energy used to power pumps in the Cleveland Dam Pump House to maintain fish flows to the downstream Capilano Fish Hatchery. 2.1.4 Existing Licensed Rights Restrictions on the amount of water drawn from the reservoir for use in the regional water system are governed by water licenses issued by the Province of British Columbia. A list of existing water licenses is provided in Appendix E. 2.1.5 Proposed Hydropower Facility This section provides a brief description of the proposed Capilano hydropower facilitates. A detailed description of the proposed hydropower facilities is provided in Appendix A. The proposed Capilano hydropower project has the following elements: a new surface intake on the west side of Capilano Reservoir and an underground tunnel and shaft connecting to an underground powerhouse discharging to the existing diversion tunnel that in turn discharges to the west side of the lower end of the Cleveland Dam plunge pool (see project description (Table 1) and layout (Figure 1) below). All facilities would be located on lands owned by the Greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD).
Page 2
UC-47 Table 1: Description of Capilano Hydropower Project Concept
ITEM DESCRIPTION The conceptual hydropower option was selected because it: 1. Utilizes existing dam features (low level outlet tunnel); 2. Powerhouse located underground, thereby avoiding visual impacts; 3. Provides effective fish screening, handling and transport past Cleveland Dam to the Capilano River downstream; 4. Provides a means to release flows into the downstream Capilano River for General Concept fishery/environmental needs in a controlled manner; and 5. Provides a source of warm near-surface water from the reservoir to be delivered to the downstream Capilano River to the benefit of fishery resources. The selected option includes underground construction work associated with tunnels, shaft(s) and a powerhouse cavern. An intake structure having a maximum withdrawal rate for power generation of approximately 25 m3/s would be constructed on the West Abutment of the existing dam. The intake will have an approximate invert elevation of 130 m. The intake would be equipped with a trashrack with a trash cleaning system, stop logs, and a vertical slide gate for use in isolating and dewatering of the Intake downstream facilities. Immediately downstream of the Intake would be a Modular Inclined Screen and its associated Fish Bypass Pipeline System. The screen would be operational at all times of the year with the exception of brief moments when the screen is rotated for cleaning purposes. The Fish Bypass Pipeline System would carry the screened fish to a Fish Collection/Transport Facility located downstream of the dam on the West bank that is accessible by truck. During the two-month smolt out-migration period of the year, April 15 to June 15, the screened fish would be sorted, tagged and transported below the dam where they will be released. During the other 10 months of the year, any screened fish would be collected, transported and released to the lower Capilano River downstream of Cleveland Dam or back into the Capilano Reservoir (as agreed to by the fisheries agencies and the JWUP Monitoring Committee). A combination of a high level tunnel and vertical shaft is planned to carry the Hydraulic Conduit water to the underground powerhouse. The high level tunnel alignment is located for Hydropower close to the gravity dam section and is assumed to be lined and grouted to Flows mitigate dam safety concerns. The vertical shaft is also assumed to be lined and grouted to carry the internal pressure of water. The high level tunnel and vertical shaft would have an inside diameter of approximately 4 meters.
Page 3
UC-48 The underground powerhouse has been laid out for two horizontal shaft Francis turbine units (2 x 8 MW = 16 MW installed capacity). The placement of the powerhouse is relatively flexible and allows for changes if required following the conduct of geotechnical field investigations. The approximate elevation of the two Francis units is 59 m. The underground powerhouse cavern will be about 40 m by 18 m with an excavated height of 18 m. Connection to the existing elevator shaft is desired to minimize costs associated with providing access. The tunnel from the elevator to the new underground powerhouse should be aligned to avoid Powerhouse / relocation of existing Howell-Bunger (HB) valves. The tailrace from the Tailrace underground powerhouse would discharge to the existing diversion tunnel that in turn discharges to the West side of the lower end of the Cleveland Dam plunge pool. An additional connection to the penstock downstream of the fish exclusion screens and upstream of the turbine isolation valve would allow for the controlled release of fish flows of between 0.57 m3/s and 4 m3/s. This fish flow would release water into the lower Capilano River through the existing diversion tunnel. A stand alone step-up transformer would be required to enable direct connection Switchyard Not and metering to BC Hydro transmission line. Generators would be generating at Required 13.8 kV and buried cables will be used to carry the power to the expanded GVWD 69 kV substation located on the West side of Cleveland Dam. Total Annual System modeling for the JWUP Consultative Committee estimates the average Energy annual energy generation at about 57 GW h per year.
∙
Page 4
UC-49
Figure 1: Conceptual Layout of Capilano Hydropower Project
2.2 Seymour Watershed 2.2.1 Location The Seymour River Watershed is a mountainous catchment located in the Western South Coast region of British Columbia. Seymour River originates at Coastal Mountain near Loch Lomond and flows about 39 km to Burrard Inlet. 2.2.2 The Seymour System The Seymour River Watershed drainage area is 186 km2 with approximately 32% of its area below the Seymour Falls Dam. Seymour River has a total length of 39 km, having 19 km below the dam. There are twenty tributaries in this system. Loch Lomond and Burwell Reservoirs are the alpine reservoirs for the Seymour system. There is a usable storage capacity of 27 M m3 in the main reservoir with an additional combined 19 M m3 of storage available at alpine Reservoirs. ∙ 2.2.3 Existing∙ Works and Operations Seymour Reservoir The Seymour Reservoir is part of the GVWD Watershed and has restricted public access. The Seymour Reservoir is normally full during the fall, winter and spring months. During these periods the reservoir fills to its maximum storage capacity with large amounts of water spilling from it.
Page 5
UC-50 Alpine Reservoirs Loch Lomond and Burwell Lake have a combined available storage of 19 M m3. These alpine lakes can be used for inflow augmentation during dry season and help maintain the lake level of Seymour Reservoir during dry periods and improve source water quality. Moreover, they can improve∙ source water quality by adding clear, cold and well-oxygenated water and assist in the reduction of ammonia production in Seymour Lake. Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project will provide a wide range of benefits in water quality and system reliability. It will also result in the potential for the Capilano and Seymour drinking water distribution systems downstream of the Filtration Plant to be operated as an inter-connected system. Seymour Fish Hatchery The Seymour Fish Hatchery is located approximately 300 m downstream of the Seymour Falls Dam on the West bank of the Seymour River. The fish hatchery uses water from the same intake as the domestic water supply at a rate of 0.2 m3/s. All water used by the hatchery is discharged directly back into the Seymour River. The hatchery is managed by the Seymour Salmonid Society which uses the fish hatchery to help sustain a viable sports fishery. Each year the hatchery produces approximately 30,000 Steelhead trout, 120,000 Coho salmon, 100,000 to 600,000 Chum salmon, and 1.0 to 1.2 million Pink salmon (every two years). 2.2.4 Existing Licensed Rights Restrictions on the amount of water drawn from the reservoir for use in the regional water system are governed by water licenses issued by the Province of British Columbia. A list of existing licensed water licenses is provided in Appendix E. 2.2.5 Proposed Hydropower Facility This section provides a brief description of the proposed Seymour hydropower facilitates. A detailed description of the proposed hydropower facilities is provided in Appendix A. The proposed hydropower project on Seymour Falls Dam has the following elements: water for power generation that would be diverted at the existing HB valves, a new penstock routed along the downstream face of the dam and connecting to a surface powerhouse on the East bank of the Seymour River that would discharge to a new tailrace channel that in turn discharges to the East side of the Seymour River (see project description (Table 2) and layout (Figure 2) below). Table 2: Description of Seymour Hydropower Project Concept
ITEM DESCRIPTION General Water for power generation would be diverted at the existing Howell-Bunger Concept valves to a surface powerhouse on East bank of the Seymour River. The conceptual hydropower option was selected because it: 1. Utilizes existing dam features (intake at existing HB valves) with minimal modification; 2. Provides effective fish screening at the intake structure;
Page 6
UC-51 ITEM DESCRIPTION 3. Penstock located along the downstream face of the dam with minimal exposed length; and 4. Powerhouse is located to avoid interference with the dam during construction and subsequent operation. Powerhouse location on the East bank provides direct connection from the tailrace to the deepest area downstream of the spillway. Intake The intake structure to be located on the North West face of the Seymour Falls Dam will take water from the approximate elevation of 194.6 m. The conceptual intake structure has the following approximate dimensions: 8.5 m wide by 2 m and 23 m in height. Water for power generation is to be diverted at the Howell-Bunger valves’ intake and the maximum withdrawal rate for power generation is about 15 m3/s. A two stage intake tower is envisaged as the hydropower flows will require fish exclusion while Howell-Bunger flows would be screened for smaller debris only (50 – 100mm clear spacing). Underwater construction would be required as this is the lowest point of the reservoir. Water diverted for power generation would be screened with a dual- flow travelling fish-exclusion screen. The design and construction of the screens is very similar to the screens currently used at the drinking water intake. A separate high-discharge opening would be designed for operation of the HB valves. Hydraulic Intakes from both HB valves would be connected to the penstock by installing Conduit for a manifold and relocating the HB valves. The concrete roof above the HB Hydropower valves will be extended to protect the HB valves from spill flows. Penstock is Flows routed along the downstream face of the dam and is protected with concrete against spillway flows and debris impact. The penstock would transition to a buried penstock prior to entering the powerhouse. The hydraulic conduit for the hydropower flows is envisaged to be about 2.5 m in diameter. Powerhouse / A surface powerhouse on the East bank with a preliminary plan for one Tailrace Kaplan unit. A 450 m access road to the powerhouse location is needed from the existing road on the East side of the Seymour River. The proposed powerhouse would be 15 m by 9 m with a height of 15 m. The powerhouse floor would be constructed at an approximate elevation of 184.30 m. Switchyard A step-up transformer will be located inside the powerhouse electrical room. An overhead or buried transmission line will, with a length of approximately 11 km, be used to carry the power to the existing BC Hydro system near the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant. Opportunities to reduce the eventual costs of the power-line through possible synergizes with installation of Seymour Main #5 (North) from Seymour Falls Dam to the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant will be explored. Total Annual System modeling for the JWUP Consultative Committee estimates the average Energy annual energy generation at about 7.2 GW h per year.
∙
Page 7
UC-52
Figure 2: Conceptual Layout of Seymour Hydropower Project
3.0 HYDROLOGY OF THE CAPILANO-SEYMOUR BASIN 3.1 The Capilano Watershed The total length of the Capilano River is approximately 33 km; other than seasonal storms and spring snowmelt it also receives runoff from two large tributaries, the Eastcap Creek and Sister Creek which are approximately 11.5 km and 6.5 km upstream from the Cleveland Dam, respectively. The total watershed area is 197 km2 at Cleveland Dam. The maximum length and width of the watershed is about 22 km in the North-South direction and 14 km in East-West direction. The width of the lower part of the catchment reduces gradually downstream from the Palisade Lake to the Cleveland Dam. There are many small lakes inside the basin, but only Palisade Lake is being used as an important source of emergency water storage. The catchment area of Palisade Lake is 2.3 km2. The Capilano watershed is characterized by rugged topography, steep rocky slopes at higher elevations, and mountain peaks 900 to 1760 m above sea level. The minimum basin elevation is 146 m with a mean basin elevation of about 1042 m above sea level upstream of Cleveland Dam. Storage available between the normal operating range of El. 123 m and 145.9 m is estimated from the stage-storage curve at about 46.7 M m3. The maximum depth of the reservoir is about 75 m.
The watershed is covered by a young∙ forest (40-120 years old). The vegetation in the lower elevations of the watershed includes Western Hemlock, Amabilis Fir, Western Red Cedar, Sitka Spruce and Douglas
Page 8
UC-53 Fir. In the mid-elevation yellow cedar and mountain hemlock are the dominant species. The highest elevation of alpine Tundra zone includes herbs, lichens, and low alpine shrubs. Appendix B, the Hydrology of Capilano Watershed (2008), describes in detail the physiography, hydrometeorological network, climatology, streamflow statistics, reservoir inflow, outflow and storage relationship, and reservoir operational inflow forecast. 3.2 The Seymour Watershed 3.2.1 Seymour River Watershed The Seymour River receives runoff from several tributaries such as Clipper Creek, Fannin Creek, Jamieson Creek, Orchid Creek, Syeba Creek, Balfour Creek, Gibbens Creek, Burwell Creek, Paton Creek, Couger Creek, Needles Creek, Hayes Creek, Intake Creek, Elsay Creek, Hydraulic Creek, Suicide Creek, and Canyon Creek. The total watershed area is about 185.7 km2 at the river mouth. The maximum length and width of the watershed is about 39 km in the North-South direction and 7.5 km in the East-West direction. The width of the lower part of the catchment gradually reduces downstream of Intake Creek to Burrard Inlet. The minimum and maximum basin elevations are 5 m and 1737 m, respectively, with a mean basin elevation of about 746 m above sea level. There are many small lakes inside the basin, but only Loch Lomond and Burwell Lake, with catchment areas of approximately 2.5 km2 and 3.7 km2, respectively, are currently being used for controlled storage of water. 3.2.2 Reservoir Watershed The total watershed area at Seymour Falls Dam is approximately 125.9 km2 (i.e. “reservoir watershed”). The maximum length and width of the watershed is about 20 km in the North-South direction and 7.5 km in the East-West direction. The reservoir watershed is characterized by rugged topography and steep rocky slopes at higher elevations with mountain peaks at elevations reaching 900 m to 1737 m above sea level. The minimum and maximum basin elevations are 190 m and 1737 m, respectively, with a mean basin elevation of about 948 m above sea level. Usable storage available between the normal operating range of 196.8 m (737 ft) and about 214.8 m (796 ft) with stop logs in place is estimated from the stage-storage curve to be about 32 M m3. The maximum depth of the reservoir is about 23 m without stoplogs and approximately 24.8 m with stoplogs in place. ∙ The watershed is covered by a young forest which is approximately 40-120 years old. The vegetation in the lower elevations of the watershed includes Western Hemlock, Amabilis Fir, Western Red Cedar, Sitka Spruce, and Douglas Fir. In the mid-elevation, Yellow Cedar and Mountain Hemlock are the dominant species. The highest elevation of alpine tundra zone includes herbs, lichens, and low alpine shrubs. 3.2.3 Lower Seymour River Watershed The drainage area of the Lower Seymour River, between Seymour Falls Dam and Burrard Inlet, is about 60 km2. The Lower Seymour Watershed is a narrow valley, which rises in the East to an elevation of 1455 m (Mt. Seymour) and 1466 m in the West (Coliseum Mountain, Lynn Ridge and the Needles). The drainage area within the Lower Seymour Conservation Reserve is pristine land, which contains a mosaic of forests providing a variety of habitats as well as educational and recreational opportunities. Some forests are 350 years old, and they are highly significant from a regional and provincial perspective due to their ecological value, representation of rare and endangered ecosystems, and provision of habitat for
Page 9
UC-54 many rare and endangered wildlife species. The drainage area inside the District of North Vancouver is an urban watershed where land use patterns include residential, commercial, and recreational components. The Lower Seymour River receives runoff from several tributaries which originate on both sides of the river. The river area is characterized by a cobble-gravel-bed starting from the Seymour Falls Dam (upstream) and ending approximately at the Dollarton Highway in District of North Vancouver (downstream). Only the last 0.9 km of the river, which reaches between the Dollarton Highway and the Burrard Inlet, is a flat sand-gravel bed reach. The 2 km river section between the Swinburne Avenue of the District of North Vancouver and the Twin Bridges in the Lower Seymour Conservation Reserve area is a bedrock canyon. The channel widens and narrows along the entire length of the river with riffle pool system. The Lower Seymour Watershed aquatic habitats include the Seymour River, tributaries, several lakes, and wetlands which support salmon, trout and a diversity of other species. Appendix C, Hydrology of the Seymour Watershed (2009), describes in detail the physiography, hydrometeorological network, climatology, streamflow statistics, reservoir inflow, outflow and storage relationship, and reservoir operational inflow forecast. 4.0 OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR EXISTING (BASE CASE) FACILITY 4.1 Role of Facilities in the GVWD System Metro Vancouver supplies drinking water for the municipal members using a system of watersheds, dams, reservoirs, pumping stations and pipelines. The Capilano and Seymour Reservoirs are classified as a “coastal reservoirs” where the majority of inflow results from seasonal storms and spring snowmelt which is collected and stored in the Capilano, Seymour and Coquitlam Reservoirs. The Capilano and Seymour Reservoirs are one of the three main drinking water supply sources for Metro Vancouver. Together, these systems currently supply about 70 percent of the region’s drinking water, while Coquitlam supplies the rest. 4.2 Water Use at Capilano-Seymour Facilities Management of the region’s drinking water is guided by Metro Vancouver’s Drinking Water Management Plan (DWMP). The goals of the DWMP are to: · Provide clean, safe drinking water; · Ensure sustainable use of water resources; and · Ensure the efficient supply of water. Moreover, the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant and related infrastructure on the North Shore would supply filtered water from both the Seymour and Capilano Reservoirs to the municipal members. The lower watersheds of both the Seymour and Capilano rivers are used for a range of recreational activities including hiking, picnicking, fishing, swimming, canoeing and kayaking. Metro Vancouver will continue to support and preserve the unique recreational activities offered in the lower watershed areas. 4.3 Emergencies and Dam Safety 4.3.1 The Capilano Facility Emergencies and dam safety requirements shall take precedence over the operational constraints outlined in the JWUP. Emergencies include, but are not limited to, actual or potential loss of power to customers, mechanical failures, environmental incidents or water quality disruptions. Dam safety requirements for
Page 10
UC-55 operations are outlined in the Cleveland Dam: Operation, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual issued by Metro Vancouver Operation & Maintenance Department. Operation instructions for undertaking reservoir drawdowns and refilling for dam safety are described in the Operation, Maintenance and Surveillance (OMS) manual. Community notification procedures are documented in the Cleveland Dam Emergency Response Plan. 4.3.2 The Seymour Facility Emergencies and dam safety requirements shall take precedence over the operational constraints outlined in the JWUP. Emergencies include, but are not limited to, actual or potential loss of power to customers, mechanical failures, environmental incidents or water quality disruptions. Dam safety requirements for operations are outlined in the Seymour Falls Dam: Operation, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual issued by Metro Vancouver Operation & Maintenance Department. Operation instructions for undertaking reservoir drawdowns and refilling for dam safety are described in the OMS manual. Community notification procedures are documented in the Seymour Falls Dam Emergency Response Plan. 4.4 Operation of Works for Proposed Diversion and Use of Water As a result of the Capilano-Seymour JWUP consultation process, Metro Vancouver proposes to operate its facilities in accordance with the conditions described in the following sections. 4.4.1 Capilano Reservoir Levels The Capilano Reservoir is normally full during the fall, winter and spring months at a reservoir elevation of 145.9 m. 4.4.2 Seymour Reservoir Levels The Seymour Reservoir is normally full during the fall, winter and spring months at a reservoir elevation of 212.9 m; while the normal full supply level with stop logs in place is 214.8 m. 4.4.3 Flood Mitigation Provisions 4.4.3.1 Cleveland Dam Historical rainfall records indicate that annual maximum flood peaks occur between September and May with the potential for extreme floods being greatest in the period from October to February. The Capilano Reservoir is not effective at attenuating the flood peaks of major storms because of its relatively small storage volume and short response time. The intent of flood operating procedures is to allow the flood peaks to pass downstream while trying to minimize any sudden increases or decreases in flow in the river downstream especially at low flow conditions. The ramping rates established for the maximum rate of increase or decrease of discharge from the Capilano Reservoir is given in Appendix D. 4.4.3.2 Seymour Falls Dam Historical rainfall records indicate that annual maximum flood peaks occur between September and May with the potential for extreme floods being greatest in the period from October to February.
Page 11
UC-56 The Seymour Reservoir is not effective at reducing the flood peaks of major storms because of its relatively small storage volume and short response time. The intent of flood operating procedures is to allow the flood peaks to pass downstream while trying to minimize any sudden increases or decreases in flow in the river downstream especially at low flow conditions. The ramping rates established for the maximum rate of increase or decrease of discharge from the Seymour Reservoir is given in Appendix D. 4.4.4 GVWD Withdrawals 4.4.4.1 Capilano Reservoir Restrictions on the amount of water drawn from the Capilano Reservoir for use in the regional water system are governed by water licenses issued by the Province of British Columbia (Water License #C123813, #C016296, and #F008691). Once drawn from the reservoir, the water is contained within a closed system until delivered to the Water District’s customers. No flows are normally discharged from the water distribution system directly to the environment. 4.4.4.2 Seymour Reservoir Restrictions on the amount of water drawn from the Seymour Reservoir for use in the regional water system are governed by water licenses issued by the Province of British Columbia (Water License #C123895, #C016298, #F008689 and #F008690). Once drawn from the reservoir, the water is contained within a closed system until delivered to the Water District’s customers. No flows are normally discharged from the water distribution system directly to the environment. 4.4.5 Fish Flow Release 4.4.5.1 Capilano River The JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested increases to the minimum fish flow releases from Capilano Reservoir to the lower Capilano River under most conditions (JWUP Consultative Committee, Alternative 3E). However, new water control facilities will have to be built in conjunction with the proposed hydropower project to enable the delivery of these new fish flow releases. When undertaking unusual maintenance or other unusual or emergency conditions minimum fish flows may be reduced to 0.57 m3/s if required. Fish flow releases above 0.57 m3/s, may be released at reservoir elevations above 130 m according to the June 1 to November 30 table provided in Appendix F, and during the winter (December 1 to May 31) period when lake levels are above 130 m. During the December 1 to May 31 period, the new Capilano minimum fish flow release would be 1.2 m3/s, providing that the water level in Capilano Reservoir is above 130 m. 4.4.5.2 Seymour River The JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested increases to the minimum fish flow releases from Seymour Reservoir to the lower Seymour River under most conditions (JWUP Consultative Committee, Alternative 4D). Minimum fish flow releases, in the June 1 to November 30 period, will be according to the table provided in Appendix F. During the December 1 to May 31 period the new Seymour minimum fish flow release would be 1.36 m3/s. When undertaking unusual maintenance or other unusual or emergency conditions minimum fish flows may be reduced to 0.57 m3/s if required.
Page 12
UC-57 4.4.6 Ramping Rates Ramping rates are used to limit the speed at which discharge flow rates will change whenever set points are changed and/or the inflows to the reservoir change quickly (i.e. storm conditions). Appendix D illustrates the ramping rates for increasing and decreasing flows with respect to Cleveland Dam (Drum Gate, Upper Outlet Slide Gates and Lower Outlet Howell-Bunger Valves) and Seymour Falls Dam (Howell Bunger Valves and Fish Valves). The increasing discharge ramping rates are set in order to limit the speed at which the flows increase. This gives warning to anyone whom may be downstream. The decreasing discharge ramping rates are set in order to limit the speed at which the flows decrease. This will prevent fish from being stranded at the sides of the river.
5.0 PROPOSED JWUP MONITORING PACKAGE ENDORSED BY THE CC As recommended in the Provincial Water Use Planning Guidelines, the JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested a number of monitoring and communications activities as part of the JWUP. The following provides an overview of the activities that are common to the two watersheds: · Monitoring and annual reporting of reservoir water levels, drinking water withdrawals, fish flow releases and hydropower withdrawals (when commissioned); · Monitoring and annual reporting of river flows, at one location, in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and at one location in the lower Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam along with analysis and reporting of the rate of flow changes (ramping); · Assessments needed for the final design of a hydropower project and/or studies related to the operation of the hydropower project; and · Operation of a JWUP monitoring committee to provide annual feedback on the monitoring results and, as appropriate, advice on unique watershed conditions. Some of the monitoring activities that are unique to the Capilano watershed are outlined below. 5.1 Monitoring Activities Unique to the Capilano Watershed A flow monitoring station has been operated on the Capilano River above Capilano Reservoir since 1914. In recent years this station has been funded by Metro Vancouver and the JWUP proposes that this hydrometric station be operated on an ongoing basis. The board has previously committed to a “trap and truck” program on Capilano Reservoir to capture out- migrating Coho and Steelhead smolts and transport them around Cleveland Dam. This program reduces the mortalities associated with smolts passing over the Cleveland Dam spillway. Associated with this “trap and truck” program, monitoring is done to enumerate the out-migrating smolts. Prior to construction of the new surface intake for the hydropower project the monitoring results will be used to optimize the design of the new smolt capture facilities associated with the new hydropower intake channel. After commissioning of the new smolt capture facilities the level of effort involved with the smolt monitoring program is expected to decrease. The JWUP Consultative Committee expects measurable improvements to fish habitat in the lower Capilano River once the proposed new fish flow releases are implemented, and has suggested the following monitoring for about two years prior, and up to five years after the fish flow releases are changed: · Water temperature monitoring;
Page 13
UC-58 · Biological response monitoring of status and trends in key fish species. Details and costs of the proposed monitoring program are provided in the 2012 Capilano-Seymour Joint Water Use Plan: Consultative Committee Report. 6.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JWUP RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed conditions of the operation of the Capilano-Seymour facilities and monitoring program proposed in the 2012 JWUP would not come into effect until after Metro Vancouver receives direction from the Comptroller of Water Rights and implemented under the British Columbia Water Act. 7.0 EXPECTED WATER MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS OF THE JWUP 7.1 Raw Water Quantity and Quality 7.1.1 The Capilano System The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect the current raw water quality of the Capilano Reservoir or Capilano River below Cleveland Dam. Furthermore there will be an improvement in the water temperatures in the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam to enhance aquatic growth. 7.1.2 The Seymour System The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect current raw water quality of the Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. 7.2 Drinking Water Quantity and Quality The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect current high quality drinking water supplied to the GVWD associated with the Capilano and Seymour Reservoirs. The capacity to reliably supply drinking water would be maintained at current levels, in the June to November period, even in dry years with low reservoir inflows. 7.3 Riparian Rights The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect riparian rights associated with the Capilano Reservoir or Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and the Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. 7.4 Fisheries 7.4.1 The Capilano System The JWUP Consultative Committee has proposed increases to the minimum fish flow releases from Capilano Reservoir to the lower Capilano River. New water control facilities would be built in conjunction with the proposed hydropower project to enable the delivery of these increased fish flow releases. The proposed new minimum fish flow releases are as follows: · June 1 to November 30, release varies from 0.57 m3/s to 2.3 m3/s, depending on the level of Capilano Reservoir, the amount of reservoir spill, reservoir inflows, and Alpine Lake storage; · December 1 to May 31, release of 1.2 m3/s (providing the Capilano Reservoir is maintained above 130 m elevation).
Page 14
UC-59 7.4.1.1 Proposed Fish Design Objectives and Criteria for the Capilano Hydropower Project (endorsed by the JWUP CC) The proposed new hydropower project on the Capilano River has the potential to partially restore natural Coho and Steelhead productivity from the watershed above and below the Cleveland Dam. It is proposed that this facility will have a screened surface intake and underground powerhouse on the West bank of the Capilano River. It the potential to improve some of the inherent fish issues arising from the 1954 Cleveland Dam, namely: a) Provision of safe and unimpeded downstream passage of Coho and Steelhead smolts from April 15th to June 15th each year avoiding as much as practicable mortalities associated with fish passing over the spillway (these being field studies have estimated mortality at over 70%); b) Provision for enhanced minimum flow capacity and fine control of ramping rates particularly below 4 m3/s at all times of the year with a “fish valve”; and c) Provisions for near surface withdrawal of water from Capilano Lake into the Capilano River to offset very cold water temperatures from the existing mechanical pump tailrace which provides a base fish flow release of 0.57 m3/s. The surface intake for hydropower generation will generate an attraction flow for smolts during the spring freshet. This facilitates the design of a long-term smolt collection system located in the forebay of the surface intake that can efficiently capture the smolts. The surface intake will generally be discharging warmer water and this will improve the fish productivity in the lower Capilano River. In addition, the new water valves associated with the surface intake can allow for a gradual adjustment of the new water valves associated with the surface intake can allow for a gradual adjustment of downstream flows that will minimize the risk of stranding fish. 7.4.2 The Seymour System The JWUP CC has proposed increases to the minimum fish flow releases from Seymour Reservoir to the lower Seymour River under most conditions. The proposed new minimum fish flow releases are as follows: · June 1 to November 30, releases vary from 0.7 m3/s to 2.8 m3/s, depending on the date, level of the Seymour Reservoir, and status of Alpine Lake storage; · December 1 to May 31, release of 1.36 m3/s. If the proposed JWUP were approved by the Board and the regulatory agencies, and fully implemented, it would provide improved environmental/fish flows to the Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam under most conditions relative to the existing situation. 7.5 Wildlife Habitat The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to significantly affect wildlife habitat associated with Capilano Reservoir or Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam.
Page 15
UC-60 7.6 Flood Mitigation Provisions The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are expected to maintain current levels of flood mitigation in the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and the Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. The flood management triggers and communication protocols established previously have proven effective and did not warrant any changes. 7.7 Recreation 7.7.1 The Capilano System The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are expected to significantly improve recreation associated with the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam. There will be a significant improvement in flows for angling, kayaking and canoeing in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and more opportunities for paddlers to take advantage of preferred conditions through real-time flow gauges and access to forecast information on dam releases for the coming week. Preferred paddling flows were estimated to almost double over current conditions. 7.7.2 The Seymour System The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are expected to significantly improve recreation associated with the Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. There will be significantly improved flows for angling and kayaking in the lower Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam and more opportunities for paddlers to take advantage of preferred conditions through real-time flow gauges and access to forecast information on dam releases for the coming week. 7.8 Culture The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect the current cultural use of water associated with Capilano Reservoir or Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. 7.9 Industrial Use of Water The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to significantly affect the current industrial use of water associated with the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and the Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. 7.10 Other Licensed Uses of Water The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect other current licensed users of water associated with Capilano Reservoir or Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. 7.11 Electrical Power Generation 7.11.1 The Capilano System The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are expected to significantly increase the electrical power generation associated with Capilano Reservoir or Capilano River below Cleveland Dam. The Capilano power plant is planned to be a 14-20 MW facility which will have an expected power output of 30-70
GW h annually. Potential maximum annual greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction of up to 1200 tonnes CO2e is expected. ∙
Page 16
UC-61 7.11.2 The Seymour System The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are expected to significantly increase the electrical power generation associated with Seymour Reservoir or Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam. The Seymour power plant is planned to be a 2-4 MW facility that will have an expected power output of 5-10
GW h annually. A maximum annual GHG reduction of up to 225 tonnes CO2e is anticipated.
7.12∙ First Nations Considerations In April 2010, letters were sent and follow-up phone calls were made to 52 potentially affected First Nations and tribal councils/associations whose traditional territory lies within, overlaps with, or who have interest in territory within the subject area of the JWUP. Correspondence was received from the Tsleil- Waututh and Squamish Nations. Members of the Squamish Nation attended the October 2010 public meeting to initiate the JWUP process and have been involved in the Consultative Committee and the Fisheries Technical Working Group. The Squamish Nation hosted two of the JWUP CC meeting at their offices near the Seymour River on March 31, 2011 and July 14, 2011. Metro Vancouver has also met with the Squamish Nation separately on JWUP and there may be other opportunities to meet directly with the Squamish Nation and other First Nations as the JWUP process is completed. Tsleil-Waututh was invited to participate in the JWUP process and indicated they would like to participate on the CC, but did not attend any CC meetings. As a CC member, Tsleil-Waututh received all of the information sent to the Consultative Committee members throughout the process. As the JWUP process is completed, Metro Vancouver will also inform, notify and seek comments from other First Nations and tribal councils/associations, whose traditional territories lie within, overlap with, or who have asserted interests within the JWUP area. 7.13 Archaeological Considerations The proposed conditions in the 2012 JWUP are not expected to affect First Nations archaeological interests. If future projects warrant archaeological assessment, Metro Vancouver will work with First Nations under the provincial Heritage Management Act to protect cultural sites located within the reservoirs from erosion; cultural sites located in the reservoirs from exploitation; opportunities for archaeological investigation in the reservoirs; and maintaining the cultural, aesthetic and ecological context of important cultural resources and spiritual sites. 7.14 Net Cost of Water Supply The costs for Metro Vancouver to monitor and report compliance with the JWUP would be higher than the existing situation. However, these costs are considered appropriate when compared to the monitoring costs of other water use plans adopted in other locations in British Columbia and considering the gained benefits of hydropower. As Metro Vancouver proceeds further on the engineering design of the proposed hydropower projects there will be specific assessment needed to minimize/mitigate the potential impacts of the construction and operation of these projects. The JWUP maintains the capacity to reliably supply drinking water under the stressed conditions that are used to design the drinking water system. However, in the December to May period of the year with extremely low inflows, the higher fish flow release in the JWUP would only slightly reduce the amount of drinking water that could be reliably supplied from the Capilano and Seymour watersheds. Analysis
Page 17
UC-62 shows that this change in fish flow from December to May still maintains drinking water supply at or above needed levels. There would also be a net reduction in operating costs for the drinking water system as the proposed hydropower project on Capilano appears to be economically feasible. The hydropower project on Seymour may be economically viable under certain conditions. 8.0 RECORDS AND REPORTS 8.1 Compliance Reporting Metro Vancouver will submit data as required to the Comptroller of Water Rights, to demonstrate compliance with the conditions conveyed in the Water Licenses or order. The submission will include records of:
· Capilano Reservoir Elevations; · Seymour Reservoir Elevations; · Capilano Fish Flow Releases; · Seymour Fish Flow Releases; · Total Discharge into Capilano River; · Total Discharge into Seymour River; · Generation Discharge from Capilano Generation Station; · Generation Discharge from Seymour Generation Station; and · Diversion flows.
8.2 Non-Compliance Reporting Non-compliance with operating conditions required by the water licenses or Water Act order, or anticipation thereof, will be reported to the Comptroller of Water Rights in a timely manner. 8.3 Monitoring Program Reporting Reporting procedures will be determined as part of detailed terms of reference for each monitoring study or undertaking. 9.0 PLAN REVIEW The JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested that ideally the review for this joint water use plan should occur concurrently and about 15 years after JWUP approval. However, if the Capilano hydropower project is delayed, then the review period may be separated for the two watersheds and the review of the Capilano component of the JWUP initiated 10 years after the hydropower facilities at Cleveland Dam are commissioned. 10.0 NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES Notification procedures for floods and other emergency events are outlined in the Dam Emergency Response Plan Cleveland Dam and Seymour Falls Dam. These documents are filed with the Office of the Comptroller of Water Rights.
Page 18
UC-63
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED HYDROPOWER PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Page 19
UC-64
APPENDIX B: HYDROLOGY OF CAPILANO WATERSHED
Page 20
UC-65
APPENDIX C: HYDROLOGY OF SEYMOUR WATERSHED
Page 21
UC-66
APPENDIX D: RAMPING RATES
Page 22
UC-67
APPENDIX E: WATER LICENCES
Page 23
UC-68
APPENDIX F: MINIMUM DAM RELEASES
Page 24
UC-69 ATTACHMENT 2
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds - August 8, 2012
Over the last 20 months, Metro Vancouver has been working with key interested parties, through a consultative committee, to develop the key elements of a draft Joint Water Use Plan (JWUP). At a meeting on July 19, 2012, the JWUP Consultative Committee unanimously endorsed and fully supported the key elements of the draft Joint Water Use Plan outlined in the following sections: 1 Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects 2 Proposed Reservoir Operation and Environmental/Fish Flow Releases 3 Proposed Monitoring and Communications Activities 4 Proposed Implementation Schedule
1 Proposed Capilano and Seymour Hydropower Projects The Seymour and Capilano Reservoirs are normally full during the fall, winter and spring months. During these periods the reservoirs fill to their maximum capacity with large amounts of water spilling from each reservoir. As part of the joint water use planning process for the Capilano and Seymour watersheds, Metro Vancouver is proposing the Capilano and Seymour hydropower projects. These potential hydropower projects are envisaged to make use of the existing dam infrastructure to produce electricity from water that overflows from the Reservoirs. Energy generation would assume the 3rd priority of the reservoir flow regime after drinking water supply and environmental/fish flows. The energy generation facilities would operate using flow consistent with the first two priorities. As part of the water use planning process a hydropower consultant worked with Metro Vancouver staff to assess potential hydropower project options. The proposed hydropower project for Cleveland Dam is defined in Section 1.1 below and the proposed hydropower project on Seymour Falls Dam is defined in Section 1.2 below. Please note some aspects of the proposed hydropower projects are also discussed in Sections 2 to 4. Based on analyses conducted to date the proposed hydropower projects appear to be sustainable and economically feasible. Consequently, Waterpower Project Development Plans for the proposed hydropower projects at Cleveland Dam and Seymour Falls Dam are being prepared. The Waterpower Project Development Plans are to be suitable for inclusion along with water license applications to the Ministry of Environment-Comptroller of Water Rights as part of the complete Joint Water Use Plan submission package.
1.1 Proposed Capilano Hydropower Project The proposed Capilano hydropower project has the following elements; new surface intake on the west side of Capilano Reservoir, with an underground tunnel and shaft connecting to an underground powerhouse discharging to the existing diversion tunnel that in turn discharges to the west side of the lower end of the Cleveland Dam plunge pool (see project description and layout below). All facilities would be located on lands owned by the Greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD).
UC-70 Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 2 of 11
Description of Capilano Hydropower Project ITEM DESCRIPTION General Concept to avoid significant modifications to the existing Dam Concept infrastructure. Majority of the work is done underground and requires significant amount of tunneling. Intake This project includes installation of a new near-surface intake with the invert of the approach channel at an approximate elevation of 130 m. Water is drawn from near the surface of the reservoir and the maximum withdrawal rate for power generation is about 25 cms. A dual-flow travelling fish-exclusion screen is included in the project. The screen would eliminate entrainment of fish into the intake and turbine. The design and construction of the screens is very similar to the screens currently used at the drinking water intake. Location of the intake in an excavated channel with accessible sides permits smolt capture for downstream passage. As part of the project, new water control facilities will be built to enable, in conjunction with existing facilities, the delivery of the proposed new JWUP fish flow releases. These facilities will be designed to provide appropriate ramping rates and fish flow releases to the river whether or not the power project is operating through the widest possible range of lake elevations and down to 130m elevation if practical. Hydraulic A combination of high level tunnel and vertical shaft is planned to carry Conduit for the water to the powerhouse. The high level tunnel under the gravity Hydropower dam section is assumed to be lined and grouted to mitigate dam safety flows concerns. To carry internal pressure of water the vertical shaft is also assumed to be lined and grouted. Powerhouse Underground powerhouse with a preliminary plan for two Francis units. / Tailrace The placement of the powerhouse is relatively flexible and allows for changes if required after geotechnical investigations. Connection to the existing elevator shaft is desired to minimize costs associated with providing access. The tunnel from the elevator to the new underground powerhouse can be aligned to avoid moving of existing HB valves. The tailrace from the underground powerhouse will discharge to the existing diversion tunnel that in turn discharges to the west side of the lower end of the Cleveland Dam plunge pool Switchyard Step-up transformers are not required as generators’ will be generating not required at 12.47 kV. Busbars/buried cables will be used to carry the power to the existing Metro Vancouver 69 kV substation located to the west of Cleveland Dam. Total Annual System modeling for the JWUP Consultative Committee estimates the Energy average annual energy generation at about 57 Giga Watt hours per year.
UC-71
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 3 of 11
Conceptual Layout of Capilano Hydropower Project
1.1.1 Proposed Fish Design Objectives and Criteria for Capilano Power Project (endorsed by JWUP Consultative Committee) The proposed new power project on the Capilano River has the potential to partially restore natural Coho and Steelhead productivity from the watershed above and below the Cleveland Dam. It is proposed that this facility will have a screened surface intake and underground powerhouse on the west bank of the Capilano River. It has the potential to overcome some of the inherent fish issues arising from the 1954 Cleveland Dam, namely: a) Provision of safe and unimpeded downstream passage of Coho and Steelhead smolts from April 15th to June 15th each year avoiding as much as practicable mortalities associated with fish passing over the spillway (these being field study estimated at over 70%); b) Provision for enhanced minimum flow capacity and fine control of ramping rates particularly below 4 CMS at all times of the year with a “fish valve”; and c) Provision for near surface withdrawal of water from Capilano Lake into the Capilano River to offset very cold water temperatures from the existing mechanical pump tailrace which provides a base fish flow release of 0.57 cms.
Capilano Hydropower Design Objectives and Criteria 1. The new facility must prevent all fish from entering the intake for the power project at all times of the year through easily cleaned screens that do not impinge fish on the screens. (Standard specifications for travelling screens would apply.) 2. There needs to be an effective smolt collection system with attraction water provided by gravity flow through the power project and/or fish valve bypass that will be operational under all reservoir levels from approximately April 15th to June 15th each year. This system should
UC-72
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 4 of 11
employ sufficient surface currents and guide nets (leads) to help direct migrating Steelhead and Coho smolts to the collection facility and discourage them from backing out or going over the spillway if it is operating. The design and orientation of the intake, leads and collection facility should be optimized in this regard. (The current lake traps and rotary screw traps operated by MVRD for collecting Coho and Steelhead smolts have improved the situation, but are not effective enough to rebuild natural populations particularly of Steelhead where trapping efficiency has been approximately 10 %.) 3. Once captured, smolts can be reintroduced to the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam either by a direct safe downstream passage facility that discourages subsequent predation and provides for enumeration and sampling capability or they need to be safely held in flow- through collection box (es), enumerated, sampled/tagged as required and transported below the dam to one or more release points on at least a daily basis and preferably more frequently during peak migration periods. 4. The spillway should not be operated during the smolt collection period unless necessary to pass flows beyond the capacity of the new power project and fish valve under peak flow conditions. 5. The power project must have a bypass “fish valve” that can provide for appropriate ramping rates and fish flow releases to the river whether or not the power project is operating through the widest possible range of lake elevations. 6. It is suggested that at least one small turbine (or equivalent facilities) be explored to generate power from the fish flow releases on a year round basis. It could potentially replace the energy requirements of the existing water to water hydraulic pumping system to high elevation reservoirs on the north shore. (The tailrace from this system currently provides the base fish flows of 0.57 CMS and has colder water for extended periods than could be provided by the new surface intake.) 7. The power project intake channel and the intake itself should be designed to provide improved water temperatures downstream, relative to historic operation, when lake conditions permit. (The optimal water temperatures for salmonids during the growing season are in the range of 10 to 15 degrees C.)
1.2 Proposed Seymour Hydropower Project The proposed hydropower project on Seymour Falls Dam has the following elements; water for power generation would be diverted at existing Howell-Bunger valves, with a new penstock routed along the downstream face of the dam and connecting to a surface powerhouse on East Bank of the Seymour River that would discharge to a new tailrace channel that in turn discharges to the east side of the Seymour River (see project description and layout below).
UC-73
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 5 of 11
Description of Seymour Hydropower Project ITEM DESCRIPTION General Water for power generation would be diverted at existing Howell-Bunger Concept valves to a surface powerhouse on East Bank of the Seymour River. Intake The intake is located on the face of the dam. Water for power generation is diverted at the Howell-Bunger (HB) valves’ intake and the maximum withdrawal rate for power generation is about 15 cms. A two stage intake tower is envisaged as the Trashrack at the HB valve inlet will need to be upgraded to screen out smaller debris (50 – 100 mm clear spacing). Trash removal equipment will be required. Underwater construction will be required as this is the lowest point of the reservoir. Water diverted for power generation would be screened with a dual-flow travelling fish-exclusion screen. The design and construction of the screens is very similar to the screens currently used at the drinking water intake. A separate high-flow opening would be designed for operation of the HB valves. The two stage tower would connect to the opening through the dam at the HB valves’ location. This also requires relocation of the HB valves to enable connection for the penstock take- off. Roof to be extended above to protect the HB valves from spill flows. Hydraulic Penstock is routed along the downstream face of the dam and is Conduit for protected with concrete against spillway flows and debris impact. The Hydropower penstock would transition to buried penstock prior to entering the flows powerhouse. Powerhouse Surface powerhouse on the east bank. An access road to the / Tailrace powerhouse location is needed from the existing road on the East side of the Seymour River. Switchyard A surface switchyard with a step-up transformer is needed on the East side of the River near the powerhouse. An overhead or buried transmission line will be used to carry the power to the existing Metro Vancouver Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant. Opportunities to reduce the eventual costs of the power-line by through possible synergizes with installation of Seymour Main #5 (North) from Seymour Dam to the Filter Plant will be explored. Total Annual System modeling for the JWUP Consultative Committee estimates the Energy average annual energy generation at about 7.2 Giga Watt hours per year.
UC-74
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 6 of 11
Conceptual Layout of Seymour Hydropower Project
2 Proposed Reservoir Operation and Environmental/Fish Flow Releases
The Seymour and Capilano Reservoirs are normally full during the fall, winter and spring months. During these periods the reservoirs fill to their maximum storage capacity with large amounts of water spilling from each reservoir. The proposed hydropower projects are envisaged to make use of the existing dam infrastructure to produce electricity from water that would otherwise spill from the Reservoirs. Energy generation would assume the 3rd priority of the reservoir flow regime after drinking water supply and environmental/fish flows.
Capilano Reservoir Operation and Fish Flow Releases
Given the above priorities, the proposed Capilano Reservoir hydropower project would generally operate as follows: · May 1 to October 31, energy would be generated from water that would otherwise spill from the reservoir; · November 1 to April 30, energy may be generated at reservoir elevations between full pool (145.9 m) and 4 meters down (141.9 m). The JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested increases to the minimum fish flow releases from Capilano Reservoir to the lower Capilano River under most conditions (JWUP consultative committee, alternative 3E). However, new water control facilities will have to be built in conjunction with the proposed hydropower project to enable the delivery of these new fish flow releases. When undertaking unusual maintenance or other unusual or emergency conditions minimum fish flows may be reduced to 0.57 cms if required. Fish flow releases above 0.57 cms, may be released at Reservoir elevations above 130m according to the June 1 to November 30 table provided below, and during the winter (Dec 1 to May 31) period when lake levels are above 130m.
UC-75
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 7 of 11
Capilano - Minimum Dam Releases during the period June 1 June 15 July 1 July 15
Abundant Water Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by June 1st: If by June 15th: If by July 1st: If by July 15th: · Lake level is > • Lake level is > · Lake level is @ • Lake level is @ full (145.89m) and (145.89m) and full pool pool (145.89m) and · Spilling >10cms · Spilling >10cms (145.89m) and • Spilling >2 cms · Spilling >10cms
Average Water Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Conditions Criteria Between Wet and Dry water condition thresholds
Drought Conditions Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Criteria / Threshold If by June 1st: If by June 15th: If by July 1st: If by July 15th: · Lake level is less · Lake level is less · Lake level is less · Lake level is less than 145.0m than 145.0m than 145.0m than 143.0m Aug 1 Aug 15 Sept 1 Sept 15
Abundant Water Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by Aug 1st: If by Aug 15th: If by Sep 1st: If by Sept 15th: · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is >143.5m and >142.0m >140m >138m · Inflows to lake >12cms (excl Alpine releases)
Average Water Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Conditions Criteria Between Wet and Dry water condition thresholds
Drought Conditions Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Criteria / Threshold If by Aug 1st: If by Aug 15th: If by Sep 1st: If by Sep 15th: · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is <139.0m <135.0m <130m <130m and · Alpine storage has been released Oct 1 Oct 15 Nov 1 Nov 15
Abundant Water Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Qmin = 2.3cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by Oct 1st: If by Oct 15th: If by Nov 1st: If by Nov 15th: · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is >136m >134m >136m >138m
Average Water Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Qmin = 1.2cms Conditions Criteria Between Wet and Dry water condition thresholds
Drought Conditions Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Qmin = 0.57cms Criteria / Threshold If by Oct 1st: If by Oct 15th: If by Nov 1st: If by Nov 15th: · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is · Lake level is <130m and <130m and <130m and <130m and · Alpine storage has · Alpine storage has · Alpine storage has · Alpine storage has been released been released been released been released
UC-76
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 8 of 11
During the December 1 to May 31 period, the new Capilano minimum fish flow release would be 1.2 cms, providing that the water level in Capilano Reservoir is above 130m.
Seymour Reservoir Operation and Fish Flow Releases
As discussed above, energy generation would assume the 3rd priority of the reservoir flow regime after drinking water supply and environmental/fish flows. Consequently, the proposed Seymour Reservoir hydropower project would generally operate as follows: · May 1 to October 31, energy would be generated from water that would otherwise spill from the reservoir; · November 1 to April 30, energy may be generated at reservoir elevations between winter full pool (212.9 m) and 1 meter down (211.9 m). The JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested increases to the minimum fish flow releases from Seymour Reservoir to the lower Seymour River under most conditions (JWUP consultative committee, alternative 4D). Minimum fish flow releases, in the June 1 to November 30 period, will be according to the table provided below. During the December 1 to May 31 period the new Seymour minimum fish flow release would be 1.36 cms. When undertaking unusual maintenance or other unusual or emergency conditions minimum fish flows may be reduced to 0.57 cms if required.
UC-77
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 9 of 11
Seymour - Minimum Dam Releases during the period June 1 June 15 July 1 July 15
Abundant Water Qmin = 1.36cms Qmin = 1.36cms Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.4cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold
Average Water Qmin = 1.36cms Qmin = 1.36cms Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.4cms Conditions Criteria Between Wet and Dry water condition thresholds
Impending Drought Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by June 1st: If by June 15th: If by July 1st: If by July 15th: Lake level <213m Lake level is <214m Lake level is < 213m Lake level is <211m
Drought Conditions Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Criteria / Threshold If by June 1st: If by June 15th: If by July 1st: If by July 15th: Lake level < 212m Lake level is <213m Lake level <212m Lake level is <210m Aug 1 Aug 15 Sept 1 Sept 15
Abundant Water Qmin = 2.8cms Qmin = 2.8cms Qmin = 2.8cms Qmin = 2.8cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by Aug 1st: If by Aug 15th: If by Sep 1st: If by Sept 15th: Lake level is >213.8m Lake level is >213.4m Lake level is >213m Lake level is >212m
Average Water Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.4cms Conditions Criteria Between Wet and Dry water condition thresholds
Impending Drought Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by Aug 1st: If by Aug 15th: If by Sep 1st: If by Sep 15th: Lake level is <208m Lake level is <206m Lake level is <204 and Lake level is <204 and Alpine storage Alpine storage released released
Drought Conditions Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Criteria / Threshold If by Aug 1st: If by Aug 15th: If by Sep 1st: If by Sep 15th: Lake level is <207m Lake level is <205m Lake level is <203 and Lake level is <203 and Alpine storage Alpine storage released released Oct 1 Oct 15 Nov 1 Nov 15
Abundant Water Qmin = 2.8cms Qmin = 2.8cms Qmin = 2.8cms Qmin = 2.8cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by Oct 1st: If by Oct 15th: If by Nov 1st: If by Nov 15th: Lake level is >211m Lake level is >210m Lake level is >210m Lake level is >212m
Average Water Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.4cms Qmin = 1.36cms Qmin = 1.36cms Conditions Criteria Between Wet and Dry water condition thresholds
Impending Drought Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Qmin = 1.1cms Conditions Criteria / Threshold If by Oct 1st: If by Oct 15th: If by Nov 1st: If by Nov 15th: Lake level is <204 and Lake level is <204 and Lake level is <204 and Lake level is <206 and Alpine storage released Alpine storage Alpine storage Alpine storage released released released
Drought Conditions Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Qmin = 0.7cms Criteria / Threshold If by Oct 1st: If by Oct 15th: If by Nov 1st: If by Nov 15th: Lake level is <203 and Lake level is <203 and Lake level is <203 and Lake level is <205 and Alpine storage released Alpine storage Alpine storage Alpine storage released released released
UC-78
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 10 of 11
3 Proposed Monitoring and Communications Activities
As recommended in the Provincial Water Use Planning Guidelines, and based on what is typical of other water use plans adopted in other locations in British Columbia, the JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested a number of monitoring and communications activities as part of the JWUP. The following provides an overview of the activities that are common to the two watersheds: · monitoring and annual reporting of reservoir water levels, drinking water withdrawals, fish flow releases and hydropower withdrawals (when commissioned); · monitoring and annual reporting of river flows, at one location, in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and at one location in the lower Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam along with analysis and reporting of the rate of flow changes (ramping); · assessments needed for the final design of a hydropower project and and/or studies related to the operation of the hydropower project; · operation of a JWUP monitoring committee to provide annual feedback on the monitoring results and, as appropriate, advice on unique watershed conditions. Some of the monitoring activities that are unique to the Capilano watersheds are outlined below.
Monitoring Activities Unique to Capilano Watershed A flow monitoring station has been operated on the Capilano River above Capilano Reservoir since 1914. In recent years this station has been funded by Metro Vancouver and the draft JWUP proposes that this hydrometric station be operated on an ongoing basis. The Board has previously committed to a “trap and truck” program on Capilano Reservoir to capture out-migrating Coho and Steelhead smolts and transport them around Cleveland Dam. This program reduces the mortalities associated with smolts passing over the Cleveland Dam spillway. Associated with this “trap and truck” program, monitoring is done to enumerate the out-migrating smolts. Prior to construction of the new surface intake for the hydropower project the monitoring results will be used to optimize the design of the new smolt capture facilities associated with the new hydropower intake channel. After commissioning of the new smolt capture facilities the level of effort involved with the smolt monitoring program is expected to decrease. The JWUP Consultative Committee expects measurable improvements to fish habitat in the lower Capilano River once the proposed new fish flow releases are implemented, and has suggested the following monitoring for about two years prior, and up to five years after, the fish flow releases are changed: · water temperature monitoring; · biological response monitoring of status and trends in key fish species.
UC-79
Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds – August 8, 2012 Page 11 of 11
4 Proposed JWUP Implementation Schedule
The following provides an overview of the key activities that are proposed for the period after Board approval to submit the JWUP to the regulatory agencies, and prior to approval of the JWUP by the regulatory agencies (anticipated in the latter part of 2013 or 2014). The following are common to the two watersheds: · Continuing to monitor river flows in the lower Capilano and lower Seymour Rivers and making this flow data accessible to the public on a real time basis; · Providing publically accessible plans or forecasts of how releases from the two reservoirs may vary over time.
After regulatory approval of the JWUP, the proposed changes to the fish flow releases from Seymour reservoir would be implemented, as these flows can be provided using existing facilities. For Capilano, as new water control facilities will have to be built in conjunction with the proposed hydropower project to enable the delivery of increased fish flow releases, the proposed new fish flow releases will be implemented after commissioning of the proposed hydropower facilities at Cleveland Dam, which are currently scheduled for 2021. The JWUP Consultative Committee has suggested that ideally the review for this joint watershed plan should occur concurrently and about 15 years after JWUP approval. However, if the Capilano Hydropower project is delayed, than the review period may be separated for the two watersheds and the review of the Capilano component of the JWUP initiated 10 years after the hydropower facilities at Cleveland Dam are commissioned.
6668001
UC-80
Consultative Committee Report Capilano – Seymour Joint Water Use Plan
A Project of Metro Vancouver
Prepared on Behalf of:
The Consultative Committee for the Capilano – Seymour Joint Water Use Plan
Prepared by:
Compass Resource Management Ltd.
Suite 200, 1260 Hamilton Street Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6B 2S8 www.compassrm.com
Date
October 24, 2012
UC-81
JWUP CC Summary Report
Executive Summary
Introduction
On July 19th, 2012 the Consultative Committee of the Joint Capilano – Seymour Water Use Plan (JWUP) reached consensus1 and unanimously endorsed a package of water management recommendations for Metro Vancouver’s existing water control structures and proposed hydropower facilities that are being contemplated for Cleveland Dam and Seymour Falls Dam. The endorsed JWUP Package includes operational recommendations for the timing and volume of water to be released from the dams, what studies and monitoring should be carried out during the implementation of the plan, design considerations for developing hydropower, when the components of the plan would be implemented, and a series of non-flow options that were agreed to.
The JWUP Consultative Committee process was initiated in January 2011 and completed in July 2012. The process followed the steps outlined in the Province’s Water Use Plan Guidelines. The purpose of this Summary Report is to document the consultative process and present the recommendations of the JWUP Consultative Committee (CC). The interests and values expressed in this report will be used by Metro Vancouver to prepare the Capilano Seymour Draft Joint Water Use Plan. Both this CC Summary Report and Metro Vancouver’s Draft JWUP will be submitted to the Comptroller of Water Rights for review and approval.
Water Use Plans
Water use planning was first introduced in the province of BC in 1996 as a way to help clarify how rights to provincial water resources should be exercised and to ensure provincial water management decisions reflect current public values related to social, environmental, and financial priorities.
A Water Use Plan (WUP) is a technical document that, once reviewed by provincial and federal agencies and authorized by the provincial Comptroller of Water Rights, defines how water control facilities will be operated. The purpose of a water use planning process is to develop recommendations defining a preferred operating strategy informed through a multi-stakeholder consultative process.
1 While the Consultative Committee reached consensus, many members expressed concerns that the anticipated fishery benefits for the Capilano system would not be realised for up to 10 years until a new intake structure is built in association with hydropower development at Cleveland Dam. The current facilities are not able to effectively augment and increase fish flows to the lower river until then.
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-82 Resource Management Page i
JWUP CC Summary Report
Metro Vancouver Joint Water Use Plan
Metro Vancouver is developing a JWUP for the Seymour and Capilano Watersheds. This JWUP is about how the reservoirs and dams are operated, how water is released from the reservoirs and allocated for different uses (as examples: drinking water, fisheries habitat, proposed power generation, etc.). This plan will guide sustainable management of these important water resources. The planning process will also explore whether generating renewable hydropower from the existing reservoirs can be accommodated within Metro Vancouver’s commitment to:
continue to supply clean, safe drinking water, protect fish habitat, adapt to climate variability and climate change, and provide benefits to other community interests such as recreation, culture and heritage, and safety within the context of the planning process.
For Metro Vancouver’s JWUP project the scope is broader than a typical WUP, as it includes consideration of water management effects associated with building possible hydropower facilities and consideration of seeking long term solutions for some historical issues associated with the construction of the original facilities (such as fish passage at Cleveland Dam).
Capilano and Seymour Systems
Situated on the North Shore (within the Western South Coast Mountains), the Capilano and Seymour reservoirs provide about two thirds of the water for Metro Vancouver’s domestic water supply system. The Capilano system consists of a reservoir behind Cleveland Dam, and Palisades Alpine Reservoir located in the upper watershed. The Seymour system includes a reservoir behind Seymour Falls Dam, and two alpine reservoirs in the upper watershed (Burwell and Loch Lomond). Both systems have fish hatcheries located in the lower rivers. In addition, the recently completed Seymour Filtration Plant is located adjacent to the lower Seymour River. The two systems are also in the process of being connected via the Twin Tunnel Projects (discussed later in this document).
The management of water at both Capilano and Seymour Reservoirs follows a normal pattern being close to full during the fall, winter and spring months. During these periods the reservoirs fill to their maximum storage capacity with large amounts of water spilling from each reservoir (in the fall and winter as a result of rain storms, and in the spring mostly a result of snowmelt waters). During times when there is no spilling from the reservoirs, both dams release base flows (minimum flows) to the lower rivers for fish and ecological purposes year round.
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-83 Resource Management Page ii
JWUP CC Summary Report
The proposed hydropower projects are envisaged to make use of the existing dam infrastructure to produce electricity from water that would otherwise spill from the reservoirs. Energy generation from these proposed developments would be considered the 3rd priority for the water stored in the reservoirs after drinking water supply and environmental fish flows are provided for.
Consultative Committee
A Consultative Committee was struck and held their first meeting in January 2011. The CC consisted of 14 members (plus alternates) representing a broad cross section of potentially affected interests from government agencies; First Nations; community, recreational and environmental associations; and relevant Metro Vancouver municipalities. The CC held 8 meetings between January 2011 and July 2012 and was supported by two technical working groups – fish and recreation – who met for a total of 20 meetings during that same period. As well, an interagency JWUP Steering Committee met on an as needed basis to provide direction on any scope and schedule issues that were raised during the process.
The mandate of the CC was to identify and explore water use options and alternatives to current operating practices, and collaboratively develop recommendations for consideration by Metro Vancouver when preparing the JWUP for operation of the Capilano and Seymour water control facilities.
JWUP Planning Process
The planning process for the CC followed a structured and iterative path consistent with the steps outlined in the provincial WUP guidelines and included: defining water use issues and objectives (Step 4), collecting data on water use impacts (Step 5), creating operating alternatives (Step 6), assessing trade-offs between the alternatives (Step 7) with the aim of reaching consensus on a preferred alternative and documenting the outcomes (Step 8).
Issues, Objectives and Performance Measures
A preliminary list of issues and interests potentially affected by changes to water conditions in the watersheds was developed early in the process and these issues were updated and added to throughout the process. The issues were organized according to the following topic areas:
Culture and Heritage Drinking Water and Operations Fish Hydropower Financial
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-84 Resource Management Page iii
JWUP CC Summary Report
Recreation Safety Climate Change Mitigation
From the issues list, the CC developed a set of fundamental objectives that were used to guide the planning process. Performance measures were used to assess how well the water management options were meeting the objectives. A number of studies and analyses were undertaken to assist in the scoping of issues and in the development of meaningful performance measures.
JWUP Options
The JWUP considered a number of operational alternatives - specific to setting targets for flow releases from the dams into the lower rivers or in relation to setting preferred water levels in the main reservoirs – and a number of non-operational (non-flow) options.
A total of 16 operating alternatives were developed and assessed for the lower Capilano River and a further 13 were considered for the lower Seymour River. As well, two joint alternatives that conceptually linked the two watersheds together were developed and reviewed. Other operating alternatives were considered for Palisades and Loch Lomond Alpine Reservoirs. Non-flow options were generally organized into those activities primarily associated with a WUP or those more aligned (or in response) to historical impacts from the construction of the original water control facilities or to address anticipated effects from the proposed new hydropower facilities. A total of 20 non-flow options were assessed during the JWUP.
Assessing the Options
The majority of the CC’s deliberations and effort was focused on assessing operating alternatives in the lower Capilano and Seymour rivers and these discussions took place during their last four meetings (Meetings 5, 6, 7, and 8). The options assessment was an interactive process that began with the evaluation of modeled alternatives followed by a discussion towards new and improved alternatives to be modeled for the next meeting. Four rounds of options assessment were carried out during the JWUP process.
In general, the assessment of operating alternatives during each meeting consisted of a review of the modeled hydrographs for the rivers and reservoirs, then a review of the calculated performance measures summarized through consequence tables and PM graphs, and lastly through structured discussions by the CC. A number of decision analysis techniques were used such as scenario analyses, pair wise comparisons,
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-85 Resource Management Page iv
JWUP CC Summary Report
dominance and sensitivity analyses to help the CC highlight the main trade-offs and the opportunities to develop improved operating alternatives.
JWUP Package of Recommendations
During the final meeting, CC members were first asked to individually rank and assess the operating alternatives and monitoring studies separately as building blocks towards the development of a JWUP Package of recommendations that would consider other elements such as non-flow options or timing issues with implementing some of the activities. The concept of bundling various components together also allowed for better considering possible effects of the proposed hydropower facilities as well as making improvements to some historical impacts associated with construction of the original facilities. The components or building blocks for the packages included operating alternatives, monitoring studies, non-flow options, scheduling and implementation items, and a number of voluntary actions not necessarily linked to requirements within a water license (under the Water Act). At the meeting, the CC reached a consensus agreement and endorsed a package of recommendations for the JWUP (summarized in Section 8 – Summary of Endorsed JWUP Package). Some of the main elements included in the package are:
Capilano
Capilano Reservoir hydropower project would be guided by a number of design criteria and objectives that would benefit fisheries resources in the watershed. Capilano Reservoir hydropower project, if built, would generate energy in the winter (November 1 to April 30) at reservoir elevations between full pool (145.9 m) and 4 meters down (141.9 m). In the summer, generation would only occur if water was spilling from the reservoir. Energy generation would assume the 3rd priority of the reservoir flow regime after drinking water supply and environmental/fish flows. New water control facilities would be built in conjunction with the proposed hydropower project2 to enable the delivery of increased fish flow releases, as follows: o Summer and Fall: Current minimum flow release of 0.57cms from Cleveland Dam to the lower Capilano River would normally increase and vary from 0.57cms to 2.3cms depending on reservoir levels, reservoir spill volumes, inflows to the reservoir, alpine storage, and time of year between June 1 and November 30.
2 Metro Vancouver agreed that in the event they did not proceed with hydropower development at Cleveland Dam that they would begin another initiative to revisit the ongoing fisheries issues in the lower Capilano River.
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-86 Resource Management Page v
JWUP CC Summary Report
o Winter and Spring: Current minimum flow release of 0.57cms from Cleveland Dam would increase to 1.2cms from December 1 to May 31 each year when lake levels are above 130m. Development and implementation of a comprehensive monitoring, research, and reporting program. Formation of a JWUP committee to provide feedback on implementation issues and in relation to the monitoring and research activities associated with the JWUP. A review period of 10 years after the hydropower facilities at Cleveland Dam are commissioned was recommended (i.e. expected in 2032).
Seymour
Seymour Reservoir hydropower project, if built, would generate energy in the winter (November 1 to April 30) at reservoir elevations between full pool (212.9m) and 1 meter down (211.9m). In the summer, generation would only occur if water was spilling from the reservoir. Energy generation would assume the 3rd priority of the reservoir flow regime after drinking water supply and environmental/fish flows. Current minimum flow releases from Seymour Falls Dam to the lower Seymour River would increase under most conditions after JWUP approval and authorizations. The proposed new minimum fish flow releases are: June 1 to November 30, releases vary from 0.7cms to 2.8cms, depending on the date, level of the Seymour Reservoir, and status of Alpine Lake storage; December 1 to May 31, release of 1.36cms. Development and implementation of a comprehensive monitoring, research, and reporting program. Formation of a JWUP committee to provide feedback on implementation issues and in relation to the monitoring and research activities associated with the JWUP. A review period of 15 years after the JWUP approval was recommended (i.e. expected in 2029).
Anticipated Benefits
The CC’s endorsed JWUP package, once approved and fully implemented, is expected to provide the following benefits relative to existing conditions:
Metro Vancouver would have increased regulatory approval and public support for its activities in the two watersheds;
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-87 Resource Management Page vi
JWUP CC Summary Report
the capacity to reliably supply drinking water would be maintained at current levels, in the June to November period, even in dry years with low reservoir inflows; improved passage around Cleveland Dam of out-migrating Steelhead trout and Coho salmon smolts; improved water temperatures in the Capilano River below Cleveland Dam to enhance aquatic productivity; improved conditions for fish in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam under most conditions (on average approximately a doubling of the fish habitat in the summer); improved ability to control the rate of change in water flow from the Capilano Reservoir (ramping rates) to reduce the risk of stranding fish in the lower Capilano River; improved conditions for fish in the lower Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam under most conditions (on average fish habitat is expected to increase by about 18% in the summer); reduced greenhouse gases through the generation of renewable, clean electricity from the proposed hydropower projects; a net reduction in operating costs for the drinking water system (given the revenue from the proposed hydropower projects on Capilano and Seymour, which appear economically feasible); significantly improved flows3 for angling, kayaking and canoeing in the lower Capilano River below Cleveland Dam and more opportunities for paddlers to take advantage of preferred conditions through real-time flow gauges and access to forecast information on dam releases for the coming week; and improved flows for angling and kayaking in the lower Seymour River below Seymour Falls Dam and more opportunities for paddlers to take advantage of preferred conditions through real-time flow gauges and access to forecast information on dam releases for the coming week.
3 Preferred paddling flows were estimated to almost double over current conditions.
Metro Vancouver © CompassUC-88 Resource Management Page vii
5.5
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Inder Singh, Division Manager, Utility Planning and Implementation
Date: November 5, 2012
Subject: Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Hawthorne Grove Park in the Corporation of Delta
Recommendation: That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 4026 Arthur Drive in Delta.
1. PURPOSE
This report responds to a request from the Corporation of Delta for GVS&DD Board approval to expand the Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) to include the property at 4026 Arthur Drive in Delta (Attachment 1) to accommodate sewer service for Hawthorne Grove Park including Kirkland House, Harris Barn and potential future expansion.
2. CONTEXT
Sewerage and Drainage Area boundaries are occasionally amended in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act, typically at the request of a GVS&DD member. Metro Vancouver (MV) received a council resolution from Delta requesting that the FSA be expanded to include Hawthorne Grove Park located at 4026 Arthur Drive in Delta.
Delta staff reports that the property contains the recently restored Kirkland House which is maintained by the Kirkland House Foundation. The master plan for this property envisions the addition of agricultural buildings illustrating Delta’s agricultural history. Delta staff report that due to site constraints the existing on-site wastewater treatment system cannot be expanded to accommodate future expansion.
The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion request: · A resolution was passed by Delta Council on May 28, 2012 requesting an expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area; · The property is located outside the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Urban Containment Boundary and as such per the RGS the GVS&DD is normally directed not to extend sewer services; · The GVRD Board has resolved that this request is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy as the established land use and community/agricultural amenity status of the property would not affect the intent or implementation of the RGS (Attachment 2).
In general, for all Sewerage Area expansion requests, if provisions of the RGS are met, GVS&DD review includes an examination of financial, technical, and operational impacts, and effects on service levels.
UC-89 · There will be no significant financial impacts on the GVS&DD for the connection to the Delta sewer system. · There will be no expected significant service level impacts to the Delta or GVS&DD sewer systems.
3. ALTERNATIVES
The GVS&DD Board approves the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 4026 Arthur Drive in Delta.
No other alternatives are presented as the GVRD Board has resolved that this request is consistent with the provisions of the RGS and MV staff report that there will be insignificant impacts on the regional sewerage systems.
4. CONCLUSION
The Corporation of Delta is requesting that the Fraser Sewerage Area be expanded to include Hawthorne Grove Park located at 4026 Arthur Drive. For the property to connect to the regional sewer system, the Fraser Sewerage Area must be expanded to include the subject property. The GVRD board has resolved that this expansion request is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy. MV staff analysis has shown an insignificant impact on the regional sewerage system. MV staff recommend the FSA be expanded to include the property located at 4026 Arthur Drive.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment 4026 Arthur Drive Corporation of Delta 2. Report dated October 5, 2012 to the GVRD Board from the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee, titled Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) http://www.metrovancouver.org/boards/GVRD%20Board/RD_12-Oct-12_REVISED.pdf.
6542260
UC-90 UC-91 ATTACHMENT 2
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012
To: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
From: Heather McNell, Regional Planning Division Manager Terry Hoff, Senior Regional Planner Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department
Date: September 19, 2012
Subject: Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park)
Recommendation:
That the Board: a) resolve that the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to the subject properties, Delta Engineering Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery and Hawthorne Grove Park sites is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy, and that the requested FSA expansion applications proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board; and b) delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to seek a GVRD Board decision regarding Regional Growth Strategy compliance for a request from the Corporation of Delta to expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Regional Growth Strategy Agricultural Designation.
2. CONTEXT
Following adoption of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) on July 29, 2011, Metro Vancouver procedures regarding the extension of GVS&DD regional sewer services outside of Metro Vancouver’s Urban Containment Boundary are subject to compliance with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy.
In a report dated, August 16, 2012, titled “Regional Growth Strategy Implementation and Sewerage Area Expansion Requests”, the Board was advised of the changes to policy stemming from the new RGS, and that staff are preparing guidelines for RGS policy implementation. The guidelines are anticipated for Board Consideration in late 2012.
UC-92
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 2 of 5
In the interim, the Corporation of Delta requests that Metro Vancouver Boards proceed with consideration of a sewerage area expansion requests submitted for the properties located at 5404 64 Avenue (Delta Engineering Works Yard), 4026 Arthur Drive (Hawthorne Grove Park) and 3890 Arthur Drive (Augustinian Monastery) (Map 1).
Pending Board approved RGS guidelines, Metro staff have prepared an assessment and recommendations for Board consideration of RGS compliance for each of the extension requests. If the GVRD Board determines that the requests are not compliant with the RGS, the extension requests will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for denial. If the GVRD Board determines that the requests are compliant with the RGS, the request will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for further consideration and final decision.
Corporation of Delta Engineering Works Yard 5404 64 Street
The Delta Engineering Works Yard has operated as a Public Utility land use at this location for over 40 years. Delta has recently completed plans to upgrade the works yard facility, and intends to replace the on-site wastewater treatment system with a connection to the regional sewer system. Delta has determined that the regional service connection is necessary to ensure future safe disposal of wastewater generated by the expanded Works Yard facilities and operations.
Due to its isolated location, the Works Yard property was integrated into the Agricultural Land Reserve in 1973 as a non-farm use. Subject to the Agricultural Land Commission Act, this status is valid unless, or until, the use is changed. Because the Works Yard was an accepted use within the ALR, it was included in the LRSP Green Zone in 1998, and subsequently included the RGS Agricultural Land Use Designation in 2011. The extension of the GVS&DD sewerage area exclusively to serve this existing municipal facility would not affect the provisions of the RGS. An extension to this site is unlikely to trigger additional extension requests among surrounding ALR properties in the vicinity, and any potential request would be subject to a separate sewerage extension application to the GVS&DD.
Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established facility / site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Augustinian Monastery 3890 Arthur Drive The subject site is located on one of three bequeathed properties making up the Augustinian facility which includes Sacred Heart Church and School, Augustinian House Residence and the Augustinian Monastery. The property containing the Church and School, and the property containing the Augustinian House Residence, had previously been approved for FSA expansion by the GVS&DD Board. The 1.2 hectare Monastery site, located between the church/school and the residence within the overall complex, was not included in the previous FSA extension application, but has connected to the system. The Corporation of Delta is now requesting the Monastery site be formally included along with the other Augustinian facilities already within the FSA.
From a RGS perspective, the requested expansion of the FSA is a rationalization of the existing sewer area boundary and connections within the established Augustinian facility,
UC-93
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 3 of 5 and would not affect the intent or implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy. The sewerage service expansion would have no significant impact on GVS&DD services. Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established facility / site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Hawthorne Grove Park 4026 Arthur Drive The subject property functions as a municipal park which includes existing and proposed facilities illustrating Delta’s agricultural history. The park contains the historic Kirkland House, and it is envisioned that the site will include additional historic agricultural buildings and provide a local venue for community events. Delta indicates that wastewater from the proposed facilities will exceed the capacity of the current on-site septic system which cannot be expanded due to site constraints, and will experience periods of heavy use with community events.
The subject property is within the RGS Agricultural Designation, abutting the UCB and Fraser Sewerage Area boundary. Given the established land use and community / agricultural amenity status of the property, the extension of sewer services to the property would not affect the intent or implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy. Given the relatively small size of the property (1.7 hectare), and multiple potential facilities on the site, it would be practical to include the complete property within the FSA. The sewerage service expansion would have no significant impact on GVS&DD services.
Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Map 1. Proposed GVS&DD Sewerage Area Extension Locations
UC-94
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 4 of 5
Decisions Procedures Regarding Technical Compliance with RGS Provisions
As specified in the recommendations for each of the preceding sewerage extension applications, RGS Section 6.8 provides for GVRD Board judgment in determining whether the nature of development is inconsistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy. Each application for sewerage service extension is subject to a staff review and assessment of RGS implications. For those applications where staff review determines there are no significant RGS implications, it may be prudent to avert such minor decisions proceeding through GVRD Committee and Board decision procedures, and to allow the applications to proceed directly through the GVS&DD Board and Committee procedures. For more substantive sewerage extension applications where staff review deem there are potentially significant implications for the RGS, the application would more appropriately proceed through Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and GVRD Board decision procedures.
Therefore, to streamline the RGS review of GVS&DD sewerage area extensions, it is recommended that the GVRD Board delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
3. ALTERNATIVES
That the Board:
UC-95
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 5 of 5 a) Resolve that the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to the subject Delta Engineering Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery and Hawthorne Grove Park sites is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy, and that the requested FSA expansion applications proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board (recommended); and b) Delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary. or c) Provide alternate direction to staff.
4. CONCLUSION
Expansion of the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area must be consistent with the provisions of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. A GVRD Board decision on RGS compliance will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board.
6520038
UC-96 5.6
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Inder Singh, Division Manager, Utility Planning and Implementation
Date: November 5, 2012
Subject: Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Augustinian Monastery in the Corporation of Delta
Recommendation:
That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 3890 Arthur Drive in Delta.
1. PURPOSE
This report responds to a request from the Corporation of Delta for GVS&DD Board approval to expand the Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) to include the property at 3890 Arthur Drive in Delta (Attachment 1) to accommodate sewer service for the Augustinian Monastery and potential future expansion.
2. CONTEXT
Sewerage and Drainage Area boundaries are occasionally amended in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act, typically at the request of a GVS&DD member. Metro Vancouver received a council resolution from Delta requesting that the Fraser Sewerage Area be expanded to include the Augustinian Monastery property located at 3890 Arthur Drive in Delta.
According to Delta staff, the existing Monastery building has been connected to Delta’s sewer system through an adjacent building which is already included in the Fraser Sewerage Area. Delta is requesting this expansion to ensure the property is consistent with a municipal requirement that requires a direct connection to Delta’s sewer system. The request also indicates that there may be a future expansion on the property requiring additional sewer service.
The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion: · A resolution was passed by Delta Council on May 14, 2012 requesting an expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area. · The property is located outside the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Urban Containment Boundary and as such per the RGS the GVS&DD is normally directed not to extend sewer services. · The GVRD Board has determined that the request is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy as it is a rationalization of the existing sewerage area boundary and will not affect the intent or implementation of the RGS (Attachment 2).
In general, for all Sewerage Area expansion requests, if provisions of the RGS are met, further GVS&DD review includes an examination of financial, technical, and operational impacts on the GVS&DD, and effects on service levels.
UC-97 · There will be no significant financial impacts on the GVS&DD for the connection to the Delta sewer system. · As the existing Monastery property is already connected to the sewer system, there will be no service level impacts to the Delta or GVS&DD sewer systems and the potential future expansion will have insignificant impact on the GVS&DD sewerage system based on projected flow information from Delta staff.
3. ALTERNATIVES
The GVS&DD Board approves the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 3890 Arthur Drive in Delta.
No other alternatives are presented as the GVRD board has resolved that this request is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy and MV staff report that there will be insignificant impacts on the regional sewerage system.
4. CONCLUSION
The Corporation of Delta is requesting that the Fraser Sewerage Area be expanded to include the Augustinian Monastery property located at 3890 Arthur Drive. For the property to connect to the regional sewer system, the sewerage area must be expanded to include the subject property. The GVRD Board has resolved that this request is consistent with the provisions of the RGS. MV staff analysis has shown an insignificant impact on the regional sewer system. MV staff recommends the expansion of the FSA to include 3890 Arthur Drive.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment, 3890 Arthur Drive, Corporation of Delta. 2. Report dated October 5, 2012 to the GVRD Board from the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee, titled Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) http://www.metrovancouver.org/boards/GVRD%20Board/RD_12-Oct-12_REVISED.pdf.
6541969
UC-98 UC-99 ATTACHMENT 2
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012
To: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
From: Heather McNell, Regional Planning Division Manager Terry Hoff, Senior Regional Planner Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department
Date: September 19, 2012
Subject: Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park)
Recommendation:
That the Board: a) resolve that the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to the subject properties, Delta Engineering Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery and Hawthorne Grove Park sites is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy, and that the requested FSA expansion applications proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board; and b) delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to seek a GVRD Board decision regarding Regional Growth Strategy compliance for a request from the Corporation of Delta to expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Regional Growth Strategy Agricultural Designation.
2. CONTEXT
Following adoption of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) on July 29, 2011, Metro Vancouver procedures regarding the extension of GVS&DD regional sewer services outside of Metro Vancouver’s Urban Containment Boundary are subject to compliance with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy.
In a report dated, August 16, 2012, titled “Regional Growth Strategy Implementation and Sewerage Area Expansion Requests”, the Board was advised of the changes to policy stemming from the new RGS, and that staff are preparing guidelines for RGS policy implementation. The guidelines are anticipated for Board Consideration in late 2012.
UC-100 In the interim, the Corporation of Delta requests that Metro Vancouver Boards proceed with consideration of a sewerage area expansion requests submitted for the properties located at 5404 64 Avenue (Delta Engineering Works Yard), 4026 Arthur Drive (Hawthorne Grove Park) and 3890 Arthur Drive (Augustinian Monastery) (Map 1).
Pending Board approved RGS guidelines, Metro staff have prepared an assessment and recommendations for Board consideration of RGS compliance for each of the extension requests. If the GVRD Board determines that the requests are not compliant with the RGS, the extension requests will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for denial. If the GVRD Board determines that the requests are compliant with the RGS, the request will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for further consideration and final decision.
Corporation of Delta Engineering Works Yard 5404 64 Street
The Delta Engineering Works Yard has operated as a Public Utility land use at this location for over 40 years. Delta has recently completed plans to upgrade the works yard facility, and intends to replace the on-site wastewater treatment system with a connection to the regional sewer system. Delta has determined that the regional service connection is necessary to ensure future safe disposal of wastewater generated by the expanded Works Yard facilities and operations.
Due to its isolated location, the Works Yard property was integrated into the Agricultural Land Reserve in 1973 as a non-farm use. Subject to the Agricultural Land Commission Act, this status is valid unless, or until, the use is changed. Because the Works Yard was an accepted use within the ALR, it was included in the LRSP Green Zone in 1998, and subsequently included the RGS Agricultural Land Use Designation in 2011. The extension of the GVS&DD sewerage area exclusively to serve this existing municipal facility would not affect the provisions of the RGS. An extension to this site is unlikely to trigger additional extension requests among surrounding ALR properties in the vicinity, and any potential request would be subject to a separate sewerage extension application to the GVS&DD.
Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established facility / site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Augustinian Monastery 3890 Arthur Drive The subject site is located on one of three bequeathed properties making up the Augustinian facility which includes Sacred Heart Church and School, Augustinian House Residence and the Augustinian Monastery. The property containing the Church and School, and the property containing the Augustinian House Residence, had previously been approved for FSA expansion by the GVS&DD Board. The 1.2 hectare Monastery site, located between the church/school and the residence within the overall complex, was not included in the previous FSA extension application, but has connected to the system. The Corporation of Delta is now requesting the Monastery site be formally included along with the other Augustinian facilities already within the FSA.
From a RGS perspective, the requested expansion of the FSA is a rationalization of the existing sewer area boundary and connections within the established Augustinian facility,
UC-101 and would not affect the intent or implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy. The sewerage service expansion would have no significant impact on GVS&DD services. Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established facility / site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Hawthorne Grove Park 4026 Arthur Drive The subject property functions as a municipal park which includes existing and proposed facilities illustrating Delta’s agricultural history. The park contains the historic Kirkland House, and it is envisioned that the site will include additional historic agricultural buildings and provide a local venue for community events. Delta indicates that wastewater from the proposed facilities will exceed the capacity of the current on-site septic system which cannot be expanded due to site constraints, and will experience periods of heavy use with community events.
The subject property is within the RGS Agricultural Designation, abutting the UCB and Fraser Sewerage Area boundary. Given the established land use and community / agricultural amenity status of the property, the extension of sewer services to the property would not affect the intent or implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy. Given the relatively small size of the property (1.7 hectare), and multiple potential facilities on the site, it would be practical to include the complete property within the FSA. The sewerage service expansion would have no significant impact on GVS&DD services.
Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Map 1. Proposed GVS&DD Sewerage Area Extension Locations
UC-102
Decisions Procedures Regarding Technical Compliance with RGS Provisions
As specified in the recommendations for each of the preceding sewerage extension applications, RGS Section 6.8 provides for GVRD Board judgment in determining whether the nature of development is inconsistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy. Each application for sewerage service extension is subject to a staff review and assessment of RGS implications. For those applications where staff review determines there are no significant RGS implications, it may be prudent to avert such minor decisions proceeding through GVRD Committee and Board decision procedures, and to allow the applications to proceed directly through the GVS&DD Board and Committee procedures. For more substantive sewerage extension applications where staff review deem there are potentially significant implications for the RGS, the application would more appropriately proceed through Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and GVRD Board decision procedures.
Therefore, to streamline the RGS review of GVS&DD sewerage area extensions, it is recommended that the GVRD Board delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
3. ALTERNATIVES
That the Board:
UC-103 a) Resolve that the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to the subject Delta Engineering Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery and Hawthorne Grove Park sites is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy, and that the requested FSA expansion applications proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board (recommended); and b) Delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary. or c) Provide alternate direction to staff.
4. CONCLUSION
Expansion of the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area must be consistent with the provisions of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. A GVRD Board decision on RGS compliance will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board.
6520038
UC-104 5.7
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Inder Singh, Division Manager, Utility Planning and Implementation
Date: November 5, 2012
Subject: Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Delta Works Yard in the Corporation of Delta
Recommendation:
That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 5404 64th Street in Delta – the Delta Engineering Works Yard.
1. PURPOSE
This report responds to a request from the Corporation of Delta for GVS&DD Board approval to expand the Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) to include the property at 5404 64th Street in Delta (Attachment 1) to accommodate the Corporation of Delta’s Engineering Works Yard.
2. CONTEXT
Sewerage and Drainage Area boundaries are occasionally amended in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act, typically at the request of a GVS&DD member. Metro Vancouver (MV) received a council resolution from Delta requesting that the Fraser Sewerage Area be expanded to include their Engineering Works Yard located at 5404 64th Street.
Metro Vancouver procedures regarding the extension of regional sewer services are subject to provisions of GVRD’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Bylaw.
The Works Yard currently operates using an on-site wastewater treatment system. Delta staff reports that they intend to upgrade the facilities at the Works Yard and have reported that the Agriculture Land Commission (ALC) does not object to the property being upgraded. Delta staff have also indicated that connection to the sewer system will ensure future safe disposal of wastewater from the Works Yard. They do not anticipate that there will be future requests for additional connections to this sewer due to the remote location of the facility.
The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion: · A resolution was passed by Delta Council requesting an expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area. · The property is located outside the RGS Urban Containment Boundary and as such the GVS&DD is normally directed not to extend sewer services. · The GVRD Board has resolved that this request is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy as it is designated as agricultural land under the RGS and that the extension is to exclusively service the municipal facility and will not likely trigger additional service requests (Attachment 2).
UC-105 In general, for all Sewerage Area expansion requests, if provisions of the RGS are met, further GVS&DD review includes an examination of financial, technical, and operational impacts, and effects on service levels.
· There will be no significant financial impacts on the GVS&DD for the connection to the sewer system as any costs will be paid by the Corporation of Delta. · Delta staff flow projections will cause no expected significant service level impacts to the Delta or GVS&DD sewer systems. · Delta staff report the discharge is primarily domestic wastewater. Should additional non-domestic flows be considered, an application to MV’s Regulation and Enforcement Division would be required.
3. ALTERNATIVES
The GVS&DD Board approves the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the property located at 5404 64th Street in Delta – the Delta Engineering Works Yard.
No other alternatives are presented as the Metro Vancouver Board has resolved that this request is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy and GVS&DD staff report that there will be insignificant impacts on the regional sewerage system.
4. CONCLUSION
The Corporation of Delta is requesting that the Fraser Sewerage Area be expanded to include their Engineering Works Yard located at 5404 64th Street. The property is outside of the RGS Urban Containment Boundary and outside of the Fraser Sewerage Area. For the property to connect to the regional sewer system, the FSA must be expanded to include the subject property. The GVRD Board has resolved that this expansion request is consistent with the provisions of the RGS. MV staff analysis has shown an insignificant impact on the regional sewerage system. MV staff recommend the FSA be expanded to include the Corporation of Delta Engineering Works Yard property located at 5404 64th Street.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment, 5404 64th Street, Corporation of Delta. 2. Report dated October 5, 2012 to the GVRD Board from the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee, titled Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) http://www.metrovancouver.org/boards/GVRD%20Board/RD_12-Oct-12_REVISED.pdf.
6543221 UC-106 UC-107 ATTACHMENT 2
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012
To: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
From: Heather McNell, Regional Planning Division Manager Terry Hoff, Senior Regional Planner Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department
Date: September 19, 2012
Subject: Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park)
Recommendation:
That the Board: a) resolve that the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to the subject properties, Delta Engineering Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery and Hawthorne Grove Park sites is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy, and that the requested FSA expansion applications proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board; and b) delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to seek a GVRD Board decision regarding Regional Growth Strategy compliance for a request from the Corporation of Delta to expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Regional Growth Strategy Agricultural Designation.
2. CONTEXT
Following adoption of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) on July 29, 2011, Metro Vancouver procedures regarding the extension of GVS&DD regional sewer services outside of Metro Vancouver’s Urban Containment Boundary are subject to compliance with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy.
In a report dated, August 16, 2012, titled “Regional Growth Strategy Implementation and Sewerage Area Expansion Requests”, the Board was advised of the changes to policy stemming from the new RGS, and that staff are preparing guidelines for RGS policy implementation. The guidelines are anticipated for Board Consideration in late 2012.
UC-108
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 2 of 5
In the interim, the Corporation of Delta requests that Metro Vancouver Boards proceed with consideration of a sewerage area expansion requests submitted for the properties located at 5404 64 Avenue (Delta Engineering Works Yard), 4026 Arthur Drive (Hawthorne Grove Park) and 3890 Arthur Drive (Augustinian Monastery) (Map 1).
Pending Board approved RGS guidelines, Metro staff have prepared an assessment and recommendations for Board consideration of RGS compliance for each of the extension requests. If the GVRD Board determines that the requests are not compliant with the RGS, the extension requests will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for denial. If the GVRD Board determines that the requests are compliant with the RGS, the request will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board for further consideration and final decision.
Corporation of Delta Engineering Works Yard 5404 64 Street
The Delta Engineering Works Yard has operated as a Public Utility land use at this location for over 40 years. Delta has recently completed plans to upgrade the works yard facility, and intends to replace the on-site wastewater treatment system with a connection to the regional sewer system. Delta has determined that the regional service connection is necessary to ensure future safe disposal of wastewater generated by the expanded Works Yard facilities and operations.
Due to its isolated location, the Works Yard property was integrated into the Agricultural Land Reserve in 1973 as a non-farm use. Subject to the Agricultural Land Commission Act, this status is valid unless, or until, the use is changed. Because the Works Yard was an accepted use within the ALR, it was included in the LRSP Green Zone in 1998, and subsequently included the RGS Agricultural Land Use Designation in 2011. The extension of the GVS&DD sewerage area exclusively to serve this existing municipal facility would not affect the provisions of the RGS. An extension to this site is unlikely to trigger additional extension requests among surrounding ALR properties in the vicinity, and any potential request would be subject to a separate sewerage extension application to the GVS&DD.
Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established facility / site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Augustinian Monastery 3890 Arthur Drive The subject site is located on one of three bequeathed properties making up the Augustinian facility which includes Sacred Heart Church and School, Augustinian House Residence and the Augustinian Monastery. The property containing the Church and School, and the property containing the Augustinian House Residence, had previously been approved for FSA expansion by the GVS&DD Board. The 1.2 hectare Monastery site, located between the church/school and the residence within the overall complex, was not included in the previous FSA extension application, but has connected to the system. The Corporation of Delta is now requesting the Monastery site be formally included along with the other Augustinian facilities already within the FSA.
From a RGS perspective, the requested expansion of the FSA is a rationalization of the existing sewer area boundary and connections within the established Augustinian facility,
UC-109
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 3 of 5 and would not affect the intent or implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy. The sewerage service expansion would have no significant impact on GVS&DD services. Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established facility / site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Hawthorne Grove Park 4026 Arthur Drive The subject property functions as a municipal park which includes existing and proposed facilities illustrating Delta’s agricultural history. The park contains the historic Kirkland House, and it is envisioned that the site will include additional historic agricultural buildings and provide a local venue for community events. Delta indicates that wastewater from the proposed facilities will exceed the capacity of the current on-site septic system which cannot be expanded due to site constraints, and will experience periods of heavy use with community events.
The subject property is within the RGS Agricultural Designation, abutting the UCB and Fraser Sewerage Area boundary. Given the established land use and community / agricultural amenity status of the property, the extension of sewer services to the property would not affect the intent or implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy. Given the relatively small size of the property (1.7 hectare), and multiple potential facilities on the site, it would be practical to include the complete property within the FSA. The sewerage service expansion would have no significant impact on GVS&DD services.
Therefore, subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that GVRD Board pass a resolution that the extension of sewerage services to this established site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS, and that the requested FSA expansion application proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board.
Map 1. Proposed GVS&DD Sewerage Area Extension Locations
UC-110
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 4 of 5
Decisions Procedures Regarding Technical Compliance with RGS Provisions
As specified in the recommendations for each of the preceding sewerage extension applications, RGS Section 6.8 provides for GVRD Board judgment in determining whether the nature of development is inconsistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy. Each application for sewerage service extension is subject to a staff review and assessment of RGS implications. For those applications where staff review determines there are no significant RGS implications, it may be prudent to avert such minor decisions proceeding through GVRD Committee and Board decision procedures, and to allow the applications to proceed directly through the GVS&DD Board and Committee procedures. For more substantive sewerage extension applications where staff review deem there are potentially significant implications for the RGS, the application would more appropriately proceed through Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and GVRD Board decision procedures.
Therefore, to streamline the RGS review of GVS&DD sewerage area extensions, it is recommended that the GVRD Board delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
3. ALTERNATIVES
That the Board:
UC-111
Consideration of Regional Growth Strategy Compliance - Corporation of Delta Request to Expand the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area within the Agricultural Designation (Delta Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery, Hawthorne Grove Park) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: October 5, 2012 Page 5 of 5 a) Resolve that the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to the subject Delta Engineering Works Yard, Augustinian Monastery and Hawthorne Grove Park sites is consistent with the provisions of the Regional Growth Strategy, and that the requested FSA expansion applications proceed for consideration by the GVS&DD Board (recommended); and b) Delegate to the Chief Administrative Office (CAO) or her delegates, the authority to determine technical compliance with the Regional Growth Strategy for the extension of GVS&DD sewerage services to Agricultural, Rural and Conservation / Recreation areas outside the Urban Containment Boundary. or c) Provide alternate direction to staff.
4. CONCLUSION
Expansion of the GVS&DD Fraser Sewerage Area must be consistent with the provisions of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. A GVRD Board decision on RGS compliance will be forwarded to the GVS&DD Board.
6520038
UC-112 5.8
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: November 9, 2012 Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Utilities Committee
From: Heather McNell, Division Manager, Regional Planning Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department
Inder Singh, Division Manager, Utility Planning and Implementation Utility Planning Department
Date: November 2, 2012
Subject: Corporation of Delta Request to Extend Regional Sewer Service Outside of the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Containment Boundary, and to Amend the Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – Millennium Pacific Greenhouses at 3760 Arthur Drive
Recommendations:
That the GVRD Board: resolve that the proposed extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta is consistent with Regional Growth Strategy provisions.
That the GVS&DD Board: subject to the GVRD Board resolving that the proposed extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta is consistent with Regional Growth Strategy provisions, approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta to include the building footprint of the proposed temporary farm worker housing for the duration that the temporary structures are in place, and the building footprint only for the existing greenhouse buildings (based on domestic wastewater flows only).
1. PURPOSE
This joint report seeks: a) a GVRD Board decision regarding Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) compliance for a request from the Corporation of Delta to extend regional sewer services outside of Metro Vancouver’s Urban Containment Boundary (UCB) into the Regional Growth Strategy Agricultural designation, and b) a GVS&DD Board decision to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary.
2. CONTEXT
Regional Growth Strategy Assessment Following adoption of Metro Vancouver’s RGS on July 29, 2011, Metro Vancouver procedures regarding the extension of GVS&DD regional sewer services outside of Metro Vancouver’s Urban Containment Boundary are subject to compliance with the provisions of the RGS.
UC-113 In a report dated October 5, 2012, titled “Regional Growth Strategy Implementation and Sewerage Area Expansion Requests”, the GVRD Board was advised of the changes to policy stemming from the new RGS, and that staff are preparing guidelines for RGS policy implementation. In the interim, the Corporation of Delta has requested that Metro Vancouver Boards proceed with consideration of the sewer extension request described in their Council Resolution (Attachment 1). Pending GVRD Board approved RGS guidelines, Metro staff have prepared an assessment and recommendation for GVRD Board consideration of RGS compliance.
Delta is requesting a Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) expansion for a property located within the RGS Agricultural land use designation, being utilized for greenhouse production. The sewer connection is intended for a proposed temporary residential use, which would include six trailer units for 60 migrant farm workers, plus a lunchroom and washrooms within the greenhouse facility.
Migrant farm worker housing is a permitted use in Delta’s Official Community Plan and Zoning bylaw. The municipality will require a Restrictive Covenant on the property to ensure the migrant farm worker housing is used only for the intended purpose, and that housing will be removed if no longer needed for the intended purpose.
The property is currently serviced by an on-site sewage system. The proponent and Delta indicate that expansion of the system field is constrained by poor (peat) soils and cultivated areas on the property, and is concerned that an on-site system is not properly able to accommodate the additional demand required for the housing facility, thereby raising the risk of contaminating the adjacent Chillukthan Slough, an important watercourse that serves as part of Delta’s irrigation system. The proponent therefore proposes to connect to an existing Delta sewer main that traverses the property in order to alleviate potential threats to public health and natural assets.
RGS provisions regarding the extension of regional sewer services are intended to reinforce Urban Containment, protect Agricultural Area viability and ensure there is no threat to public health or natural assets. An RGS assessment of this application concludes that:
· the extension of regional sewerage services would be limited to a small footprint within the subject property, and the connection will be designed only to serve the specified uses within that footprint; · the application will not result in additional sewer infrastructure that could trigger further extension applications and land use pressures in the surrounding area; · the concerns regarding residential intrusion into Agricultural areas will be alleviated by a Restrictive Covenant required by the Corporation of Delta, which will ensure the housing is used only for the limited and intended purpose of accommodating federally permitted migrant workers. The Restrictive Covenant would benefit from additional provisions ensuring that connection of regional sewerage services to the housing structures is contingent on the permitted use. Any alternative use would require the Corporation of Delta to amend the GVS&DD sewerage area boundary footprint.
Therefore, pending future GVRD Board approval of RGS guidelines for sewerage extension outside the UCB, this assessment concludes that extension of regional sewerage services would have no significant effect on RGS provisions. However, this assessment is not intended to establish a precedent for future sewerage area expansions nor prescribe or inhibit content of related RGS guidelines.
UC-114 Subject to RGS Section 6.8, it is recommended that the GVRD Board pass a resolution that the application to extend regional sewerage services to the subject site is consistent with the provisions of the RGS.
Utility Planning Assessment
Sewerage and Drainage Area boundaries are occasionally amended in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act, typically at the request of a GVS&DD member. Metro Vancouver received a council resolution from Delta requesting that the FSA be expanded to include Millennium Pacific Greenhouses located at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta.
The request seeks permission to expand the FSA to include the entire property at 3760 Arthur Drive. The specifics include a connection for temporary housing for 60 migrant farm workers, as well as existing and future greenhouses. The property is currently serviced by an on-site sewage system which is reported by Delta staff as being inadequate to service the new development. Delta staff also indicates it would be difficult to upgrade the existing sewer system. A subsequent letter to Metro Vancouver proposes to limit the FSA expansion to only building footprints (Attachment 2). The building footprints are shown on Attachment 3.
The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion: · A resolution was passed by Delta Council requesting an expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area; · The property is located outside the RGS Urban Containment Boundary, and as per the RGS, the GVRD Board must determine compatibility with RGS provisions. The GVS&DD Board must not authorize regional service connections for an application that is deemed, in the sole judgement of the GVRD Board, to be inconsistent with RGS provisions.
In general, for all Sewerage Area expansion requests, if provisions of the RGS are met, further GVS&DD review is limited to an examination of financial, technical, and operational impacts, and effects on services levels.
· There will be no financial impacts on the GVS&DD for the connection to the Delta sewer system. · There will be no significant service level impacts expected to the Delta or GVS&DD sewer systems as a result of domestic wastewater from the farm workers housing or the existing greenhouse washrooms. Process water from greenhouse operations is not included nor considered part of this assessment. · The Delta report also indicates that future greenhouses on this property may request sewer service. For future requests, additional information will be required at that time to consider a further expansion of the FSA.
3. ALTERNATIVES
That the GVRD Board: resolve that the proposed extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta is consistent with Regional Growth Strategy provisions. and
UC-115 that the GVS&DD Board: subject to the GVRD Board resolving that the proposed extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta is consistent with Regional Growth Strategy provisions, approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area at 3760 Arthur Drive in Delta to include the building footprint of the proposed temporary farm worker housing for the duration that the temporary structures are in place, and the building footprint only for the existing greenhouse buildings (based on domestic wastewater flows only).
Or
That the GVRD Board provide alternative direction to staff.
Or
That the GVS&DD Board provide alternative direction to staff.
4. CONCLUSION
The GVRD Board is reviewing guidelines for determining compatibility with RGS provisions, assessment of this application recommends that the extension of regional sewerage services at 3760 Arthur Drive be resolved by the GVRD Board as consistent with RGS provisions. If the GVRD Board alternatively determines that the proposed extension is not consistent with RGS provisions, the GVS&DD Board must not authorize the proposed FSA expansion.
GVS&DD staff analysis of the expected flows does not show any significant impact on GVS&DD service levels as a result of domestic wastewater from the proposed temporary farm worker housing, or the existing greenhouse kitchen and washrooms. Staff recommend that the FSA be expanded to include building footprints only for domestic wastewater from the temporary migrant farm workers housing and the existing greenhouse kitchen and washrooms. However, any future greenhouse development would require a new application for a sewerage area expansion.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Corporation of Delta Council Resolution – February 2012 (Doc. # 6708566)
2. Letter from Corporation of Delta – October 2012 (Doc. # 6708911)
3. Proposed Fraser Sewerage Area Amendment, 3760 Arthur Drive, Corporation of Delta (Doc. #. 6709297)
6699447
UC-116 2012 attached Please 4330 Dear Burnaby, Metro Ms. Deputy F ruary e E. D. C. B. A. b Delia regarding Ms. approval property Enlargement Kingsway Greenhouses) THAT accordance THAT Covenant THAT 3. THAT 2. be 1. THAT Vancouver be Commissioner Council completed report stage. Provide Provide the Enter satisfaction BC equipment 2 Laglagaron: Laglagaron, advised , 2” the the Development First, a V5H Director at 12 the of into from copy which owner boundaries 3760 Resolution with metering (Millennium 4G8 the alternative that (Millennium above Second a by the and of of Bylaw Section sewer Arthur MPA of “Delta will the of at the Community Community the and the install Delta set owner: Variance Delta for fthe of and Zoning area Drive. No, regarding January fire-protection, property 219 endorsed out Pacific Pacific all Fire appropriate Sewer Third conditions expansion. Restrictive 7040, proposed area Planning Permit Bylaw Planning Chief; Greenhouses) 30, at Greenhouses) the Delta Readings of 2012 Extension 3760 2012 No, the LU006293 following and UC-117 and for confirm and Covenant address Sewer & 2750, Arthur be Regular “Delta migrant Development existing Development; forwarded be’ Bylaw resolution: Area adequacy 1977”. and Drive Sewer be Bylaw sign given for Meeting, farm issued water flood Extension Enlargement No, enter
to FEBOS2O1Z Area” No. worker to department to Act
7040, identify ;: — proofing of seivices with 7040, Delta Delta into Metro LicttC on access be :!k housing 2012. the & a extended Council 2012 worker Sewer Section Enlargement in following at Vancouver
(Millennium O/’ for a dated bx! the form on Delta considered housing, Extension 219 building the to e January acceptable conditions include property P1L, Restrictive fire — for Pacific fighting permit to their the 19, and I the the .72 in to to Page 2 of 2
F. THAT subject to approval of the sewer area expansion by Metro Vancouver, the owner enter into a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant regarding the private sanitary pump station to indemnify the Municipalityfor any potential pump failure or surcharge. G. THATthe Mayor and Municipal Clerk be authorized to sign all documents pertaining to this development.
Consequently, we forward this information to you with a request that the application for Sewer Extension described in the attached report and more specifically noted under item E, above, be considered by the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Board at its earliest convenience.
Yours truly,
Municipal Clerk
Attachment cc: Steven Lan, Director of Engineering Harald Fograscher, Manager of Utilities&Construction
UC-118 E.O The Corporation of Delta COUNCIL REPORT Regular Meeting
To: Mayor and Council File No.: LU006293
From: Community Planning & Bylaw No.: 7040 Development Department Date: January 19, 2012
Development Variance Permit, Request for Sewer Area Extension and Authorization to Execute Documents for Migrant Farm Worker Housing at 3760 Arthur Drive (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) The following report has been reviewed and endorsed by the Chief Administrative Officer. RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. THAT Development Variance Permit LU006293 be issued with the following conditions to be completed by the owner:
1. Enter into a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant for flood proofing in a form acceptable to the Director of Community Planning and Development;
2. Provide alternative fire-protection, confirm adequacy of access for Delta firefighting equipment and install appropriate address sign to identify worker housing, to the satisfaction of the Delta Fire Chief; and
3. Provide metering for all proposed and existing water services at the building permit stage.
B. THAT the owner of the property at 3760 Arthur Drive enter into a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant which willset out conditions for migrant farm worker housing on the property in accordance with “Delta Zoning Bylaw No. 2750, 1977”.
C. THAT the boundaries of the area of the “Delta Sewer Area” be extended to include the property at 3760 Arthur Drive.
D. THAT First, Second and Third Readings be given to Delta Sewer Extension and Enlargement (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) Bylaw No. 7040, 2012.
E. THAT a copy of Delta Sewer Extension and Enlargement (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) Bylaw No. 7040, 2012 be forwarded to Metro Vancouver for their approval of the sewer area expansion.
F. THAT, subject to approval of the sewer area expansion by Metro Vancouver, the owner enter into a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant regarding the private UC-119 Page 2 of 7 3760 Arthur Drive (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) LU006293 January 19, 2012
sanitary pump station to indemnify the Municipality for any potential pump failure or surcharge.
G. THAT the Mayor and Municipal Clerk be authorized to sign all documents pertaining to this development.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this reportis to present an application for migrant farm worker housing for the property at 3760 Arthur Drive. The application includes a request for a Development Variance Permit, the details of which are described below, and a request to extend the sewer area to incorporate the subject property. Development Variance Permit No. LU006293 and Sewer Area Extension and Enlargement Bylaw No. 7040 are presented for Council’s consideration. This report also seeks Council approval to authorize the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to sign a Section 2.19 Restrictive Covenant pertaining to the proposed migrant farm worker housing. The covenant is a requirement of the Al Agriculture Zone.
Location Map
BACKGROUND:
Site Description and Context: This 66.14 ha (163 acre) site is located north of 34B Avenue and east of Arthur Drive, and is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The subject site contains two greenhouses with a total building area of 12 ha (30 ac), administration and service buildings totaling 4,200 2m (45,208 2),ft and a farm house. The Al Agriculture Zone permits migrant farm worker housing for up to 130 workers per farm for intensive farming, without rezoning, provided that certain conditions are met. One of the conditions is that the landowner UC-120
specified
farm
maximum
thus
greenhouse
greenhouse
The
located
Development measured
specifies
housing
containing
The
proposal
Development
buildings. Attachment
Additional
migrant
housing
(15,177
access
employed
units
The
Proposal:
its
accordance
enter
LU006293 3760
applicant DISCUSSION:
the
variance intended
residents
Al
has
Where
home
Permit this
ancillary
The
is
Council
applicant
with
Arthur intended
-
into
on
road,
housing
farm
(where
Agriculture
ft 2 ).
had
plan
and
in
complies
that
Official
depth
from
a
a
the
plate
information
at
the
a
without
prior
Drive
building buildings.
B. total
farm
a
A
south
the
restrictive
worker
to
is
Variance the purpose.
and
with
Policy:
proposes
would
or
housing.
Variance
proposes
Al
fair
new
a
The
considered
it
of them
for
would
would
businesses.
(Millennium
Community
notification
floor
greenhouse.
dedicated
maximum
does
home
Provincial
Agriculture
the
60
opportunity
with
of
referral
general
Zone
6
site
measure
and
housing
m
may
the
ha
provisions
area
on
These
be
be
not
Permit
all
to
covenant
plate
(197
plan
Section
to
the
Permit:
(14.83
existing
the
sets
located
locate
located
regulations
also
adjoin
Pacific
to
osrc accommodation construct
of
minor
and
depth
or
Agricultural
has
west
Plan
ft)
in
and
as
site
Zone
entrances
a
70.5
594
to
constructed
to
out
The
be
Attachment
Public
measured
intensive
ac)
506(5)(b)
illustrated
been
the
vary
of
comment
Greenhouses)
with
an
and
and
end
the
555
greenhouses,
for designation
well
m 2
regulations
considered,
m
the
by
housing
greenhouse,
housing
existing
a
(231
this
plans
(6,394
except
proposal
the
will
of
m
given,
495
Hearing
back
farm
zone
are
Land
the
(1,821 Page
UC-121
agricultural
requirement
not
Municipality
ft)
of
from
on
road.
m
on
in C
would
of
at
home
easternmost
ft 2 ).
and
farm
“Delta
Council
near
by
the
(1,624
adversely
3
the
Attachment
shows
for
the
Commission
for
Arthur
the
provided
if
of
is
ft)
a
20
is
they
location
to
The
is
migrant
The
this
7
dedicated
included
site
application
home
the
from
east
currently
comprise
plate
m
removed
Zoning
be
ft)
the
may
uses.
Drive.
for
site
are
applicant
(66
plan
farm
main
to
to
located
end
Arthur
affect
they
containing
The
plate)
proposed
sixty
ensure
allow
of farm
satisfied
greenhouse
ft)
is
issue
D
in
in
legislation
Bylaw
home
worker
of
in
the
Agricultural.
or
Uses
for
show
six
The
when
variance
the
Attachment
meet
or
migrant
the the
surrounding
Drive.
worker
constructed
is east
the
is
a
farm
manufactured
a
in
the
60
Project
rear
total
plate,
seeking
customary
No.
westernmost
Development
planning
the
those that
worker
municipal
location
entrances
no
migrant
of
m
housing
home
This
of
and
2750,
is housing. farm
layout
the
building,
longer
area
(197
the
excluding
the
being
cases
Data
C.
The
proposed
housing
a
policies.
exceeds
community
owners,
road
stages.
farm plate
of
workers January
of
ft)
proposed
1977”
of
and is
policies
needed
to
the
designation
Table
trailer
1,410
sought
where
used
the
and
The
Variance
the
as
worker
the
to
19,
the
in
m 2
in
be for
in
2012 the subject employee the this Tsawwassen, location pressure through
housing would existing According the large-diameter From does Applications and technical, objectives their provided granted forcemain sewer Vancouver’s number worker The subject readings Variance worker
Sewer about Standards alternatives
housing but 3760 recommendations Section No. LU006293
proposed
applicant
sewer
this
upgrade
5100,
applicant
Arthur
approval
not
a
the intrude
system,
Area property
technical
housing
housing
property
would the sanitary
as may of
by
5.7
from
in meet a
to
Permit
operational lunchrooms).
location
to
in that and
factors Drive
1994”
rationale well
Bylaw. The
the
a subject
in
approved
to
the
the
the Extension: be
Fraser
in
connection
sewer
into a and
prior has
need Schedule
transmission current
traverses
land
approval forcemain.
extend
(Millennium
as making
fire
Corporation
as
waived
is adjacent
forcemain
event
as
applicant, to
system
perspective,
requires
what
including:
also private
made
washrooms of
as
An well
ensure to
property
hydrant,
designations
it
to
for
extension Sewerage
the
is
and a
Council
demand address
by
the
be
of
required
this as the is
condition
currently
by
There to
A
to
a the
would
housing
an
to the
currently service
reviewed that Pacific
financial
The
Sewer existing
request of the
include compliance the
was
meet
request
request
an
sewer
of
consistency
emergency within approval
property.
Delta “Delta
the
giving
no
bylaw
Director
existing sewer Delta. contained is
Area.
existing
sign
during
only
also
Greenhouses)
once
current
sufficient
of located
Area to
should dwelling connections
sanitary
these
that
and to
a
a
impacts
Fire
with for
the
to
clearly
be Subdivision
minimally
a
final
statutory
cultivated
and
extend
would
the
of This
The
peak
consideration. Council.
the
are
In with
septic met
future
provides of service
Regional
Page
Chief.
Engineering,
and alternative
and
with firefighters UC-122
areas
outside
within
order then
consideration. buildings
Engineering
forcemain
be
process
sewer would capacity
reviewed
indicating
prior
of the
operational
collect
4 would
the
projected
local more
field greenhouses,
the
right-of-way, of
are
impact
forward
Given
area connection, to in
Delta
the
Expansion
and
7
service
to sewer
of Growth
area allow
the
connect
proposed
generally
does
policy
are
flows requires
than
firefighting not
issuance
greenhouses
Delta’s in
need
of
with
that Development
the
the
Delta Subdivision
and
The Delta’s
the
extension
subject
the
the
constructed
demand for significantly
area
periods.
not
to
90
from
Strategy.
consideration traverses and location
distance
to
system.
likely
forcemain
connection
additional
bylaw farm.
the
of
Sewer
as
Sewer
m
function
Council
to extension; not
attend
boundary
of
ability
the
land
(295
the
show to
is
the entire
the
be
were
supported.
Proximity
included The to
(Attachment providing
existing (e.g.,
of
and
migrant
Area
Area
of
municipal
use
Standards
sited A
ft)
the
a to Development
The
increase
Metro
to
the
to
on
effectively
land the
community
currently fire.
connection
considerations
costs
from
avoid
of
Development
maintain
to
give
designations;
property and
offices,
Attachment given
and
must
applicant migrant
north
migrant
farm
include
septic to
Vancouver in
farm January
of
firefighting
a
three to
the
confusion
In
Metro the
the
the
sanitary
fire
the
first
to
Bylaw
E).
worker
maintain
of
this
runs
and
goals,
worker
or
a
is farm
sanitary
report
field
the of
farm
hydrant
the
19,
be
has
repair a
case,
C.
2012
of
the
for
referred
Council
sewer
Given
Concepts
Regional
Community
Local
Technical!
Operational
Levels Service
Compliance
Land
Financial
summary
within
proposal
on
time,
extension
be
if
industry
public
regional Vancouver
Strategy
Metro
LU006293 3760
there
developing
considered
that
area
Arthur
Use
Metro
the
give
to
Vancouver
health
are
(Strategies
sewage
the
in
Metro
iet the directs
of
extension
next
under
Drive
First,
the
currently
recently
Vancouver
the
Strategy
The
of
Containment
greenhouse
The
GVS&DD.
processing
forcemain,
Discharges
resulting This
the
flow The
is
Regional
the
permitted
located
The
Designation
consistent
offsetting
The connected,
applicant.
issue,
such
few
agriculture
in
same
increased
Vancouver
(Millennium
areas
the
Second
bylaw,
property
Regional
proposed
support
services
applicant
of
incremental
proposed
proposed
approval
months.
criteria
protect
#
adopted
in 1.1
Greater
new
any
within
(Strategy
manner
from
evaluated
1.1.1
Growth
support
financial
in
has
the
but
liters/second
with
facility
There
to
and
operation.
guidelines
the
Regional
of
the
to
as
Boundary.
is
Pacific
and
into
Growth
for
the
the
uses
has
flow the and
the
is
not
will
and
agricultural
uses
the
sewer
located
In
Vancouver
Delta’s
‘Agriculture’,
land
a
Agricultural
Third
as
required
increase
their
Strategy agri-industry
agricultural
the
of
OCP
sewer would
#2.3.1).
discharges,
new
Agricultural
yet
region’s
need
indicated
intend
maximum
would Greenhouses)
#2.3.1).
impacts
are
is
has
agriculture
as
owner
Strategy
absence
Growth
extension
presented
developed
Readings
consideration.
Regional
or
outside
greenhouse
Official
and
consistent
been
to
based
The
system
be
to
criteria
increase
in
in
appears
be uses
UC-123
Page
natural
Sewerage
would
of
no
neighbouring
that order
present Staff
Land
flow
with
proposed
areas
of
done
Strategy
factored
operating
etc.)
Land
consistent designation
capital
of
Community
of
on
or
5
130
on
and
to
Growth
beyond
their
in
for
criteria
can
of
criteria,
the
contacted
the
to
Reserve.
with
agri-industry, a
be
assets
to
Bylaw
the
to
agriculturally
for
may
7
except
and
Reserve.
worker
workers
when
draft
extend
connection
2.3
charged
current
Regional
be
connection
allow
and
cost
previous
table
in
the
language.
sewer
lorequire also Delta’s
Strategy.
migrant
to
regular
accommodated
with
liters/second.
with
Delta
developments.
criteria
No.
or
a
Drainage
current
to
‘Agriculture’.
where
Plan
guide
for
population
Metro the
sewer
to
below.
currently
Al
Delta
area
7040
additional
the
The regular
service
some
Growth
staff
overall
sewer
Sewer
it
would
sanitary
Future
Agriculture
farm
designated
to
will
evaluation
is needed
Regional
Metro
Vancouver
zoning
The
proposed
extension
area
or
so
regional
recommended
have
District
a
consideration
have
worker
sewer
Metro
authorized
that
area
agriculture
of
Permit
be
Area.
Strategy
sewer
Regional
Land
The
future
extension
staff
flows
within
60
and
evaluated
to
paid
an
it
Growth
extensions.
to
Zone,
committees
of
Vancouver.
people.
property lands.
address
may charges
uses
Use
housing
is
January
are
Metro
system.
from estimated to
existing
flows
not
(e.g.
for
sewer
the
in
Urban
determine
Growth
working
under
be
support
or
by
extend
are
and would
that existing
of
At
the
agri
19,
the
If
a
is
area
are
this
with
this
2012
A If Page 6 of 7 3760 Arthur Drive (MillenniumPacific Greenhouses) LU006293 January 19, 2012 Migrant Farm Worker Housing Covenant:
The owner of a lot on which migrant farm worker housing is located is required to register a restrictive covenant against the title of the property to: • Ensure that present and future owners are aware of and commit to following the zoning regulations for migrant farm worker housing; • Notifythe owner of the requirement for an annual statutory declaration documenting that the housing has been inspected and that the workers being housed have been recruited through one of the recognized federal foreign worker programs; and • Obtain financial security for removal of the housing should it no longer be required but failto be removed by the property owner in the time period specified.
The restrictive covenant would need to be registered on the property prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed migrant farm worker housing. Council’s authorization for the Mayor and the Municipal Clerk to sign the restrictive covenant on behalf of The Corporation of Delta is therefore sought.
Implications: Financial Implications — There are no financial implications to Delta. The owner would be responsible for infrastructure costs to connect to the sewer and would be charged regular sewer charges based on volumes.
Interdepartmental Implications — The owner would be required to comply with the development regulations set out in “Delta Subdivision and Development Standards Bylaw No. 5100, 1994”. Metering of all proposed and existing water services is required. The owner is also required to enter into a flood proofing covenant and a covenant regarding the private sanitary pump station to indemnify the municipality for any potential pump failure or surcharge. In terms of fire protection, the applicant will need to provide engineering details specifying the alternative method of fire protection, acceptable to the Delta Fire Chief. A report from a geotechnical engineer is also required to confirm whether the existing access to the property will support Delta’s firefighting equipment.
Community Implications — Public notification on the proposed Development Variance Permit was sent to surrounding residents on two occasions, most recently to advise them that Council willbe considering this item at the January 30, 2012 Regular Meeting. To date no comments have been received. Should any comments be received prior to January 30 they will be provided to Council as on-table items.
• CONCLUSION:
This report considers a request for a Development Variance Permit to vary “Delta Zoning Bylaw No. 2750, 1977” to allow the farm home plate for proposed migrant farm worker housing to be located more than 60 m (197 ft) from a dedicated or constructed road. A request to extend the Sewer Area to allow for connection with the sanitary
UC-124 Page 7 of 7 3760 Arthur Drive (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) LU006293 January 19, 2012
forcemain that traverses the property is also presented. It is recommended that the Development Variance Permit be issued, subject to the owner satisfying the conditions noted in this report. It is further recommended that Bylaw No. 7040 to extend the sewer area be given First, Second and Third Readings so that it may be advanced to Metro Vancouver for its consideration.
Thom s Leathem Director of Community Planning & Development Department submission prepared by: Susan Elbe, Planner and Marcy Sangret, Deputy Director of Community Planning and Development SE/MS/js/jf
• ATTACHMENTS:
A. Sewer Area Extension and Enlargement Bylaw No. 7040 B. Project Data Table C. Site Plan D. Plans for Migrant Farm Worker Housing E. Delta and Applicant’s Correspondence
This report has been prepared in consultation with the following listed department.
Concurring Departments Department Name Signature Engineering Steven Lan
GCurrent DeveiopnientLlJ FiLES\LIJOO6\LUOCi6293Ccuncii\DVP Report 2012 doc
UC-125 Attachment A Page 1 of 3
THE CORPORATION OF DELTA Refers to Item E.0 30, 201 BYLAW NO 7040 - Regular Meetinç A Bylaw to extend the boundaries and area o ‘Delta Sewer Area”
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of Delta has adopted a bylaw entitled “Delta Sewer Area Merger Bylaw No. 2551, 1976” which outlined areas specified as the “Delta Sewer Area” created for the purpose of providing a sanitary sewer system for the special benefit of the said areas;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable and expedient to extend the specified area serviced by the sewer system;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of The Corporation of Delta in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as the “Delta Sewer Area Extension and Enlargement (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) Bylaw No. 7040, 2012”.
2. Any liabilities incurred, on behalf of the “Delta Sewer Area” as created by the “Delta Sewer Area Merger Bylaw No. 2551, 1976” shall be borne by all the owners of parcels of lands in the “Delta Sewer Area” as extended and enlarged by this bylaw.
3. The “Delta Sewer Area” as created by the “Delta Sewer Area Merger Bylaw No. 2551, 1976” and as extended from time to time is hereby further extended and enlarged to include the property described as “Proposed Sewer Area Extension” as shown outlined inbold on the plan attached hereto and identified as Schedule “A”.
READ A FIRST time the day of , 2012.
READ A SECOND time the day of , 2012.
READ A THIRD time the day of ,20
APPROVED BYthe Greater Vancouver Sewer & Drainage District the dayof ,20
UC-126 Bylaw No. 7040 Attachment A Page 2 of 3
FINALLYCONSIDERED AND ADOPTED the day of 20
Lois E. Jackson Mayor
Angila Bains Municipal Clerk
UC-127 Bylaw No. 7040 Attachment A -3- Page 3 of 3
This is Schedule “A”to “Delta Sewer Area Extension and Enlargement (Millennium Pacific Greenhouses) Bylaw No. 7040, 2012”
Legal: P.l.D. 013-028-839
UC-128
Worker
Home
Maximum Zoning
Variances
Section
Worker
Minimum
Minimum
Maximum
Interior
Minimum
Floor
Maximum
Farm
Farm Project
Maximum
Housed
Number
Proposed
Zoning
Existing
Lot
Application
Applicant:
OCP
Owner:
Size
Area:
Plate
Worker
Home
Designation
Bylaw:
Housing
506.5(b)
conditions Data
—
Volume of
Floor Land
Depth
Required;
Permitted:
Permitted:
Permitted: Land
—
Farm
Plate—
Date
Migrant
Housing
for
Area
Use of
—
Use
Workers
Per
3760
a
Migrant
Per
Farm
Farm Worker
—
Arthur
to
be
Drive
dedicated
60
RequiredlPerm
area
8.5
7.44
BC”
Seasonal
Seasonal
Meet
446.4
600 “Guidelines
-
(355
farm
maximum
greenhouse
1,980
per
*based
ReguiredlPermitted
130
Migrant
Farmhouse
Greenhouses
Farmhouse Al
Greenhouses Agricultural
66.14
May
Brian
Millennium
based
m
m 3
—
m 2
1,000
m 2
workers
(197
ft 2 )
standards
27,
Agriculture
(300
m 2
m 2
G.
ha
(80 (6,459
on
on
per
Farm
or
(4,805
Farm
2011
Housing (21,313
UC-129
ft)
Hart
(163
m 2
of
a
ft 3 )
a
ft 2 )
for
constructed
worker
measured Greenhouses
floor
(A)
ratio
ratio
130
(10,763.9
ft 2 )
Worker
in
&
the
ac)
Workers
itted
in
ft 2 )
Co.
sleeping
workers
ft 2 )
space
of
the
of
for
Provision
1
33
worker
Housing
from
ft 2 )
m 2
to
road
in
per
Ltd.
a
a
of
for
plan from
road,
555
Proposed
area
10.2 9
completion
To
inspection
594
1,410
60
Proposed
60
m 2
be
workers
m
in
a
m 2
workers
m 3
(96.8
as
dedicated
Attachment (1,820.8
verified
m 2
(360
(6,394
illustrated
(15,177
ft 2 )
upon
on
ft 3 )
by
site
Attachment
ft 2 )
ft)
Page
in
or building
independent
measured
on
ft 2 )
C.
sleeping
constructed
the
1
of
site
I B )
0 di 0. * UC-130
r
Attachment
Page
1
of
2 C UC-131
0
‘y’
96ed 0 UewI4oe4w Attachment D Pagelof3
UC-132 UC-133
z TON END TON END
‘V UC-134
2 31
I
8 3,8
IPK
I— —r
>>
;V7c
CC00
(øi —r c’;3 zrn H wa > -U 3 0
ciuowqoeiv
I \_J H
ARChITECTURE
b121AN
4375
sufficient
construction
service
quoted
viability
2
of
Notwithstanding
An
it the
the
during
west
septic
basis,
I
application,
Further
Dear
Attention:
4500
The
Delta,
Department
11.11.28
WEI,T
as
have
is
the
expansion
greenhouse
the
maximum
supporting
Corporation
quadrant
Sir:
farm including
Clarence
field
agriculture...”
peak
spoken
iivr B.C.
in
of only
to
reason
previous
the
our
V4l(
is
is
periods.
area
Re:
please
Thomas
of
Director
of
of
peat
POAD.
inadequate
region
loads.
of
to
meeting
Taylor
worker
a
requires
3E2
a
Sewer
the
Community
the
to
of
complete
the of
the Sustainable
-
justify
correspondence,
be
the
septic
the
above,
Delta
The
C.
with
This
Leathem,
of
DtLTA,
site
firm
Crescent
Connection
advised
housing
farm
with
extremities
Community
a
statement
poses
an
on
and
a
minimum
field
that
pump
Metro
connection.
Planning
emphasis
BC
yourself,
with
the
IIAIT
the
Economy
MCIP,
of
would
is
unusual
and
cultivated
CANADA
out.
contracted the
•PLANNING
remotely
Vancouver’s
system at
UC-135
in
of
of
Planning
the
indicates
3760
&
Marcy
unequivocal
following.
require
The
the
on
40
and
Development
demands
planned
food
people
requires
Arthur
original
V4K
drainage
suitable
portion
Sangret
deems
to
and
further
that
Regional
production.
1P9
keep
year
Drive
expansion
on
Development
and
footprint
extensive
of
sewer
underlying
field agriculture
•
and
a
intrusion
the
the
round
does
TELEPIIoN/rAx
(LU006293)
system
Growth
occupies
Brad
system
farm.
extensions
The
of not
•
and
of
maintenance
Bedelt
soils.
Burns
into
to
Strategy
URBAN
as
Strategy
the
establish
The
has
functional.
properly
a
part
the
RECEIVED
portion
(The
area
present
Bog.)
had
regarding
are
cultivated
(604)
of
2.3,
establishes
easterly
conditions.
in
NOV
under
supported
the
on
accommodate
excess
which
of
operation
The
604-946-8302
a
the
economic
29
the
quarterly
DESIGN
glass,
portion
area existing
I
of
south
11
above
have
Goal
The
“to
120
as
is of Attachment E Page 2 of 2
I recognize that Delta does not have a history in this area; however, on adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy, it is my opinion that Delta’s role is to facilitate such applications, not discourage them.
I trust this is satisfactory and that we can complete our connection design.
Yours truly,
BRIANG. HART& COMPANY
Brian G. Hart MAIBCFRAICMCIPAlAAICP
UC-136 - r _z 71 ,( OCT742012/ GMD CMY’( DID October 22, 2012 0 -iv AcUoft ir . 4 Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer . ..—. Metro Vancouver Info .. 4330 Kingsway FdeNo - Burnahy, BC V5H 4G8 Ooc.No —— CAOTrkefNo ..
Dear Ms. Mason,
Re: Application for Sewer Area Extension to Service Migrant Farm Worker Housing at 3760 Arthur Drive, Delta, B.C.
Thank you for taking the time to meet with myself, Steven Lan and Marcy Sangret at your offices on October 17, 2012.
As requested, Iwould like to provide the followingclarifications with regard to the Millennium Greenhouse application for a sewer area extension. A copy of the referral letter and accompanying staff report was provided to you at our meeting.
Migrant farm worker housing is seen as an integral part of farming in Delta and in 2008, Delta Council adopted zoning regulations to ensure its orderly and proper use in agricultural areas. The regulations were developed in close consultation with the Ministryof Agriculture, which also has established guidelines for migrant farm worker housing in agricultural areas. Further, pnor to adoption of the Zoning Bylaw amendments to permit migrant farm worker housing, Delta consulted with the Agricultural Land Commission and confirmed that the use is permitted within the Agricultural Land Reserve. An excerpt from “Delta Zoning Bylaw No. 2750, 1977” referencing regulations and conditions regarding migrant farm worker housing is attached for your reference.
You willnote that migrant farm worker housing must be accessory to farming, temporary and relatively modest, with no more than 10 m2 livingspace allocated for each worker. The farm owner must also enter into a covenant with the municipality which ensures adherence to the zoning regulations and requires that a statutory declaration supported by documentation of workers be provided every year. Where a farm does not adhere to the conditions set out in the zoning or covenant, or fails to provide the annual statutory declaration, the migrant farm worker housing must be removed.
4 ar )1 C cu. Brr . Jui ‘llK3E2 6 946 b04 9463S iil ççjfc j. c aLc c r 2I UC-137 October 22, 2012 Page 2
Given the restrictions noted above, we do not consider this use to be equivalent to residential housing as would occur in an urban area. It is unlikely and contrary to Delta’s policies, land use designations and zoning for these buildings to be converted to any other form of housing.
On the public health and environmental side, the property is next to Chillukthan Slough, an important watercourse that serves as part of Delta’s irrigation system. There are concerns that a septic system that is not properly able to accommodate the waste from the housing and greenhouse washrooms and lunch rooms would have a detrimental impact on public health and a valuable natural asset. Given its proximityto this site, a connection to the sewer line provides a practical method to protect both.
We confirm that, in order to address any of the Greater Vancouver Sewer and Drainage District’s concerns, the application could be adjusted to include only the building footprint for the housing and the sections of the greenhouse that have domestic waste water (e.g., lunchrooms, washrooms only). There would be no discharge into the sewer of greenhouse processing water.
Given the points noted above, we believe this application is consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy’s directions regarding extension of services into rural areas expressed in Strategy 1.3.1 and 2.3.1. The proposed sewer extension would support agriculture, protect natural assets and address public health.
As this application was initiallyreferred to Metro on February 2, 2012, we would appreciate your earliest consideration and response. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (604) 946-3212 or Marcy Sangret, Acting Director of Community Planning and Development at (604) 946-3219.
Yours truly, (o \j‘ I George V. Harvie Chief Administrative Officer
Enclosure cc: Greg Moore, Chair, Metro Vancouver Board of Directors Mayor Lois E. Jackson Delta Council Marcy Sangret, Acting Director of Community Planning and Development Steven Lan, Director of Engineering
UC-138 UC-139 5.9
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Ray Robb, Division Manager Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Department
Date: November 6, 2012
Subject: Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012
Recommendation:
That the Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012”; b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012”.
1. PURPOSE
To authorize amendments to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007. The amendments include corrections to an error in GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012 as well as clarification of the appointment of Officers and the Sewage Control Manager.
2. CONTEXT
On October 26, 2012, the Board adopted the GVS&DD Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012 and the GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012. After the adoption of these bylaws, it was noted that there was an error in the reference to a section number in the amending bylaw. To correct this error, staff is proposing to repeal GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012 and incorporate the corrected amendments in GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No 276, 2012.
In addition staff is proposing changes to section 9.1 of the Bylaw to clarify the appointment of Officers and the Sewage Control Manager under the newly adopted GVS&DD Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012 (the Grease Interceptor Bylaw). GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012 did not reference this requirement that allows for the appointment of Officers and the Sewage Control Manager to enforce the Grease Interceptor Bylaw.
3. ALTERNATIVES
That the Board may: a) give three readings to and adopt the amending bylaw; or
UC-140 b) provide alternative direction to staff.
Staff recommends alternative (a).
4. CONCLUSION
Staff is proposing amendments to GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 to ensure the enforcement of GVS&DD Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012.
ATTACHMENT
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012 (6715186)
6716218
UC-141 ATTACHMENT
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT SEWER USE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 276, 2012
A Bylaw to Amend “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”
WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District has adopted “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”, to manage the direct or indirect discharge of non-domestic waste to any sewers and drains connected to a Sewage Facility operated by the District;
AND WHEREAS the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District wishes to amend “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”;
NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 273, 2012” is hereby repealed.
2. “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007” is hereby amended as follows:
(a) in section 2.1 by adding the following definition:
“Grease Interceptor Bylaw” means the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Food Sector Grease Interceptor Bylaw No. 268, 2012, as amended or replaced from time to time;
(b) in section 2.1 by deleting the definition of a “Food Sector Establishment” and replacing with the following:
“Food Sector Establishment” means a food sector establishment as defined in the Grease Interceptor Bylaw;
(c) in section 4.1 (b) by replacing section 4.1 (b) with the following:
a person operates a Food Sector Establishment in full compliance with the Grease Interceptor Bylaw and the Trucked Waste is discharged at a District facility designated for receipt of Trucked Waste.
(d) in section 5.2 by replacing section 5.2 with the following:
Nothing prohibits the discharge of Waste specified in section 5.1 provided the person is also in compliance with this Bylaw, the Grease Interceptor Bylaw, a valid and subsisting Waste Discharge Permit, a Trucked Waste Authorization, an Order, or a Code of Practice.
(e) in section 5.8 by adding the phrase “,the Grease Interceptor Bylaw,” after the word “Order” and before the words “or this Bylaw”;
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012 Page 1 of 2
UC-142 (f) in section 6.1 by adding the phrase “,the Grease Interceptor Bylaw,” after the words “in compliance with” and before the words “a Waste Discharge Permit”;
(g) in section 9.1 by adding the phrase “and the Grease Interceptor Bylaw” after the words “under this Bylaw”;
(h) in section 10.2 by adding the phrase “,the Grease Interceptor Bylaw,” after the words “any provision of this Bylaw” and before the words “or any Waste Discharge Permit”;
(i) in the title page of the Schedules to Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007” by deleting the letter “D”; and
(j) deleting Schedule “D”, entitled “Code of Practice for Wastewater Management at Food Sector Establishments” in its entirety.
3. This Bylaw shall be cited as “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012”.
READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this ____ day of ______2012.
RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this ____ day of ______2012.
Greg Moore, Chair
Paulette A. Vetleson, Secretary
6715186 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 276, 2012 Page 2 of 2
UC-143 5.10
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Robert Hicks, Senior Engineer, Utility Planning Department
Date: October 25, 2012
Subject: Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Implementation Status
Recommendation:
That the Utilities Committee receive for information the report titled Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan – Implementation Status.
1. PURPOSE
To provide the Utilities Committee with an update on Metro Vancouver and municipal implementation progress of key actions from the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan.
2. CONTEXT
The Minister of Environment approved the Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan as the new Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) for the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) and members on May 30, 2011. Under the Environmental Management Act, an approved LWMP is similar to a provincial regulation.
Specific to LWMP implementation, Metro Vancouver and its GVS&DD members are required to report the progress of LWMP implementation to the Ministry of Environment every two years. Submission of the first biennial report under the new Plan is due July 1, 2013.
In preparation for this submission, Metro Vancouver continues to work with the GVS&DD members through the Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC) Liquid Waste Subcommittee and has developed a municipal action reporting template to assist members in summarizing the status of their progress on implementing the LWMP actions. This template will be provided to the Ministry of Environment to confirm that information collected and reported satisfies the Ministry’s reporting requirements.
Over the next six months, Metro Vancouver staff, in collaboration with municipal staff, will prepare the 2013 LWMP Biennial Report and submit the report to the Board for approval for its submission to the Ministry of Environment by the July 1, 2013 deadline.
With respect to LWMP implementation, many of the actions are on-going aspects of core Metro Vancouver and municipal sewer and drainage utility work. Work includes operation of the collections and treatment system, monitoring of the receiving environmental, by-law enforcement, and asset planning and management. Metro Vancouver continues to use collaborative forums such as the REAC Liquid Waste Subcommittee for resolving shared UC-144 regional-municipal wastewater issues and the Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group (SILG) to provide stormwater management tools and assist with municipal policies. The Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC) continues to act as a focus group with senior government agencies and members on environmental monitoring and assessment issues.
Key activities in 2012 include progress to reduce sanitary sewer overflows by Metro Vancouver by initiating engineering design for the Katzie Pump Station and its in-system storage, and the initiation of work by the District of North Vancouver to reduce inflow and infiltration into its sewers and thereby reduce sanitary sewer overflows at Metro Vancouver’s Lynn Branch Siphon. In addition, upgrades to maintain environmental compliance of the Annacis Island and North-west Langley Wastewater Treatment Plants are in the design phase. Furthermore, consultation has started on the replacement for the Lions Gate Wastewater Treatment Plant as part of the Project Definition Phase.
While implementation is generally proceeding as anticipated, progress in reducing municipal inflow and infiltration remains a concern as some municipalities may not have been addressing this issue with sufficient priority. A more detailed assessment of municipal progress will be made once the detailed biennial report information has been provided and evaluated in early 2013.
The Metro Vancouver Board developed the 2012 Action Plan in consideration of the LWMP, and therefore specific LWMP actions are Board priorities for 2012. A brief summary of implementation progress for the 2012 Action Plan and key LWMP actions is listed in the Attachment.
3. ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives presented.
4. CONCLUSION
Metro Vancouver will continue to work with its GVS&DD members to advance the implementation of LWMP actions and Board priorities. Overall, implementation of the LWMP is proceeding according to schedule. However, progress by some member municipalities may be slower than expected regarding reducing their municipal inflow and infiltration rates and developing their integrated stormwater management plans. These are two key areas where the Ministry of Environment expect progress. A more complete understanding of municipal progress will be available in early 2013, when municipalities provide a summary of their action implementation status as required for biennial reporting. The detailed biennial progress report will be provided to the Board for its approval prior to submission to the Ministry of Environment by the July 1, 2013 deadline.
Collaborative forums such as REAC, the REAC Liquid Waste Subcommittee, SILG and EMC continue to prove effective in developing solutions to common municipal-regional problems, which in turn facilitate timely and successful implementation of the LWMP actions.
ATTACHMENT
Implementation Progress: Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management: A Liquid Waste Management Plan for the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District and Member Municipalities, November 2012 (6669200)
6636283 UC-145
ATTACHMENT
Implementation Progress Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management: A Liquid Waste Management Plan for the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District and Member Municipalities
November 2012
The following highlights progress on key Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) actions:
Actions Related to the Board Priorities for 2012
Strategy 1.1 Reduce liquid wastes at their source Action 1.1.1 A bylaw amendment to reduce restaurant discharges of fats, oils, and grease into sewer system was adopted October 26, 2012
Strategy 1.2 Reduce wet weather overflows Action 1.2.4 Katzie Pump Station: As part of the strategy to reduce the risk of sanitary sewer overflows at Katzie Pump Station, the design of pump station improvement/upgrades and in-line storage to address sanitary sewage overflows was initiated in 2012 with in-system storage construction anticipated to start in 2013, and pump station construction anticipated to start in 2015. Cloverdale Pump Station: The strategy to reduce sanitary sewage overflows at the Cloverdale Pump Station requires further consultation with contributory municipalities and is expected to be finalized in late 2012 or early 2013. Lynn Branch Siphon: The District of North Vancouver has initiated targeted inflow and infiltration reduction measures that are expected to reduce the risk of sanitary sewer overflows at Metro Vancouver’s Lynn Branch Siphon.
Strategy 1.3 Reduce environmental impacts from liquid waste management to a minimum Action 1.3.1 Annacis Island Wastewater Treatment Plant: In order to maintain compliance with wastewater treatment plant effluent criteria, planning for the Stage 5 Annacis Island Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrade was started with the commencement of the Project Definition Report in late 2009 and was followed by Pre-design which started in 2012. NW Langley Wastewater Treatment Plant: For the NW Langley Wastewater Treatment Plant, work was started in 2010 with the Phase 1 Upgrade design work for three clarifiers. Site preparation work commenced in 2012. In addition, updating the long-term strategy for this plant is underway with the study due late in 2013. This study includes examination of an expanded service area for this plant.
UC-146 Action 1.3.3 Combined Sewer Overflow Reduction - VSA: To significantly reduce the risk of combined sewage overflows in the southwest Vancouver Sewerage Area, a hydraulic surge tower at Iona Island Wastewater Treatment Plant is being constructed with subsequent evaluation before expanded construction and completion of additional works in 2013. Action 1.3.5 Lions Gate Wastewater Treatment Plant: The Project Definition Phase is now underway for the Lions Gate Secondary Treatment upgrade. A full technical team is in place and public engagement commenced in June. An Integrative Design Process with seven key workshops will explore the options to meet the project objectives and lead to short-listing and the eventual selection of a preferred build scenario. The Project Definition Report is scheduled to be completed by December, 2013.
Strategy 2.1 Pursue liquid waste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context Action 2.1.1 Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR): The examination of IRR opportunities centered around the Vancouver Sewerage Area was initiated with a study in two phases. Phase 1 involves formulating a framework and identifying the better IRR opportunities for further evaluation. Phase 2 involves full evaluation of IRR opportunities and the development of an IRR Plan. The Phase 1 work is expected to be complete in the third quarter of 2013. The evaluation of IRR opportunities for the Lulu Island Sewerage Area is planned to start in first quarter of 2013.
Strategy 3.1 Manage assets and optimize existing sanitary sewerage operations Action 3.1.2 Cost Allocation: A cost allocation formula for wastewater treatment plant upgrades is being developed in collaboration with the Regional Administrative Advisory Committee (RAAC) with a recommendation anticipated in early 2013. Related work by the REAC Liquid Waste Subcommittee to develop options for the adjustment of Tier 1 cost allocation from dry weather flows to wet weather measured flows is on hold pending the outcome of RAAC evaluation.
Strategy 3.2 Use innovative approaches and technologies Action 3.2.1 Annacis Wastewater Centre: The Annacis Wastewater Centre was completed in late 2011. Action 3.2.2 Annacis Wastewater Centre: Partnerships and programming for Metro Vancouver Sustainability Academy– Annacis Wastewater Centre are currently being developed in the areas of research and development, training and professional development and public education.
6669200 UC-147
Actions Additional to the 2012 Board Priorities
Strategy 1.1 Reduce liquid wastes at their source Action 1.1.7 Rainwater Inflow and Groundwater Infiltration Management: The development of a strategy to assess the condition of private sewer laterals (sewer connections) at the time of property sales is underway and anticipated to be completed in first quarter of 2013 This is expected to lead to new tools for municipalities to better control inflow and infiltration into sanitary sewers. Action 1.1.8 Rainwater Inflow and Groundwater Infiltration Management: Metro Vancouver and the REAC Liquid Waste Subcommittee have developed a template for member municipalities to use as an aid in developing their inflow and infiltration management planning actions under the LWMP. Action 1.1.12 Stormwater Management: Metro Vancouver in collaboration with the Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group (SILG) have developed guidelines to aid member municipalities with on-site rainwater management systems that support municipal stormwater management actions under the LWMP.
Strategy 3.4 Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term needs Action 3.4.7 Stormwater Management: Municipalities continue to make progress in developing and implementing their Integrated Stormwater Management Plans (ISMPs); however, not all municipalities are expected to make the 2014 plan deadline and may need to take advantage of the deadline extension offered by the Ministry of Environment. Fulfilment of Condition 7 allows for a two year extension to the ISMP deadline.
Conditions defined by the BC Minister of Environment Condition 7 Stormwater Management: An Adaptive Management Framework to assess watershed health has been drafted by the joint working group of SILG and Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC). The development of this framework is a condition for the deadline extension for developing ISMPs. Working with SILG and EMC, Metro Vancouver will be testing and evaluating this framework in 2013.
6669200 UC-148 5.11
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Fred Nenninger, Project Manager, Wastewater Secondary Treatment Upgrades
Marie Griggs, Public Involvement Division Manager, Engineering & Construction Department
Date: October 29, 2012
Subject: Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Project Update
Recommendation:
That the Board receive for information the report titled “Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant – Project Update”, dated October 29, 2012.
1. PURPOSE
To update the GVS&DD Board on the work now underway to complete the Project Definition Phase for the Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrade.
2. CONTEXT
2.1 Technical Work
The technical work now underway is focused on the opportunities, goals and performance measures related to the four project objectives of secondary level treatment, sustainability objectives, integrated resource recovery opportunities and community enhancements.
As part of the Integrative Design Process (IDP) Workshop #2 that was held October 15 to 17, 2012, the technical team reviewed discussion documents related to the four key project objectives. A list of opportunities and approaches was prepared for each of the key objectives. A suite of more specific sub-objectives and related performance measures under each key objective will be used in the technical decision process during the assessment and screening of potential options.
The output from IDP Workshop #2 will lead to the development of concept options and a range of build scenarios which will begin to be screened and prioritized at IDP Workshop #3 in December.
UC-149
2.2 Financial Status
Project Board Definition Expended to Committed to Project Final Approval Phase Initial Date Date Cost As of Sept. 30, Budget 2012 $20 M $8,000,000 $1,041,365 $4,983,630 $8,000,000
2.3 Funding
As part of the overall workplan for the design and construction of the new Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant in North Vancouver, Metro Vancouver staff has developed a draft political advocacy strategy with the prime objective of securing funding for the new plant from other levels of government. This plan has been developed with the direct input of senior staff and the advice and counsel of an external strategist.
The Lions Gate political advocacy strategy is largely framed around the federal government’s November 2011 announcement that it would be working with stakeholders to replace the Building Canada Fund (BCF), a 7-year, $33 billion infrastructure investment program that expires as of March 2014, with a new Long-Term Infrastructure Plan (LTIP). Through Budget 2011 and as part of its Economic Action Plan 2012, the Government of Canada has committed to working with partners and stakeholders in the development of a long-term plan for public infrastructure that would extend beyond the expiry of the BCF. Metro Vancouver has been working closely with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Infrastructure Canada to ensure that the Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades Project is well-positioned to receive funding under the new LTIP.
Phase 1 of the proposed strategy will focus on early, high-level framing of the project; advocacy around the federal government’s LTIP; and budget and provincial election pre- positioning. Phase 2 follows the federal/provincial budgets and marks the start of more substantive discussions with federal officials, and also focuses on the 2013 provincial election and securing provincial commitments. Phase 3 revolves around ensuring smooth communications and outreach transition from project design, to final design approval, to funding submission/approval.
At the tactical level, the proposed advocacy strategy will focus on briefings with key federal and provincial Ministers and MPs/MLAs; presentations to key members of the federal and provincial Opposition caucuses; direct work with federal and provincial senior bureaucrats and political staff; and ongoing work with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
2.4 Engagement and Consultation Program
Metro Vancouver is providing information and opportunities for input to all potentially affected residents and organizations within member municipalities with a particular focus on the Districts of North and West Vancouver and the City of North Vancouver. The following sections of the report outline the most recent engagement and consultation activities and those upcoming for the remainder of 2012.
UC-150
2.4.1 The Public A public meeting will be held in the spring of 2013 to discuss with the community potential options affecting the plant design. Metro Vancouver is pursuing new ways to engage the public through its website and social media outreach in coordination with the North Shore municipalities. To support ongoing communication, Metro Vancouver is rebranding the web and print-based communications materials that will be launched in mid-November.
2.4.1.1 Key Engagement Activities
Lions Gate Public Advisory Committee
In collaboration with North Shore municipalities, the Lions Gate Public Advisory Committee (LGPAC) membership (Attachment No.1) has been finalized. The North Vancouver Chamber of Commerce recommended two people from the chamber for the vacant positions.
On September 10, 2012, the LGPAC was invited to the public involvement session of Integrative Design Process (IDP) Workshop #1. The objective of the workshop was to align around purpose and process. Discussion points on the potential of the project included: the site becoming a destination, developing linkages to other parts of the community, and Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR) serving the community. The meeting summary is on the Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant (LGSWWTP) webpage: found by visiting www.metrovancouver.org and searching “Lions Gate”.
The third meeting of the LGPAC was held on October 30, 2012. As requested by the committee, background issues such as secondary wastewater treatment regulations and project site were presented. The LGPAC agreed as a group that the information presented was a good foundation and understood that many of their detailed questions and issues would be explored and discussed at subsequent meetings during project definition. An example included the scalability of the project for future demand and population growth.
The LGPAC was also invited to a November 14 community workshop. This workshop is an opportunity for the community to provide input to the technical design process, and learn about the results of the October 15-17 IDP technical workshop.
Norgate Park Community Association
There will be bi-annual meetings with Norgate Park Community Association. The four Norgate members on the LGPAC and other members of the local community were invited to the November 14 community workshop.
UC-151
Community Resource Forum
The Community Resource Forum (CRF) was established to provide a regular venue for individuals recognized for community service, academic contributions, and involvement in environmental issues to receive detailed project information and provide feedback.
CRF attendees were also invited to the public involvement session of IDP Workshop #1. There was a second meeting of the CRF on November 1 at which there was a presentation on the same foundational items provided at the October 30 LGPAC meeting. Participants asked questions regarding funding opportunities to reduce the impact on the taxpayer, and queried Metro Vancouver’s policy of a 15 year amortization period for significant Metro Vancouver infrastructure projects. The CRF participants were also invited to the November 14 community workshop.
2.4.2 Metro Vancouver Members
Opportunities for input and presentations to representatives of member municipalities will continue through Metro Vancouver advisory committees (see Section 2.4.3), and through delegations to Mayors and Councils. Plans are underway for presentations to be made to the three North Shore Mayors and Councils in November.
2.4.3 Technical Advisory Committees
Metro Vancouver Advisory Committees
The following Metro Vancouver advisory committees receive reports every quarter, and are engaged in the IDP process at key stages: Regional Administrative Advisory Committee, Regional Engineers Advisory Committee, Regional Finance Advisory Committee, and Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee.
Lions Gate Intergovernmental Advisory Committee
The Lions Gate Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (LGIAC) has representation from senior staff of the North Shore municipalities, and Federal, and Provincial agencies. First Nations representation is also being sought. Metro Vancouver has held briefing meetings with the LGIAC in February, June, and October 2012.
2.4.4 First Nations
Squamish Nation and Tsleil-Waututh Nation staff will be invited to sit on the LGIAC as well as to attend separate meetings. The Musqueam Indian Band has informed Metro Vancouver of their interest in receiving information about the project. Metro Vancouver staff will arrange a presentation to provide further information. In addition, Metro Vancouver will correspond with the 28 other First Nations, Tribal Councils and Treaty Groups/Associations that have traditional territories that lie within, overlap with, or have shared interests within the project area, advising them of the project milestones and engagement opportunities. 6621288 UC-152
2.4.5 Provincial and Federal Government Agencies
Government agencies will be notified of the consultation process, and will be given opportunities to participate, including their current involvement in the LGIAC.
3. ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives presented.
4. CONCLUSION
The technical work for the Lions Gate Secondary Treatment Plant is now underway. Integrative Design Workshop No. 2 engaged the technical team in a review of discussion papers addressing the approaches for each of the project objectives with long-lists developed for each objective. Work will proceed to assessment and screening leading to Workshop 3 where the first lists of build scenarios will be developed.
A strategy has been developed to assist with the securing of funding for the design and construction phase, with a focus on work with FCM and others related to a new Long-term Infrastructure Plan as announced by the federal government in late 2011.
This report provides an update on the engagement and consultation activities completed to date for the Project Definition Phase of the LGSWWTP project. Meetings and workshops will continue in October and November with the Lions Gate Public Advisory Committee, the Community Resource Forum and members of the local community. The program will be carried out in collaboration with North Shore municipalities, providing residents, First Nations, and those with a specific interest in the project with continued opportunities for input.
ATTACHMENT
1. LGSWWTP Public Advisory Committee Members and Alternates List (6277796)
6621288 UC-153 Lions Gate Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant Public Advisory Committee
Membership List Updated: October 1, 2012
LOCAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION Position Name Position Name Primary and Vice-Chair Tracy Tilscher Alternate Arlene King Primary Diana Sollner Alternate David Knee
ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS Position Name Position Name Primary (North Shore) Darlene Clarke Alternate (North Shore) John Croockewit Primary (North Shore) Adrian Rowland Alternate (North Shore) Brian Walker Primary (Region) Christianne Wilhelmson Alternate (Region) David Lane
BUSINESS INTERESTS Position Name Position Name Primary and Chair Christine Banham Alternate David Morton Primary John Hunter Alternate Blair East Primary Louise Ranger Alternate Gonzalo Benitez
NON-AFFILIATED CITIZENS Position Name Primary Jan Timmer No alternate required Primary Peter Thompson No alternate required Primary Troy Vassos No alternate required
www.metrovancouver.org UC-154 5.12
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Mark Ferguson Water & Wastewater Treatment Engineering Division Manager Engineering and Construction Department
Date: October 29, 2012
Subject: Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project – Project Status
Recommendation:
That the Board receive for information the report titled Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project – Project Status, dated October 29, 2012.
1. PURPOSE
To advise the Committee and Board of the status of the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project to September 30, 2012.
2. CONTEXT
Implementation Status
a) Design: Detailed design for the project is substantially complete. b) Materials and Equipment Procurement: Fabrication of the energy recovery turbine is underway with delivery anticipated in early 2013. c) Construction: The construction status for each major component of the project is summarized as follows:
i. Capilano Pumping Station
· Construction is complete. · The station is being maintained in operational readiness for the completion of the twin tunnels needed to deliver water to and from the new filtration plant.
ii. Break Head Tank and Energy Recovery Facility
· Break Head Tank construction is complete. · Remaining work on the Energy Recovery Facility includes turbine installation and electrical connections. · The tender for installation of these works is scheduled to be issued in November 2012. · Overall completion is 75%. Projected substantial completion for the Energy Recovery Facility is Spring 2013.
UC-155 6603639 iii. Twin Tunnels (Seymour-Cap Partnership)
· Tunnel and shaft excavation for both tunnels is complete. · Delivery of steel liner pipe from the temporary storage area on Annacis Island continues. Approximately 48% of the pipe has been delivered to date. · Installation and grouting of the steel liner in the Capilano Treated Water Shaft is complete. · Installation of the steel liner at the Capilano end of both tunnels is complete. Grout backfill is scheduled to commence in late October 2012. · The second phase of shotcrete lining in the central section of the tunnels resumed in early September 2012. · Overall completion is 85%. Projected completion of tunnel piping is the end of 2013. Installation of surface piping to connect the tunnels to the existing transmission system at Capilano and Seymour is scheduled for early 2014. · Development of the tunnels commissioning plan, including energy recovery and filtration flow control, continues.
iv. Filtration Plant
· Filtration plant construction is complete. · The filtration plant is in operation treating water from the Seymour source.
v. Clearwells
· Clearwells construction is complete. · The clearwells are in operation storing treated water from the Seymour source.
Financial Status
The project budget as of September 30, 2012 is summarized as follows:
Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project Cost Summary
Project Budget Expended to Committed to Projected Final Component Date Date Cost Design Project Management $4,500,000 $4,496,000 $4,496,000 $4,496,000 Capilano Pump Station / Break Head Tank / Energy $87,300,000 $67,311,000 $72,974,000 $75,500,000 Recovery Facility Filtration Plant and Clearwells $327,900,000 $352,800,000 $353,709,000 $352,800,000
Twin Tunnels $400,300,000 $301,236,000 $382,134,000 $384,800,000
TOTAL $820,000,000 $725,843,000 $813,313,000 $817,596,000
Notes: 1. Costs are net of tax rebates. 2. Federal and Provincial infrastructure grants ($118 M), and BC Hydro grants for filtration plant geo-exchange ($100,000) and Capilano energy recovery ($2.7M) are not included in the above totals but are accounted for as an offset to these costs, as they are received.
UC-156 6603639
3. ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives presented.
4. CONCLUSION
Quarterly status reports for the construction phase of the Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project have been provided to the Committee and Board since the beginning of 2005. This is the third report for 2012. All of the major construction contracts are complete except for the twin tunnels. As of the end of September 2012, twin tunnels completion is 85%. The balance of the project is at 98% overall completion. Filtration of the Seymour source commenced in late December 2009 and reached full flow in mid-January 2010. Filtration of Capilano source water is scheduled for Spring 2014 following commissioning of the twin tunnels.
6603639 UC-157
5.13
Utilities Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2012
To: Utilities Committee
From: Tim Jervis, Manager, Engineering and Construction Department
Date: November 8, 2012
Subject: Managers’ Report
Recommendation: That the Utilities Committee receive for information the Managers’ Report dated November 8, 2012.
1. Utilities Committee 2012 Work Plan – Tim Jervis
Attached is the updated 2012 Work Plan (Attachment 1) indicating the quarter that the priority is expected to be considered by the Utilities Committee. Completed items are shown in bold.
2. Water Quality During October Rainstorms – Doug Humphris
The heavy rainfall on the weekend of October 13 and 14 affected turbidity levels in all three water supplies. The supply that was most affected was Seymour where the turbidity reached 40 NTU at Seymour intake on the morning of October 16th. However, the turbidity was removed through the filtration process at the plant and the turbidity of the water entering the distribution system from the plant was maintained well below 1 NTU throughout the event. The use of filtered water was maximized during the period, with the filter plant supplying approximately 70% of the water to the region. The balance of the water was provided from the Coquitlam supply because the Capilano supply had been removed from service on October 13th as the turbidity began to rise and the trend indicated that it would continue to increase. Turbidity at Coquitlam also rose (albeit briefly) to slightly above 5 NTU on October 14th. Disinfection levels were increased at Coquitlam during the period in keeping with the Turbidity Response Protocol.
Once the tunnels have been completed and the Capilano water supply is filtered, it will be possible to provide filtered water to the entire region during periods of elevated turbidity in the source waters.
ATTACHMENT: Utilities Committee 2012 Work Plan
UC-158
ATTACHMENT 1 Utilities Committee 2012 Work Plan 1st Quarter
Key priorities · 2012 Committee Priorities · 2012 GVWD and GVS&DD (Liquid Waste) Capital Projects · Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project Status – Q4 2011 · Lions Gate Secondary WWTP –Project Update · Lions Gate Secondary WWTP - Project Definition Phase, Engagement & Consultation Program · GVS&DD Sewer Use Amending Bylaw No. 265, 2012 · Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee (IUMAC)
2nd Quarter
Key priorities · Tap Water Campaign – Summer Water Wagon Schedule · Water Conservation Campaign to Reduce Peak Use During the Summer · Water Supply Forecast and Water Conservation Update for Summer 2012 · Update on the Joint Water Use Planning Process in the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds · Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures · Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project Status – Q1 2012 · Lawn Sprinkling Regulations · GVWD Quality Control Annual Report for 2011 · Municipal Adoption of Drinking Water Management Plan Actions · Implications of New Fisheries Act – Wastewater Regulations · GVS&DD Quality Control Annual Report for 2011 · Interim Sewage Heat Use Policy · Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) Management Options and Strategies · Municipal Requests for Sewer Area Expansions · Lions Gate and Iona Secondary WWTPs – Quarterly Update
3rd Quarter
Key priorities · New Agreement for Acquiring Additional Allocation of Coquitlam Lake Water · Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project Status – Q2 2012 · Summer 2012 Water Supply Performance · Update on Fisheries Initiatives in the Capilano, Seymour and Coquitlam Watersheds · Electricity Generation Opportunities in Water Distribution System · GVS&DD Sewer Cost Allocation Model · Lions Gate and Iona Secondary WWTPs – Quarterly Update · Amend Bylaw to Reduce Restaurant Oil and Grease Discharges to Sewer · Collaborative Watershed Governance Accord for BC · Key Elements of the Draft Joint Water Use Plan for the Capilano and Seymour Watersheds and Proposed Engagement and Consultation Process · RGS Implementation and Sewerage Area Expansion Requests
UC-159
4th Quarter
Key priorities · Status of Utilities Capital Expenditures · Tap Water Campaign/Water Wagon Update · Water Conservation Campaign Update · Seymour-Capilano Filtration Project Status – Q3 2012 · Approval of Joint Water Use Plan for Capilano and Seymour Watersheds · Vancouver Sewerage Area Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR) Study · Municipal Requests for Sewer Area Expansions · Draft Cooperative Municipal/Regional Sewerage Heat Use Framework · Municipal Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ILWRMP) Actions and Reporting Requirements · Lions Gate and Iona Secondary WWTPs – Quarterly Update · 2013 Programs and Priorities
UC-160