Initial EnviTonmental Evaluation

STEVESTON Fishing Harbour

SH 224.B7 I54 c. 2 D 511 7 '15'j

B2Y 4A2 j) c ,;p

INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION OF STEVESTON FISHING HARBOUR

SMALL CRAFT HARBOURS BRANCH Pacific Region

Fisheries & Marine Service

Environment Canada

April - 1976 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1. List of Figures ...... 1 2. Overview Summary ...... 2 3 .1 Declaration ...... 3 3.2 Need...... 3 3.3 Alternatives ...... 6 3.4 Associated Projects ...... 15

4. Steveston Waterfront Harbour Proposal ~...... 17 4.1 Operations and Maintenance ...... 20 5. Existing Environmental Features and Natural Resources...... 24 5.1 Hydrography and Hydrology...... 24 5. 2 Oceanography ...... 2 5 5.3 Meteorological Conditions ...... 26 5.4 Water Quality ...... 26 5.5 Flora...... 31 5. 6 Fish and Wildlife ...... 32 5 . 7 Pe op 1 e ...... 3 5 6. Irnpac ts ...... 36 7. Mitigation ...... 40 8. Residual Impacts ...... 48

Technical Sources Appendix I 1. List of Figures

Fig. 1 Location Charts (Three Sheets lA, lB, lC) Fig. 2 Steveston Island Possible Harbour Site. Fig. 3 Steveston Waterfront Possible Alternate Sites. Fig. 4 Steveston Topographic Plans (Three Sheets 4A, 4B, 4C) Fig. S Proposed Harbour Site Site Plan SA Phase I SB Phase II SC Phase III SD Sections SE Fig. 6 Sampling Stations, Dissolved Oxygen Survey. Fig. 7 Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Plots. Fig. 8 Dissolved Oxygen, Percent Saturation and Temperature Plots. Fig. 9 Fraser River, Steveston and Vicinity. Fig. 9A Typical Cross Sections of Cannery Channel. Fig. 10 Discharge vs. Tide 25,000 cfs Fig. 11 " " " 75 - 100,000 cfs Fig. 12 " " " 350,000 cfs Fig. 13 Steveston Beach Seine Stations. Fig. 14 Fishing Vessel Distribution by Home Port Area. - 2 -

2. Overview Summary

The Small Craft Harbours Branch, Fisheries and Marine Service of ENVIRONMENT CANADA proposes to construct a 1000-berth public commercial fishing harbour in Richmond on the Steveston waterfront between No.l Road west to Seventh Avenue. The purchase of up to 18 acres of land and the reserve of 45 acres of water lot is required. The pro­ • ject will be phased to meet demand and consists of dredging and landfill to create mooring basins, navigation channels, net working areas, parking and road access, electrical, water and sewage systems and an administration building. The cost of Phase I is approximately $ 5 million.

The area is currently occupied by fishing-related industrial facilities, marine fuel stations and a small pub- 1 ic float.

The site was chosen from a number of alternatives after 18 months of investigation and discussion with Richmond Municipality and other interested groups. The site minimizes the potential environmental impacts of the long-awaited fish­ ing harbour for the Steveston area. The major concern at this site is the existing marginal water quality in Cannery Channel. Additional flow from the main river will be intro­ duced into the channel to mitigate this problem by adjusting the existing control weir.

Dredging and landfill operations will meet the re­ quirements of ENVIRONMENT CANADA as to fishery impact and dis­ posal of material.

Alternate sites on Steveston Island were rejected as being environmentally harmful due to access construction. - 3 -

3.1 Declaration

This project has been initiated by the Pacific Region of the Small Craft Harbours Branch, Fisheries and Marine Service of the Department of the Environment.

The primary role of this Branch is to plan, fund, construct, operate and maintain efficient harbour facili­ ties for thG use of the fishing industry.

3.2 The Need

There are some 7,000 commercial fishing vessels in B.C. of which 2,900 are located in the Lower Mainland area. Of these, 1,500 are in the lower Fraser River below New Westminster with SOO reported in Steveston Harbour.

With the exception of a few small installations in the New Westminster area, the only available public berthing consists of the publjc float at Steveston 2nd Avenue with temporary accommodation for 15 vessels. The vast majority of vessels are accommodated at a number of fishing company owned in~tallations or at small private floats along the river banks.

The Department of Public Works who, prior to 1973, were responsible for the planning and construction of fishing harbours had received many requests over the years for the con­ struction of public facilities in Steveston and did acquire foreshore reserves from the Province on Stcvcston Island for the purpose as early as 1950.

With the formation of Small Craft !!arbours and the increase in funding available for fishing harbour development, representations were made in 1973 to the Minister of the Environment by fishermen's organizatinns, Richmond Council and the Fraser River Harbour Commission to undertake this project. - 4 -

Representations from the fishermen indicated a strong desire to be more independent of the fishfng com­ panies, a need for modern facilities and a willingness to pay for the use of such facilities. The fishing companies, due to increasing costs in providing the berthing facilities to fishermen, were also anxious to reduce their commitments to this type of operation in order to protect their compe­ titive position with those ~egments of the industry that did not offer berthing facilities. The companies also desired to make more intensive use of their property for warehousing and gear storage.

Numerical Demand for Public Berthing

It is difficult to quantify the actual use of a public harbour for fishing vessels in a situation where vessels are already accommodated at a variety of existing structures. With the exception of those vessels owned by the fishing companies, each vessel represents an independent businessman who will move to the new harbour or not, depend­ ing on his perception of the saving in cost or the value of the increased convenience to his own operation.

The theoretical population available to the harbour is the 2,900 vessels in the Lower Mainland area. Of these, only vessels meeting one or more of the following criteria will require berthing:

1. Vessels not bound to a company facility by ownership or agreement.

2. Vessels moored at inadequate facilities in Steves ton.

3. Vessels moored at inadequate facilities out­ side Stevcston. - 5 -

4. Vessels threatened with future eviction at private marinas, shipyards, etc., to make way for pleasure craft which produce more lucrative returns to the marina operator.

5. Vessels with gear combinations requiring good storage facilities adjacent to their berths.

6. Vessels whose owners cannot pay for or ob­ tain water lots for their private moorage in the river.

7. Vessels whose owners reside in Richmond and neighbouring communities.

Correspondence and discussions with the fishing companies, the Fisheries Association, Vessel Owners' Asso­ ciation and representatives of the fishermen's associa­ tions all confirm the target figure of 1,000 vessels is realistic and that the initial phases will be rapidly filled.

The future requirements of the fishing industry for accommodation do not indicate a decline in absolute accommodation requirements. Trend in vessel numbers within

the fish~ry will be subject to the following factors:

1. Limitation of tonnage in the salmon fishery will reduce the number of vessels but will continue to increase the size and versatility of the individual vessels.

2. Vessels using combinations of gear and thus requiring more sophisticated accommodation and gear storage will continue to increase as a - 6 -

percentage of the fleet.

3. The Salmon Enhancement Program, with its goal of doubling fish production, will increase the sophistication of vessels and require im­ provements in accommodation.

4. The continuation of the herring fishery on a sustained yield basis will increase fishing vessel activity.

5. The extension of territorial rights to off­ shore resources will tend to increase the size of the trawler fleet requiring sophisticated harbour facilities.

With the large investment in processing plants and allied facilities in Steveston, the presence of a sheltered harbour conveniently located to the sea, freshwater mooring and the presence of large numbers of fishermen resident in the Lower Mainland area, the continuing need for a large fishing harbour in the lower Fraser River is well established.

3.3. Alternatives

a) Do Nothing

The Branch could ignore its mandate to provide fishing harbour facilities in the hope that the market would provide for it­ self. Because of the high capital cost of harbour facilities, the lack of suitable sites and the diversity of interests to be served, it is unlikely that the market will solve the problem. This option would con­ tinue the present situation of scattered, inefficient facilities and under-utiliza­ tion of waterfront areas. - 7 -

b) Alternate Locations

The fishing industry is a total system of which the harbour component forms an in­ tegral part. In order to maximize returns to the individual fisherman, the harbour must be located close to the fishery, to the point of delivery of catch, to the pro­ cessor and to the residence of the fisher-

Only the New Westminster, Surrey, Ladner and Steveston areas represent viable communities capable of providing the services necessary to support a harbour development of this size.

New Westminster

The waterfront is heavily industrialized and is oriented to servicing deepsea traffic and the forest pro­ ducts industry. It is approximately 20 miles upstream from the mouth and has no fish processing facilities. Other than those vessels fishing primarily within the river, the opera­ tional costs would be higher due to additional vessel travel times to reach the mouth.

Surrey

The situation is similar to New Westminster, except that there is more likelihood of sufficient back-up land being available. There are no natural harbour sites large enough for development.

Ladner

This area is close to the river mouth but is more difficult of access by land transportation. There is little fishing industry currently operating in the area other than - 8 - small individual moorings. The entrance to Ladner Channel from the main river is poor and requires periodic dredging. Elimination of this will require complex river training structures located in an environmentally sensitive area. It would appear to be physically possible to locate a large facility in this area. Much of the water area is sensitive environmentally.

Steves ton

Historically, Steveston has been the centre of the lower Fraser River fishing industry. With the closure of many smaller canneries, both upcoast and in the river, Steveston has increased its importance in the processing side of the industry. Some 30% of the B.C. catch is processed here. The waterfront is almost totally devoted to the fish­ ing industry. The harbour is located immediately adjacent to the river mouth and is sheltered by a rock breakwater and sand island. The river flow is considerably reduced by the upstream entrance weir resulting in a calm, quiet harbour with a minimum of maintenance dredging.

Because of the concentration of the fishing industry at Steveston, the apparent availability of sites, the expressed desires of the users, and the community, it was decided to con­ centrate the investigation on this area. The Steveston commu­ nity forms part of the Municipality of Richmond.

Steveston Island

The Department of Public Works were requested to pro­ duce an engineering study of a 1000-berth fishing harbour designed primarily to provide permanent herthing. They iden­ tified the need for approximately 10 acres of upland property and 45 acres of foreshore for use in mooring and access channel. A proposal was developed in cooperation with the Fraser River Harbour Commission to ensure that the requirements for the - 9 - future operation of a fishing harbour could be integrated with the continuing river channel dredging for navigation and the disposal of the resulting sand.

In April 1974 this proposal was presented to the Richmond Council as a design concept for their considera­ tion. The Council referred it to their Advisory Planning Commission which formed a special sub-committee to examine the proposal and work with the Small Craft Harbours Branch to produce an acceptable solution.

A public meeting was held in the Steveston Com­ munity Centre attended by some 200 people. A series of open sub-committee meetings were held at whicl1 many citi­ zens groups attended and made their views known. During this process the proposal was modified significantly to meet a number of serious objections. These objections were basically as follows:

1. Access construction onto the upper end of Steveston (Shady) Island would seriously change its undisturbed natural values for wildlife and birds.

2. Dredging, except in the downstream areas of the rock breakwater, would remove useful marsh areas utilized by fish and wildlife.

3. Storage of sand and subsequent disposal by truck over the access road would cause un­ acceptable noise and traffic problems to the community.

4. Access to the Island side of Cannery Channel at any point other than the upper end was un­ acceptable from a navigation point of view. - 10 -

The Advisory Planning Sub-Committee produced a report to Council recommending the revised Steveston Island Proposal. This layout is shown in Fig. 2.

Because of the restriction recommended by the Sub-Committee, the disposal of sand by trucking off the Island no longer formed part of the proposal.

Internal Departmental Review

With the initiation of the EARP process, the Department of the Environment undertook to ensure that this project was thoroughly evaluated as to environmental and social impact. Small Craft Harbours requested assis­ tance in August, 1974. A Task Force was organized September 17, 1974, with a representative of each of the following agencies of Environment Canada:

Fisheries and Marine Service Environmental Protection Service Canada Wildlife Service Lands Directorate Inland Waters Directorate.

The lead agency was identified as the Fisheries and Marine Service. At their direction, Small Craft Harbours engaged a consultant to prepare a Preliminary Environmental Assessment based on existing data and information in accor­ dance with the existing guidelines for the EARP process. Technical input to be supplied by the Departmental Agencies. The final report was received from floward Paish & Associates April 18, 1975.

Prior to receipt of the final report, it became apparent to the Task Force and to Small Craft Ilarbours that

an addition~l review was required of alternatives along the Steveston Lulu Island waterfront. The basic reasons for this - 11 - were:

1. Access construction to Steveston Island was heavily dependent on future river training plans of the Department of Public Works. While it may be acceptable for one causeway on the north or south side of Steveston Island, the possibility of two separate causeways or training works was undesirable. The ultimate decision on river training was a minimum of five years away.

2. The necessity for accommodating working areas within the vessel mooring facility for the unloading of nets, gear, and minor vessel maintenance had been under-estimated.

3. The possibility of using this project as an instrument to encourage the redevelopment of the Steveston area and the waterfront was re­ cognized as an important social opportunity.

Small Craft Harbours Branch, upon receipt of the Paish Report, provided the information on social conflicts to the Richmond Council and requested they review the issues raised and ensure that the development meet the local need. A copy of. the letter to Richmond is in Appendix 1.

Discussions were held with Richmond Planning Depart­ ment, aldermen, fishing companies, and fishermen's organiza­ tions. All possible areas on the waterfront were looked at to determine their suitability and availability for develop- ment. Four sites (A, B, C, D) were identified and are shown Q in Fig. 3. -

A public meeting was held January 20, 1976, in - 12 -

Steveston by the Planning Department to gather further input on these alternatives. Further examination indicated that only Site "A" was large enough and available for development. Site "B" is in an area even more environmentally sensitive than Steveston Island. Site "C" was too small and not for sale. Site "D" fronted on Agricultural Land Reserve and had many problems similar to Steveston Island itself.

~ ~·With the receipt of Richmond Council's letter of February@ 19 76, (Appendix 1) requesting the construct ion of the fishing harbour on the Lulu Island side, a proposal was prepared covering Site "A" and presented to the Screen­ ing Coordinating Committee on March 4, 1976.

The proposal presented is the proposal now being dealt with for Environmental Assessment in this statement.

Steveston Island Land Use

Ownership of the island and riverbed is vested in the Crown Provincial who by Orders in Council have reserved lots to the Federal Department of Public Works. A total of 118. 37 acres has been reserved for ci ther "Public llarbourage", "Fishermen's Harbours" or "Breakwater". These lots (6118, 6119, 6120 and 6315) which extend from the upstream weir down­ stream 2,200 ft. cover the Shady Island upland and the water area on the north side of Shady Island. This is the prime ecologically attractive area. With the construction of the Steveston breakwater on portions of Lot 6242, this lot was used as a sand disposal area by the Department of Public Works for maintenance of the navigation channel.

There are no other uses being made of Stcvcston Island. The present zoning is unclear.

The preference of the Richmond Planning Department is to see this Island reserved for recreation or natural - 13 - purposes.

Steveston Waterfront Land Use

The entire Lulu Island waterfront of Steveston from 7th Avenue eastward is owned by three groups: fishing com­ panies, oil companies and the Government of Canada. There is no registered public access to the water.

Water lots exist over the entire area controlled by their upland owners. The leases are from the Province of British Columbia through the administration of the Fraser River Harbour Commission.

The upland property concerned with this project is as follows:

1. Canadian Fishing Co. 13.1 acres 2 . B.C. Packers Ltd. 2. 1 " 3 . Queen Charlotte Fisheries 1. 1 " 4. Gulf Oil 1. 0 " 5. Easthopes 0. 3 " 6. c. A. Reisterer Ltd. . 2 6 " 7. Federal Government 1. 4 II (Fraser River Harbour Commission)

· The property controlled by the Government of Canada consists of the existing 2nd Avenue floats and the No.l Road Department of Public Works Wharf used as a base for their survey and dredging operations.

The land required is presently zoned as General Manufacturing. A commercial fishing harbour would be a con­ forming use under this zoning.

There have been several studies of land use for - 14 - this area:

1. "The Steveston Study", Richmond Planning Department 1970 which presented an inventory

and asse~sment of Steveston plus a renewal concept for reorganization of waterfront land use.

2. "Study of Industry and Related Uses of Land and Water in the Vicinity of Steveston's Waterfront" - Richmond Planning Department November 1975. Work performed at the re­ quest of Small Craft Harbours.

3. "Fraser River Harbour Development Study" - Norman Pearson 1972. A survey for the Fraser River Harbour Commission.

4. "Urban Village" - Sakamoto, B. Unpublished Architectural Thesis.

There arc no major conflicts in this project with the recommendations for development of this site, contained in the above studies.

T_!1e upland area to be acquired is shown in Fig. 4 and is a maximum of 18 acres. The water areas to be reserved are 45 acres.

Because of the existing pressure for the urban re­ newal of Steveston, the concentration of public vessel moorage and related activities and the consequent freeing of other areas from this use, the project should encourage the stated goals of Richmond. These goals are to encourage the more in­ tense use of waterfront land, upgrade sub-standard services and increase economic activity in the area of Stcveston. - 15 -

3.4 Associated Projects

Steveston Redevelopment

The concentration of mooring requirements, park­ ing areas, working spaces associated with this develop­ ment will release privately owned property for other uses. The ultimate uses will be determined by local government through zoning authority and by market demand. The fish­ ing industry has indicated an intention to upgrade the use of its land for warehousing and net storage.

At present there is virtually no public access to the waterfront. Site "A" will open up a length of water­ front approximately 2,000 ft. long. While it is not de­ sirable from an operational or safety point of view to per­ mit unrestricted access to all areas, it will be possible to provide viewing locations on the shore.

Subject to the requirements of direct harbour demand for upland property and the size of the parcels actually acquired, it will be feasible to encourage the development of storage facilities for fishing gear either on a lease basis or on adjoining private land by others. Pri­ vate companies have indicated a willingness to provide these services.

Fuelling Facilities

In order to utilize Site "/\" efficiently, it will be necessary to relocate at least some of the marina fuelling facilities in the area now operated by Gulf Oil, Home Oil and Imperial Oil. These relocations will result in improve­ ments to the existing situation and will be subject to all the relevant environmental and safety requirements. - 16 -

River Training

The Department of Public Works are investigating a major proposal for the reduction of annual dredging on the Steveston Cut area of the main river channel, immediately south of Steveston Island. This investigation will be on­ going for a number of years. Hydraulic model studies and an environmental impact study are under way.

River training does not directly impinge on Site "A". However, for Phase III of the harbour proposal it is necessary to move the existing breakwater. It could be desirable both economically and operationally to combine the location of the new breakwater with the location of the train­ ing wall, if it were to be built. This integrated use cannot be confirmed for several years. However, it must be under­ stood that the ultimate need to move the breakwater to make room for Phase III will exist regardless of the construction of a training wall at the downstream end of Steveston break­ water.

Sand Disposal

Site "A" has no direct involvement in the continuing disposal of sand from the Steveston Cut area. The need for establishing such a site still exists and is subject to mutual arrangements among the Department of Public Works, Fraser River Harbour Commission, Richmond Council, and the Provincial Government.

With the ultimate development of Phase III the pre­ sent dumping of sand on Stcveston Island will be restricted thus increasing the need to obtain a satisfactory alternate (l site. - 17 -

4. The Steveston Waterfront Harbour Proposal

The Small Craft Harbours Branch plans to develop a major fishing harbour on the waterfront of Steveston along some 2,500 lin. ft. of shoreline stretching from the end of No.l Road to a point west of 7th Avenue on the Lulu Island side of Cannery Channel. The harbour complex will. occupy about 45 acres of land under water and 10 to 18 acres of upland. This space will accommodate, ultimately, about 1,000 commercial fishing vessels. The full develop­ ment may be accomplished in three stages.

Initially, property negotiations will be com­ pleted and the appropriate parcels of property will be pur­ chased. The property preferred consists of 7~ acres situ­ ated outside the dyke and another 2~ acres in three parcels adjacent to the waterfront inside the dyke. Depending on the outcome of the property negotiations currently in pro­ gress, the tot~l tract of land acquired may range from 10 acres to about 18 acres. (Refer to attached drawings Phases I, II, III and Sections.)

In the first stage, the waterfront area would be transformed from its present condition into a harbour capable of accommodating about 350 vessels. The basin would be dredged to a depth of 15 ft. below low water in a 600-ft. wide strip along the waterfront. About 125,000 c.y. of the dredged materials. would be used to reclaim nearly 7 acres of land outside the dyke and the remainder, about 225,000 c.y, would be wasted by dumping at sea. Dredging for reclamation pur­ poses may be accomplished by suction operations at the rate of 10,000 c.y. per day. This material would be retained by nearly 100,000 c.y. of gravel in dykes and 12,000 c.y. in riprap. The materials to be wasted would be handled by clam­ shell operations and towed away on barges at the rate of about 6,000 c.y. per day. - 18 -

Onshore site preparation will involve the demo­ lition of about 100,000 sq. ft. of wharves and buildings. The debris would be hauled away to appropriate disposal sites on land.

In the first stage three arrays of floats would be installed, radiating from shore. These would contain about 43,000 sq. ft. of deck area. The floats are movable structures riding on the water's surface and drawing less than 2 feet, secured in position by timber pile dolphins at intervals of about 50 ft. These structures would be built substantially of wood treated with preservatives for durability.

A single pier set nearly parallel to shore would be built to accommodate vessels 60 ft. long or longer. This pier will contain about 50,000 sq. ft. of deck surface. This structure may consist of a deck membrane spanning 10 to 15 ft. between the pile bent supports. Bracing or batter piles may be added to establish lateral stability. These structures would be built substantially of wood, preserva­ tively treated, and reinforced concrete.

About 5 acres of the reclaimed land would be paved and made visually attractive by the planting of trees and shrubs.

New office and washroom accommodation would occupy about 1,000 sq. ft. of area on the reclaimed· land. The har­ bour would be serviced by water, sewage disposal, power and lighting systems.

The fuel dispensing systems would be relocated for operational and safety reasons.

In the second stage of development, the basin would - 19 - be widened by 250 ft. This will entail the dredging and disposal at sea of 500,000 c.y. of materials. If recep­ tors are found, the dredge materials could be recovered for further utilization. The float arrays would be ex­ tended 250 ft. to provide another 40,000 sq. ft. of deck surface. A second fixed pier would be built parallel to the first and modifications may be made to the pier approaches and along the shoreline. These changes would double the accommodation for vessels. On land, another 3 acres would be paved and landscaped and the buildings would be enlarged by 500 sq. ft. The water supply, sewage disposal, power and lighting systems would be extended to the new structures and the fuelling facilities would be re­ located. At the completion of this stage the harbour could accommodate about 700 vessels.

The harbour can be developed to this stage in the space available in Cannery Channel between the waterfront and the breakwater forming the backbone of Steveston Island. Any further development would extend the waterside facilities into space beyond these boundaries. This space is that which is occupied by the downstream end of Stcveston Island and a narrow strip riverward of it. The nature of the final expan­ sion will depend on the action which has been taken by others to train the river through Steveston Cut of the main arm. If river training will be accomplished by the time that the third phase is undertaken, the harbour facilities will be expanded in the same manner that the second stage expansion was accom­ plished.

If river training proves to be unfeasible by the time that the third stage is needed, contingency action would be taken. This would involve the repositioning of about 2,500 lin. ft. of the downstream end of Stcveston Island. 1bis shifting would provide the space required for the expansion of the harbour and would retain the basin's protection against wave action. - 20 -

In the final stage, the basin would be widened another 250 ft. A part of the downstream end of Steveston Island would be removed involving the dredging of about 650,000 c.y. of former dredged sand. Unless a receptor can be found, this material would be wasted at sea.

Extension of the structures into this part of the basin would be accomplished as a repetition of the pre­ vious expansion. Another 40,000 sq. ft. of floats and a third fixed pier parallel to the earlier ones would be added. This expansion would include repositioning of the fuel outlet and final extensions of the services to the new structures. On shore another 2 acres would be paved and landscaped and the buildings would be enlarged by 500 sq. ft.

4.1 Operations and Maintenance

Users

The objective of the project is to maximize the harbour service to the fishing industry. Commercial fishing will have priority at all berthing and services.· Minor amounts of space will be required for government vessels. During summer months and the absence of portions of the com­ mercial fleet, some space can be made available to recreational boaters similar to the operation of the Vancouver False Creek Fishermen's Terminal. Fish will not be handled in any signi­ 1 ficant quantity at the public facilities.

Activities

a) Inactive mooring outside of the fishing season with the occurrence of minor vessel repairs, over­ hauling of gear and net storages.

b) Active mooring during fishing season, overnight and harbour days will require unloading of catch at adjacent processors and cash buyers, taking on of fuel and supplies and minor maintenance to - 21 -

nets and quipment.

c) Car traffic will occur in varying volumes, depend- ing on season but will not have pronounced regu- lar peaks due to the irregular movement of vesels and crew even during local fishing periods. The level of activity can be handled by connections to existing streets.

d) Truck traffic will be fairly light and will con­ sist of service vehicles and light trucks for the handling of nets and gear. Heavy vehicle traffic movements will be reduced in comparison to the past when the Canadian Fishing Co. opera­ tion occupied the site.

e) Pedestrian traffic from casual visitors and their cars can be accommodated in the public parking and access areas incorporated on the upland property. Portions of the waterfront land will he open to general public for purposes of viewing the acti­ vity.

Supervision

There will be on-site supervision to ensure the en­ forcement of normal harbour management regulations. Regula­ tions will be enforced in the areas of vessel movements, berthing, safety, sanitation and security.

Services

Potable water and fire protection will be received from municipal supply.

Electricity will be available on a user fee basis for operation of tools, heaters, etc. Light will be pro­ vided to the access floats and wharves and to active park­ ing areas. - 22 -

Garbage will be collected in containers and the Ministry of Transport regulations concerning garbage from vessels will be enforced.

Sewage from vessels is currently unregulated and is now disposed of directly into the water. A location for a future pump-out service for vessels with holding tanks will be incorporated into the design. This service will be provided as soon as it becomes practical to put into opera­ tion. The provision of public washroom facilities on shore will be used to discourage discharge from vessels. Live­ aboards, except on active fishing vessels, will he prohibited.

Tanks will be provided for the reception of used lubricating oil and supervision will prevent the pumping of bilge waste by moored vessels.

Fuelling Existing fuelling facilities will be relocated to fit in with new berthing layouts to ensure improvement in safe­ ty and functional performance. Actual locations and service will depend on future negotiation and agreement with the com­ panies concerned. Regulations required by the local authori­ ties and Dominion Fire Commissioner will be complied with.

Debris ·The majority of debris external to the site is de­ flected from Cannery Channel by the existing shear boom in the main channel above the entrance weir. Locally generated debris will be handled during the detailed design of the floats with incorporation of fender logs and shear boom. Site supervision will eliminate a high percentage of inter­ nally generated debris and remove accumulation as it occurs. Floating organic wastes from existing processing plants may require temporary booming and disposal at certain times of the year. - 23 -

Navigation Access

Due to the configuration of the berthing areas, it will be necessary to alter the location of the navigation channel. The final location and dimensions will be subject to the approval of the Fraser River Harbour Commission. The present dredged channel is 200 ft. wide, depth 16 ft. - 12 ft. below LLW. The new channel will exceed this at all times. Channel markers and navigational aids will be subject to the requirements of the Harbour Commission.

Maintenance Dredging

The completion of the Cannery Channel Darn and weir installation by 1959 at the upper end of the channel has vir­ tually eliminated the entrance of coarse material to the harbour. Infill occurs gradually and consists of suspended sediments. Bottom samples indicate sizes ranging from 85 to 150 microns. The Department of Public Works indicate from past records maintenance dredging will be required in Cannery Channel approximately every 4 - 5 years with a potential re­ moval of 36,000 c.y. per year of material which is carried into the channel in suspension. Dredging within the berth areas can be at longer intervals if desirable by over-dredging the required operational depth.

In the period from 1954 to 1971, accretion amounting to 8,000 c.y. per year of coarse sand has been retained above the upstream weir as bed material. If the accretion approaches the sill elevation of the weir, then it can be removed by a minor dredging operation possibly at 10- to 15-year intervals.

The Department of Public Works foresee no major change in maintenance dredging caused by the enlargement of the basin or the construction of the harbour facilities. As discussed later under Mitigation, the addition of more water to Cannery Channel will inevitably raise the annual deposition of suspended material. - 24 -

5. Existing Environmental Features and Natural Resources.

5.1 Ilydrography and Hydrology

Steveston Harbour is located at the southwest corner of Lulu Island upstream of the river training jetties forming the entrance to the main arm of the Fraser River. It is pro­ tected from the main river flow by a rock dam and submerged weir connected to Steveston Island and by a 6500 ft. long rock breakwater parallel to the river bank. The comparative volume of flow in Cannery Channel is 2% to 4% of the main channel flow. The actual volume of water moving through the harbour is a function of the tide range in Georgia Strait and the actual stage of freshwater river discharge. The effect of the tidal prism can exceed that contributed by the upstream river discharge.

The relationships are complex and for further infor­ mation reference should be made to Special Estuary Series No.l, prepared by Environment Canada, "The Fraser River Estuary, Status of Environmental Knowledge to 1974" and its extensive bibliography. Velocities in the channel are unsteady due to the changing relationship of tide, river discharge and conse­ quently slope.

The rock dam has reduced velocities within the har­ bour area so that no navigational problems are encountered.

The rock breakwater has reduced the exposure of the site to wind-generated waves from the southeast through to the west. No operational problems are encountered in the harbour by wind-generated waves.

Model tests on the revised downstream entrance to Cannery Channel have indicated no operational problems in flow directions, sedimentation, will be caused by a movement of the existing breakwater to produce a new entrance suitable for - 25 - navigation.

Existing hydrographic conditions are shown on Fig. 1, A and B, prepared by the Department of Public Works for navi­ gation purposes.

5.2 Oceanography Wave conditions within Cannery Channel are of no significance to commercial traffic due to the protection pro­ vided by the existing breakwater. Alterations to the break­ water proposed in Phase III will have no impact on these con­ ditions.

Cannery Channel is subject to the regular intrusion of salt water introduced by the flood tide. Studies carried out for the Department of Public Works by the Fisheries Re­ search Board in 1954, 1955, indicated that salt water was introduced when the river discharge dropped below 160,000 c.f.s. after the freshet period and was consistently present in vary­ ing depths and concentrations until April. The channel was subsequently dredged on a uniform slope from the upper weir to the downstream entrance to ensure salt water was not trapped in depressions in the channel.

Velocities in the channel are highly variable due to non-steady state of the flow and variations in tidal range which affect the slope of the river. Figures supplied by the Department of Public Works of field meterings indicate under minimum conditions of low river discharge and low tide ranges minimum velocities of .85 ft. per second occur along the north bank of the channel. At flood stages equivalent to 510,000 c.f.s. this velocity would rise to approximately 4.5 ( ft. per second. Velocities along the north shore of Steveston Island are much lower.

Flow in Cannery Channel represents only 2 to 4 per­ cent of the adjacent main channel flow. This holds true at - 26 - all stages of river discharge. Representative Cannery Channel figures provided by the Department of Public Works are:

Freshet Conditions

lS0,000 cfs at Hope 14 ft. Tide Q S,700 c. f. s. 3SO,OOO II II II 14 ft. II Q = 13,000 " 3SO,OOO " II " 9 ft. II Q 6,300 II Sl0,000 II II II 14 ft. II Q 24,000 II

Low Water Flow

Maximum channel Q = 8-10,000 cfs at 14 ft. Tide.

At low water flow (S0,000 cfs Ilope) the effect of the tidal prism at Steveston can produce flows of lS0,000 cfs locally in the main channel.

S.3 Meteorological Conditions

The Steveston climate is typical of the lower Fraser delta. Extensive records are available from the climatolo­ gical station in Steveston. The prevailing winds are easterly, although the strongest (SS mph) arc from the northwest. Simi­ lar strengths occur from the southeast. Due to the fetch distances and shallow water, these can generate waves prohi­ biting sa£e small vessel mooragc without adequate breakwater protection such as now exists for the entire Stcvcston water­ front.

S.4 Water Quality

Water quality in Cannery Chanel in the past was re­ ported very poor but has, wtth the advent of pollution control measures, improved. Dissolved oxygen surveys carried out by the Environmental Protection Service (EPS) during the 1973 and - 27 -

1974 salmon seasons (see Figures 7 and 8) indicated that the dissolved oxygen levels above B.C. Packers (sampling points 1-3, see Figure 6 for sample location) were near saturation. However, below B.C. Packers, which presently is the largest operation, the dissolved oxygen levels were depressed at various parts of the season. During the 1974 salmon season, B.C. Packers were operating their full range of pollution equipment. The other canneries were not operational during 1973 or 1974 salmon season. Water quality data as it re­ lates to the herring fishery is currently being collected by EPS.

Present Flushing Characteristics of Cannery Channel

The following points are noted with respect to the flow characteristics of Cannery Channel as it now exists. Fig. 9 illustrates a schematic view at the proposed harbour, Fig. 9A the typical cross sections.

1. The flow discharge in Cannery Channel is a function of the main river discharge (freshwater plus tidal augmentation), water st1rface elevation, weir crest elevation, and width, and energy losses in Cannery Channel.

2. The magnitude of flow in the main river is the single most important parameter influencing the discharge in Cannery Channel.

3. For a given head differential, the discharge increases with increasing water levels upstream of the weir.

4. The flow in Cannery Channel is subject to reversals in flow direction, except during freshet periods.

5. The discharges in Cannery Channel arc shown for a typical tide and three Fraser River discharges at - 28 -

Hope, on Figures 10, 11, and 12. The QHope less than 25,000 cfs case, Figure 10, is representative of conditions in March-April during the herring reduction season. Figure 11 is typical of the salmon season during August-September, and Figure 12 is typi­ cal of a freshet period.

a) Generally the tidal fluctuation and river discharge are out of phase with the maxi­ mum downstream flow occurring at low tide and vice versa. This results in the down­ stream flows in Cannery Channel being re­ stricted by the weir since the water levels are low upstream of the weir at the time when there is the greatest head differen­ tial available for downstream flow.

b) The net flow in Cannery Channel tends to be upstream during perioas of low, Fraser River flows typical of March-April, Figure 10.

c) The flow is unidirectionally downstream during freshet periods, Figure 12.

d) Between low flow and freshet periods, typi­ cally May, August and September, inflows and outflows would tend to balance in Cannery Channel.

6. The flow area in Cannery Channel is approximately 11,000 sq. ft. Typical mean velocities in Cannery Channel would be as follows:

Low Fraser River flows 0.0 to 0.7 fps (reversing) Freshet flows 0.0 to 0.7 fps (unidirectional) - 29 -

7. It should be noted that the periods of very low, or zero, velocity tend to be the greatest for the case of 75,000 - 100,000 cfs at llope.

8. Velocities on the right or Lulu Island side of the channel would tend to be approximately 50 percent greater than the mean of the cross section. Mean velocities then in the navigation channel would range from 0 to 1.1 fps.

9. For a mean velocity in the vertical of 1.1 fps, the velocity 0.1 ft. above the bottom would be approxi­ mately 0.4 fps.

10. Values given above have not taken into account the effect of salinity intrusion. During low and mean flow periods, the downstream bottom velocities would be reduced and upstream velocities increased by salinity effects.

11. Velocities would be very low, if not stagnant, in the existing private mooring basins and pockets along the right bank of Cannery Channel.

12. The volume of water in Cannery Channel below local low water is estimated to be 58 million cu. ft. An average discharge of 1,500 cfs would replace this volume in approximately ten hours.

It is apparent from examining the existing flow characteristics of Cannery Channel that the poor water quality in the channel measured from July to August is due to pro­ longed periods of low velocities, limited exchange flow and pockets which can retain oxygen demanding material. It is expected that conditions may be worse during low Fraser River flow periods of March-April. Proper flushing of the channel - 30 - would occur only during freshet periods, and even then, bottom material would have to be capable of being moved by velocities in the order of 0.4 fps.

Waste Dischalrges

There are three known sources of waste entering Cannery Channel:

1. Fish processing wastes. 2. Human waste from the 500-odd vessels currently berthed in Cannery Channel. 3. A large ditch which drains part of Steveston proper. These waste sources are not necessa­ rily concurrent or continuous in flow.

Tabled below are estimates, where possible, of the present and future biochemical oxygen demand loads of the three main waste sources. From this table it can be seen that the oxygen demand load could be expected to increase in the future with potential for a decrease in water quality in the Channel independent of harbour construction.

Waste Streams - Cannery Channel Source Present future Fish Processing (1) 0-1000 #/day 0-1700 #/day

Fish Boats (human) 0-50 #/day 0-100 #/day (500x.l (lOOOx.l #/cap/day) #/cap/day)

Drainage Ditch (2) ? ?

Footnotes: (1) The load from the fish processing may increase if Cana­ dian Fishing Company move their operation from Vancouver - 31 -

Harbour and/or B.C. Packers re-activate their Paramount Plant. The BOD contribution per lb. of fish processed from the industrial plants is not likely to decrease in the immediate future as the plants in Cannery Channel have been directed to apply best practical technology. B.C. Packers is currently complying with this directive. Permissible discharges are 1.2# BOD per 1000# of herring processed and 7# per 1000# of salmon processed.

(2) The BOD contribution of this waste stream is not known. However, it is expected to decrease with time as Steveston converts from septic tanks to sewers.

(3) The oxygen demand level of the Fraser River water is not significant to the water quality of Cannery Channel, nor is it expected to be in the future. However, a waste dis­ charge upstream of the entrance to Cannery Channel could be detrimental if the effluent plume did not disperse in the main stern, but entered Cannery Channel instead.

5.5 Flora Native vegetation on the foreshore marsh and inter­ tidal lands of the Fraser estuary is comprised of some 14 plant species of which three species of bulrush (Scirpus arnericanus,

~· paludosus and~· validus), on s ecies of sedge (Carex ~ lyngbyei) and one species rr.. rnacrostachya) re- ~ present 92% of all the marsh-plants Burgess 1970). Of these, three are of prime importance t dabbli ucks and snow geese.

Less abundant and less important ~· acutus, Triglochin rnaritirna, Juncus balticus, Typha tifolia, Sagittaria latifolia, Potentilla edgedei, Ridens sauve and Alisrna triviale.

Upland vegetation co sists largely of grasses and forbs on the estuary sea-dyke and agriculture plants on the farmlands within the dyked a ea of the delta. Both upland plant communities contain a variety and abundance of species

t - 32 -

highly utilized, by waterfowl and other migratory birds, as food and cover.

The above aquatic and upland plants characterize much of the estuary in the vicinity of Steveston and the proposed boat harbour site. However, since the latter is already in­ tensively developed with wharves, floats and buildings used by the fishing industry, it contains only scattered patches of upland vegetation (Reed canary grass, blackberry, salmon berry, Indian broom and some willow) mainly in the rear of the buildings backing on the railway embankment~ The inter­ tidal zone fronting the Cannery Channel north bank and lying beneath the existing wharf buildings is devoid of any vegeta­ tion, aquatic or upland.

On the north side of Steveston Island across Cannery Channel and between points opposite the southerly ends of 1st Avenue and 5th Avenue are broken patches of dune grass (Elymus mollis) interspersed with the moss (Ceratodon purporeus) and the occasional willow (Salix ~·). In the shallow water of the intertidal lands fronting this section are small areas of emerging marsh as yet very sparsely vegetated.

5.6 Fish and Wildlife Fisheries Resource General The fisheries resources of the Fraser River have re­ cently been reviewed by Northcote (1974). This review lists 38 species that inhabit the lower Fraser system (downstream from Hope), categorizes them as migratory, semi-migratory, and non-migratory, and summarizes some aspects of fish utiliza­ tion of the lower Fraser.

Salmon Details concerning the life histories, including spawning distribution, spawning and rearing requirements, - 33 - migration timing, as well as details on present and potential escapements and commercial and recreational catch of Fraser River salmon are outlined by the Department of the Environ­ ment, Fisheries Service (1974). The following summary of the life cycle, migration timing, spawning escapements and commercial catch is taken from this report.

In summary, the salmon resources of the Praser River are estimated to be 9,900,000 fish. Of this total 2,500,000 spawners produce an annual commercial catch of 7,100,000 salmon, a sport catch of 122,000 and an Indian food fishery catch of 170,000 salmon. This salmon resource represents an annual commercial catch valued at $ 73 million, and an annual commercial "net" value of $37 million (1973 prices - Fisheries and Marine Service - Economics Unit). In addition, the salmon of the Fraser River have a total annual recreational value of $197 million and preservation value of $106 million (Meyer 1974). Bennett (1973) has reported on the cultural importance of Indian fishing in the Fraser River system. The Department of the Environment, Fisheries Service

(1974) h~s estimated the potential Praser River salmon re­ source to be 24,500,000 fish annually. This resource would be comprised of 4,000,000 spawners per year which would pro­ duce a catch of 19,800,000, a sport fishery catch of 360,000 and an Indian food fishery catch of 320,000 salmon.

Juvenile Salmon Downstream Migrations Bailey and Fraser (1975) have estimated the average annual number of chum, pink and chinook fry migrating in the Fraser River from 1965 to 1974 as follows: chum 75.7 million; pink 193.5 million (even years only); chinook 16.8 million. In that the sampling procedures on which this enumeration is based sample only fry, and because many chinooks migrate after some period of freshwater rearing, and arc not sampled, the above-referenced authors state that "the total number of chinook juveniles migrating downstream is thought to be - 34 - considerably larger than the 16.8 million fry''. In his re- view of the biology of the lower Fraser River, Northcote (1974) has reported the total number of juvenile coho and sockeye migrants to be 2.1 million and 45 million respec­ tively. These figures represent a total of 343.l million juvenile salmon in even years and 139.6 million in odd years. Northcote (1974) has summarized the timing of these migra­ tions and Bailey and Fraser (1975) have reported on the annual variability in the timing of churn, pink and chinook downstream migrations.

Estuarine Utilization The rearing and feeding of juvenjle salmon and other fisheries in estuarine environments has been well documented (Environment Canada 1972, 1973, 1974, Goodman and Vroom 1972, 1974, Kaezynski et al 1973, Kask and Parker 1972). Recent studies (Department of the Environment 1975) have documented t~e abundance, distribution and food utilized by juvenile salmon and other fishes in the Fraser River Estuary between April and August. This study indicated that those areas of the lower river characterized by reduced flow, relatively fine substrate and vegetated shores were highly utilized for rearing by juvenile chinook, coho and churn salmon. Sampling for this study included bi-weekly beach seining at 8 stations (37-44) on Steveston Island (Figure 13). These data indicate that the intertidal portions, particularly the marsh habitats, of Steveston Island produce food organisms, utilized by juve­ nile salmon during the period of estuary rearing prior to entering the sea. No other data on the abundance of fish in Cannery Channel is available. On the basis of visual obser­ vations, little, if any, rearing habitat is present on the Lulu Island shore of Cannery Channel.

Avian Wildlife Migratory bird use of the estuarine lands in the vicinity of Steveston occurs throughout the year with - 35 - seasonal activity varying with different bird groups. Some 185 species hav~ been recorded in the area and the majority are regular visitors to the estuary. Waterfowl, comprising forty species of ducks, geese and swans, are the best known of the local avian wildlife groups and may be found here in large numbers throughout the period September through April. Shorebirds form the second-largest avian group on the estuary with wintering numbers in excess of one million birds (Halladay and Harris, 1972). Six species of gulls frequent the delta lands at different seasons, with greater numbers occurring during the winter. Other estuarine birds include raptors, herons and the varied and abundant members of the passerine group, most of which appear as migrants or to nest and rear young in the spring, summer and fall period. !fence the Fraser estuary is rich in species and numbers of bird-life and is extremely important as habitat for wintering, migrating and nesting birds.

The area most intensively used by birds in the imme­ diate vicinity of the boat harbour site is that of Steveston Island. While no data arc available to indicate population numbers, at lease 60 species have been recorded on this is­ land during the winter months (Watmough 1972). On the actual propoied site the present state of almost total development precludes the presence of any significant wildlife populations, avian or mammalian. Avian use of the site currently possible would be limited to minimal use of the grass and shrub habitat found in small amountin the rear of existing buildings, or in the waters of cannery Channel.

5.7 People Steveston has been a fishing community since the late 1800's and continues to be dominated by the fishing industry through its occupation of almost the entire waterfront. The increasing urbanization of the Municipality of Richmond has increased the residential population of the Steveston Bylaw -

- 36 -

Area (which is a portion of Richmond) from 5,750 in 1961 to 18,900 in 1974. The core area south of Steveston High­ way, which is more representative of the community of Steveston, grew from 2,847 to 4,673 in the same period. Most of the increased population has no connection with the fishing industry but represent increasing numbers of people who live in the area and are employed elsewhere in the region.

There is virtually no waterfront access available to the general public along the entire Steveston waterfront.

6. Impacts

Hydrography and Hydrology The construction of the fishing harbour including possible alterations to the upstream weir will not produce any impact on the hydrography or hydrology of the main channel. The river slope in Cannery Channel will not be affected. The channel dimensions and velocities obviously are changed. These are dealt with under Water Quality.

Oceanography There will be no change in wave conditions or in the intrusion of the salt water wedge into the harbour. Sur­ face velocities will be reduced within the fishing harbour area by 5.0 %•

Water Quality

The proposed small craft harbour could affect the water quality in the following ways: a) The contribution of a bacterial and biochemical oxygen demand load through a concentration of vessels. - 37 - b) The alteration of the hydraulics within the channel so that the effect on the dissolved oxygen levels by the wastes entering the channel is increased. c) The construction dredging causing a high short­ term oxygen demand due to settled putrescibles. d) The collection of certain fractions of the fish processing wastes on the upstream floats during ebb tides. e) Assuming that regulations are not promulgated with respect to holding tanks on fishing vessels and pump-out facilities at the small craft harbour, there will be a potential for a maximum two-fold increase in wastes from the fishing boats due to a doubling of the number of vessels at certain times of the year. These wastes are readily /

air flotation. The fine screened waste is about 50% settlable, while the effluent stream after air floation is almost entirely soluble.

The permit issued for B.C. Packers calls for fine screening and air flotation, and as such, the waste stream coming from this operation contains primarily soluble material. Therefore, alteration to the velocities within the channel, if there was no change in the retention time of the waste within the channel, would not be ex­ pected to cause a problem.

g) The wastes entering Cannery Channel through the drainage ditch are unknown, but it would be ex­ pected that they would be both settlable and soluble. Changes in both the velocity and the flushing rates would be expected to alter this waste effect on the dissolved oxygen levels.

h) Construction dredging will be a slight problem as recent sampling within Cannery Channel shows that the bottom material has a high chemical oxygen demand and would not be suitable for in­ discriminate disposal into other waters.

Flora There will be no impact on flora due to its almost complete absence on the Steveston waterfront side of the channel as this is an existing industrial area. On the north side of Steveston Island between the extensions of 1st Avenue and 5th Avenue are broken patches of dune grass and some minor areas of emerging marsh which will be re­ moved by dredging. Compared to the upstream portion of Steveston Island, however, these are insignificant in quantity or quality. - 39 -

Fish

a) Reduction of water quality in Cannery Channel would prove harmful to fish if it occurred.

b) The physical construction of the harbour and its initial dredging of existing material having a high chemital oxygen demand could affect the sur­ vival of fish present at the time.

Wildlife While virtually no baseline data are available for wildlife on the site proposed on the north side of Cannery Channel, Steveston, it is felt that existing information re­ lative to habitat quality and migratory bird use of the area about the site would indicate that the projected harbour development Phases I and II would not impose a major impact on wildlife, provided that adequate measures are taken to prevent or mitigate damage to wildlife resulting from pollu­ tion from the harbour operation.

Construction of Phase III raises minor wildlife concerns for habitat loss that will occur with the dredging of the required access channel. This will destroy some developing marsh and upland habitat through the removal of much of the western half of the existing island. In this connection there is concern with regard to the location of the spoil site for dredging from channel construction and maintenance, and also whether or not channel protection in­ volves a special breakwater or the incorporation of the proposed future training wall. Apart from these possible impacts, harbour development on the Steveston waterfront site, through lack of habitat and wildlife use, is not re­ garded as being of major environmental consequence.

People There is no significant negative impact on people - 40 - with the construction of this project. The commercial fisherman and his organizations have been pressing for public moorage and improved standards of accommodation in Steveston for many years. The fishing companies have indicated their desire and willingness to make better use of their property for warehousing and gear storage.

The concentration of mooring, new parking and working areas on the waterfront adjacent to the Steveston core area will encourage redevelopment in accordance with the expressed wishes of the Richmond Council.

The general public will be permitted access to areas of the waterfront currently denied.

The final location of the harbour will relieve the long-standing uncertainty of the future use of Steveston Island and permit its use by others in accordance with the wishes of the community and other outside groups.

7. Mitigation

Water Quality If the construction of the small craft harbour alters the hydraulics within Cannery Channel, even locally, such that settlable material does not get re-entrained or, more importantly, the length of time oxygen demanding mate­ rial is retained within the channel, then mitigation steps must be taken.

The options are available with respect to maintain­ ing adequate dissolved oxygen levels within Cannery Channel: 1. Remove the biochemical oxygen demanding material.

2. Increase the amount of water passing through Cannery Channel. - 41 -

Mechanically, it should be possible to pipe the effluent from B.C. Packers and any of the other companies if they come on line into the main stem of the Fraser River, or into the Richmond sewer system. The capital cost of either piping int6 the main stem or into Richmond's sewers will be high. The existing sewering at B.C. Packers is such that the construction of a pumping station would be necessary. Utilizing the Richmond sewer system would re­ sult in an operating cost of some magnitude for B.C. Packers.

Increasing the flow into Cannery Channel so as to maintain, if not improve, existing velocities and flushing rates would be the other alternative. The effect this would have on dredging cost would have to be balanced against the capital cost of piping the effluent into the main stem.

For the human wastes from the fishing vessels, there are no solutions to the bacterial contamination except for holding and pumping ashore. The eventual solution will be regulation to prevent the discharge of human waste from vessels, requiring holding tanks and pump-out facilities. A pump-out facility will be incorporated into this project.

Hydraulic Factors considered important with Respect to Channel Flushing.

1. The total discharge into Cannery Channel that is available to exchange the water within the channel and remove dissolved solids, or materials readily put into suspension.

2. The average velocities in the channel as they re­ late to the retention time of dissolved solids.

3. The bottom velocities in the channel as they re­ late to the transportation and retention time of bottom material. - 42 -

4. Back eddies and/or stagnant areas.

5. Quality of inflow water.

In light of the present marginal water quality of Cannery Channel, which is understandable in view of the loads applied to the system and the existing flushing cha­ racteristics, there is concern that the proposed harbour could cause reduction in the flushing capacity of the chan­ nel. The following concerns have been raisc

i. The floats and piles will cause a head loss in the channel and reduce the dis­ charge in the channel.

ii. The floats and piles will cause the flow to be directed away from the mooring area, causing a backwater or stagnant area.

iii. The harbour will reduce flow velocities and increase the retention time of oxygen demanding material.

Hydraulic Characteristics of Cannery Channel associated with the proposed Harbour and mitigating Measures

The proposed harbour layout, Figure 9, includes three lines of ~loats in the upstream por~ion of the harbour, perpen­ dicular to the flow and three lines of saw-tooth berths, essen­ tially parallel to the flow. The floats would be moored by pile clusters, normally at 50 ft. centres, and would draw 2 ft. of water. The saw-tooth berths would be constructed of 12-inch piles on approximately 10-ft. spacings.

Phase III of the harbour development would involve relocation of the Steveston breakwater and dredging a cross section typified by Section B-B, Figure 9A. The following points are noted relative to the effects of the proposed - 43 - harbour:

1. Discharge Conservatively assuming that piles at a 10-ft. spacing would cover an area 1,000 ft. by 700 ft., and that the floats draw by the harbour struct friction and form loss in the efficient of 95) I Channel (C = 40) would be I The change in discharge due to the floats and piles is l thus a negligible contribution.

2. Flow Distribution The floats and piles are relatively open structures and during ebb flows it is expected the maximum velocities will remain on the north side of the channel. The flow will not be strongly deflected to the south causing a stagnant area under the floats. On the contrary, there will be an area of low velocity in the vicinity of the Southetn end of the most upstream line of floats. This would occur only on the ebb tide. This effect could be reduced by making a more gradual widening from the exist­ ing navigation channel into the harbour. These measures would have two off-setting effects. One, it would re­ quire. increase in dredging and two, the velocities along the present navigation channel would be reduced.

3. Flushing Rate The volume of water within Cannery Cahnnel below low water would be increased by the harbour development to approxi­ mately 77 million cu. ft. The water volume exchange time and retention time would be increased for a given inflow discharge. - 44 -

The water volume exchange time would be maintained at status quo if inflow discharge was increased by 32 percent. On the ebb tidal flow, this increase would also maintain status quo for the retention time of dissolved solids introduced at the weir but would re­ sult in an increase of approximately 54 percent of the retention time of dissolved solids introduced immediately upstream of the harbour. The inflow would have to be increased by 100 percent to maintain status quo for the retention time of dissolved solids introcuced immediately upstream of the harbour.

4. Flow Velocities Because of the increase in cross-sectional area, Section A-A to B-B, Figure 9A, flow velocities will be reduced, on the average, by SO percent at all times within the fishing harbour area. It could be argued that since the high velocity flow will maintain itself for some distance along the north side of the channel, the retention time of bottom materials introduced immediately upstream of the harbour would not be doubled. However, this involves· a more complicated 3-dimensional flow pattern and would require a hydraulic model study to examine retention times. It is perhaps better to deal with averages and note that an inflow increase of 100 percent would reduce the retention time of bottom material introduced near the weir and maintain status quo for bottom material introduced immediately upstream of the harbour.

Surface velocities will be reduced by the floats. This, however, is not a problem.

5. Mitigating Measures a) To maintain the present water volume exchange time will require an increase in inflow of 32 percent at all stages of the tidal cycle. Theoretically - 45 -

this could be accomplished by increasing the width of the weir to 500 ft. at cl 6.0 SIID. Practically it may be difficult to obtain an opening of this length.

b) To maintain the present retention times of dissolved solids and bed materials introduced into the channel immediately upstream of the harbour would require an increase in inflow discharge of 100 percent at all times. By lowering the weir to el 4.0 SHD and in­ ceasing the width of opening to 450 ft. would in­ cease the inflow by 100 percent or more for main river, tidal augmented, discharges above 230,000 cfs and water levels 10 ft. SIID, or less. For water levels above 10 ft. SHD, the increase may not be 100 percent, however the absolute values of the dis­ charge are highest at this level and 100 percent augmentation is then not considered necessary.

c) A shear boom at the upstream end of the harbour would direct floating debris away from the floats.

6. Effects of Mitigating Measures a) Suspended sediment is presently drawn into Cannery Channel and necessitates dredging the navigation chan­ nel every 5 years. Bed-load material has built up in front of the weir. Increasing the water inflow into Cannery Channel will obviously increase the total in­ flux of suspended sediment. The velocities in the existing channel will be higher hut suspension­ velocity characteristics are non-linear and there will be an increase in siltation. For an increase of 100 percent in water intake, it is estimated that the rate of siltation will increase by approximately 40-50 per­ cent, requiring some maintenance dredging in the navi­ gation channel every 3 to 4 years. - 46 -

The rate of infill in the proposed harbour will be increased over the present rate of infill re­ gardless of whether or not the water flow is in­ creased. Infill in the proposed fishing harbour area of approximately 16,000 to 20,000 c.y. is expected annually, depending upon the magnitude of the freshet.

These amounts are still extremely low in compari­ son to the natural condition prior to the weir con­ struction.

The increased water intake and associated increased approach velocities will draw more bed load to the weir. It is essential that a sediment trap be dredged in the vicinity of the weir if the inflow discharge is increased. b) The zone of influence of the weir will be increased if the inflow rate is increased and water will be drawn from further toward mid-stream in the main river. Concern was expressed that this may result in effluent from the Gilbert Road treatment plant being drawn into Cannery Channel. To be detrimental, this would require that the concentration of Gilbert Road effluent increase from the right bank of the river toward mid-stream at the point of influence of .the weir.

Preliminary evaluation of this indicates that the effect of the additional flow would not draw in water that contained a higher percentage of pollu­

tants.$ - 4 7 -

Water Quality Mitigation Measures Proposed

1. Provision be made to increase the inflow into Cannery Channel by approximately 20 percent by widening the upstream weir to 450 ft. for the first stages of harbour development.

2. Monitoring of water quality be carried out prior to and after construction of the fishing harbour at all stages of development.

3. Consideration be given to lowering the weir crest to el 4.0 SHD during the third phase of harbour development maintaining the width at 450 ft. This would maintain status quo for the retention times of dissolved solids and bottom material introduced immediately upstream of the harbour; reduce reten­ tion times for material introduced within the exist­ ing navigation channel upstream of the harbour; and reduce the time required for water volume exchange.

4. Consideration be given to placing a shear boom im­ mediately upstream of the fishing harbour to catch or deflect surface materials.

5. Prior to Phase III, an analysis can be made of the costs/benefits of lowering the weir to 4 ft. SHD versus the removal of the industrial outfalls into the main channel where much greater dilution capa­ city exists.

6. Evaluation of existing studies on the Gilbert Road sewer outfall and completion of field study of actual effluent plume if necessary.

Flora During the dredging phases of the project with proper care paid to location and sloping of dredge cuts, placing of - 48 - dredged spoil, it should be possible to reduce the impact to a minimum.

Fish The dredging operation presents the major hazard to fish. The operation will be conducted in accordance with the Fraser River Dredging Guideline produced by the Fisheries Service. A permit will be obtained under the Ocean Dumping Act where required.

Proper supervision during operation of the harbour, which is now impossible due to the scattered nature of the facilities and lack of control, will reduce the likelihood of the discharge of deleterious materials from vessels. Regula­ tions and penalties will be enforced to discourage this prac­ tice.

8. Residual Impacts

Until the final studies are complete on the proposed deapsea channel improvements in the Stcveston areas, it is impossible to describe the the impacts of this work on the pro­ ject. It must be assumed that the training proposals will not proceed if significant effects on the resources and natural environment occur. This will then require a more detailed en­ vironmental analysis of the final location of the existing Steveston Breakwater.

The removal of the downstream end of the Steveston Breakwater which consists of a quarried rock mound and dredged sand will permanently remove some areas. These arc, however. relatively barren in comparison with the larger area of Steveston Island which will remain undisturbed.

Technical Sources Technical information was supplied by a number of agencies of which the main sources are listed below. The - 49 -

Statement, however, reflects the interpretation made by the Small Craft Harbours Branch of the material supplied.

Agencies

Department of Public Works Western Canada Hydraulic Laboratories Ltd. Howard Paish & Associates

Department of the Environment Fisheries & Marine Service Environmental Protection Service (EPS) Inland Waters Directorate Canada Wildlife Services Lands Directorate

Richmond Planning Department. l I ... ,...• i i i i z ' • I ~ ' i i i

J f •• I H I ~ : !t •• ~ "-~ L· 1 I

..

1. .< r

__ ;,! • ~t ..• .. \ ,.

·' \ • \ i \..,,

... :•. k .....;. i.+1:\ ~ \ \\... .

Fie; I A ~ ~\ ! I ~i ~, l_ ,_ !i ~- ,,.! j "': I i 8 " t;I~I : ·-1

I ' '~1 \ ! Ll__ ___._·----,1

; -··

...... I

------;----I / I . .~

_I :•

/ /

FIC, 1.13 0 STEV'CSTOH l'llGHWA'f' & c T:···.. · 0

.... ,· DI ._ .... •• ----- c - ~ • LOCATION PACIFIC REGION · ~ -

" " MOHCT H ST REE T DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 22 21 c c .c c •c " 10 • • " .~ • " 22 . z -- " ------" ,. "

21 8001 ea., n

" "

21

22 21 26 >O " -- STE VEST ON " 27 " 22 " - " FISHING HARBOUR • ,. >O ...... " >O " " 12 .. 10 LOCATION • 19 " " CHART " " 16 Y., l'IJI " NOTES .. " 22 " II -· -- - BockQl'ound moppin9 token from " --• rO.T. Hydro9fophic Chorl 3488 12 " " --· --

,., 0 • :-:-· - 'l/"v., 0 •••.•• ; " -- -- 0 " - _.._.,..... ,,. ·,,. "" " -...... -.. Reifel la land ... ,; 89035 -·- .•. •. ··., .· 0 -- ._..,:. soo KlOO ISOO .;,:·;• :. · -. SCALE IN FEET --F l G IC -- -- .: _- - . - ---.

· ·...-. "- \" -- ~ ~ ;=~~ - ; 1 ·· A ~ -~ -1 . -- •.. ,'I , \ · I \ -- o·0 ,'J :------.. ~--:~ ·\ 11 11 .. -

_...... -...... -,..-

-,~ :· . I .. STEVESTON. . ISLAND

.- ...... "-.. _,,.-~ -4 ------·· -- ---

FRASER RIVER ~

J STEVESTON ISLAND . --· . -... -.. _. -. --- _. .- . - ...... -. ... _,, ...... _.. ... -- - _ ----.-- ...... POSSIBLE HARBOUR SITE . -- .. -· ·· _...... - -·- -~ ...... ~-

··· ··· ·····. ------·--·--'.!.":.. _ :-.:.:..._ ...... __.. ···-··-- ____ _ --- ¥ .. ... \ ··"'· \ \ •. \ '

'Fl G 2 •

- <. ~c· ·· ' rr . E~ < 1 .. ~ ·· ·.

BREAKWATER \ ------~ -- ·- . --:---~------

FRASER RIVER , I \

~ - - - --_--::: .. -- _.:..!:""' ------•.-- ~-- ,, , _.-' / , ------___ ,,,--- --,....,,,' - I -~ .... t...- / ___ :._ .., ,..._ ~ __, __ ' ' ____ STEVESTON WATERFRONT

--- .. -...... _ . -.,. ·-- -- ... ,.,__ __ ...... - .. .. POSSIBLE HARBOUR Sl"FES - .. . •_:: . ..:.:·: ._ ,• ·- ...... - ...... •. .. -...... _:.J .... ------.._ :...· .... -· ....

::.:.. ,.-.:..::.___ ~-- ...... --. - · •,-;::aara11;'* - - - -- ___ / ,,. .. ""•::.:=='I: •e:ir-:r. \ \ \ \ \ ·.

- -- ff'(".' GEODETIC

13·0

1.3·.3 1.3 ·0

13·3

12 · 8

--1 G ARRY' do It

SCO T P O I NT d I I I

r eviewe d hy / e 1aP1 1 nt pa r d 111

s ca I e · e cri e I I e aoprond b~ / at~prouu ra r di I I

r e w 1s 11J n s d. t. PfOJl!l.:: t OU"lb tr ll r aair'I 1 nn FlG 4A r 111 on r ev 1s1 on s no. de entreprise no du des s " --.,17·1 ,---,- -- __J 0 ) ...... ___ ~ 0 ,,.--_ --~ == ::::::: -{6·8 16·8 \

m17·9

c= 0 ------10------01 ------======----==--B-9

. . o o . oo oo Oo

---~ 0 0 0 0

16 .8 ......

d fawir1a title ' titre du cuss1 n

dra wn by / hs s 1ne' par d 1 to

d •l•

st a I e : e cne I I e --10------r ev 1s1 !Jn s d. t. p ro1e1;t nu:-iber d r a t 1ri 1 nn FIG46 ·---~ r 111 on r eYIS I ORS no. dt en t r ep r1 se no du d1ss1 n 10·7 tJ it 11 ·5 \ 0

10·9 +

+

11·0

. .- --~ -- ..::::::::- :::::- =

10 .5 ,\:' . .

I I I I I I

~I I I b

d1a11"1f t i tle ' titre d u Oess1 n d a 11

~· :_:•'..'..!' •:_:.•::..::• d~h:.!'..:... ' ..:.:••:.:•:::.:m '..::;" •:....:.:P •...:..• ------da t e

s ca I e / e the I 1e 1oo r oud 1>1 1 a~p rou n rar d1te

d r a., ,, a nn F\6 4C re~ 1 s 1 on s no . de entrepr1se no du dtss•' "-

-~ r I

, .

Pwc 2 p~ . c . ~-.' ' ~t1t>.Rf ~· ·;" ' . , ·"""-." .71>

-~------~--- ,, --- · ----- CHANNEL CANNERY ---r -B --.,

o-:,----

W P[ C ..: , •

' ' . \ I • O ~ ---- I ? 8 9 \) . "' '", . -- "" - !:;) "' "' :::::::::::- -.___.,- - .;. / ,'. -. • •I ',J ,;

• ------G A RR y PO N r /.' --- 0 ' ! ( / STEVESTON, B.C. / PROPOSED ' • • ~ b , 1 1 11 " ' r• • t-0.T FISHING HARBOUR --- WATERFRONT SITE ------a 1 r r FRASER RIVER SCALE " SITE PLAN • ? 11 1 PACI FIC REGION 89035 F l 6 S A ' 1 =200 L \ 13 10t 13 3 13·0

~ -----t CANNERY CHANNEL

DREDGING

GARRY d • a• t '1 1 t ttl t 't itr e d u d1 ss1n STEVE ST ON, B. C. 0 1 11 PROPOSED d r a•n by / d1 ss 1ne' pa r t-0. T. 0. ti

FISHING HARBOUR r u 11•tO hr , e i iH 1n1 oa r (I I ti WATERFRONT SITE - 1apr a•• d t>w 1 1 ~p r o u u r a r cu t I! FRASER RIVE R SCAL E PHASE I d r 1 11'1 1 nn 11 1 PACIFIC REG ION 890 35 F \ G S'B L~~~~~~~~~~~======~~-======~~1 = 200~rt~l •On -~__L~~ no . de entr ea r1 11 no du 01 ss 1n

~~~~..-.------~~~~~~~- ...- ..... \ STEVESTON \ • \ \ \ ·~: \ \ ~~~~s ·_.,< . \ ---~-~\ -. - ···\C. -- \ . . . "\'~ ~ . 1 -- ,... 1\ ;, ' ~ :": ' \ ~ ll\ ~- .. ,_ "".:,~ ~ 1,~ ', ••••.••• ... ••

CANNERY CHANNEL 0f.

LAND FILL

f EXI STIN G ROC K BREAKWATER UPLAND

DREDGING

STEVESTON , B.C . :h s 1 c~ e d ~ , PROPOSED FISHING HARBOUR WATERFRONT SITE

FRASER RIVER SC A LE PHA SE PACIF ' 11 REGI ON 89035 FlG 5C ~ 1 = 200' re t •an \ ~~~ a• \ / '

K 0 ~ 1 'r . I • . ' '

'-~ -~ -·

0

}? CANNERY / . • < • • f CHANNEL "'>. .,,. I ------=------

B

. .., i"\. }

/ J. ··'!"

,:

GARRY ' ,/r~~J· .· dra • 1~i 1 1 \ l e ' 1 11r e a u aess 1n STEVE ST ON, B. C. a' te PROPOSED d ii I I

FISHING HARBOUR t t• •t • tll 11 ~ t J ilm 1 n e pa• WATERFRONT SITE aopro •• O ~ , •~ornu • e ' r ~ r PHASE III ' PACIFIC F!E GION 89035 no du a e s~ 1 n ---~~ l EXISTING ROCK t_ EXISTING • BREAKWATER PHAS E III FLOATS PHA SE II FLOATS PHASE I FLOATS a LAND FILL ..... RAILROAD I EXISTING: 30 r• BUILDING"', SOUTH EDGE 30

WATERFRONT . BREAKWATER ~ ERV ICE I : MONCTON ROAD 20 1· I ROAD ROAD I I 20 (IF NEEDED l I I \ ,- ---- 1 / I : I- \ PARKING I _ _ ___ ....J __ I- 10 / w w \ / Co... - => 10 w / w LL. / LL / z 0 LLW LLW 0 z ------z z 0 - 10 EX IST ING GROUND LINE -10 0 f-- --- <:t: ~ > w> - 20 -20 w __J _J w PHASE Ill DREDGING PHASE 11 _DREDGING___ ...,.. ,______PHASE I DREDGING __~ w - 30 -30

- 40 SECTION ~ -40 HOR 111 = 100' VERT 111 =201

t EXISTING ROCK PHA SE I BE RTHS 40 BREAKWATER 14-_P_H_A__ S_ E_ I _lI_ B_E_ R_T_ Hs-.r.. -- P _H _A_S_E_I_I _B_E_R_T_H_S--l~a_L_A_N_D_ _F ,_IL ... ~...... l,.E x IS Tl NG ..: WATERFRONT SOUTH EDGE 30 : BUILDING I I ROAD CHATHAM ROAD 1- I I : w I I w 20 LL. I l+:++:i=l+:l::+++:i=~::++:i::i:i~::++:i::i:i::::i=i::+::i=++=1::::i=i::i::i:i~::++++:1::::i=i:+:i=1+:1+1=+:+1::::i=i:~I I PARKING, SERVICE, . ' STORAGE WORK AREAS z f-­ a w 10 ~ ------10 w z LL. ---- 0 0 LLW -- LLWO z I~ ~ > w z - 10 EXISTING GROUND LINE 0 -10 ~ f------/ ~ -20 -20 w __J 1.. ., J 15' (N.T.S) w -30 PHASE II I DREDGING PHASE I DREDGING STEVESTON, B.C. 0 It I PROPOSED dr1 • n Dp / 01 s1 1n e' 11 11 t-0 .T. 0 I I I PHASE I I DR EDGING FISHING HARBOUR - 40 SECTION ~ d 111 11 WATERFRONT SITE HOR 1 = 100' I DDIO U d b~ f l~P fGU H r ~r di I I PIO J Ht nul'l bt r VERT 111 = 20' SECTIONS P.ll.CIFIC REGION 89035 na . Ot tnlrt prt u -·14 .-·OO?

VANCOUVER ON

G•arg/a ·:

~ LU LU ISLAND ~ ~ MAP

·······.... ::,·::...... ' 1· . .... Woodward Rsoc/J .. ''--...!:'.ood•or -~ ,,,::;:::;;-'~..!.;_ o i n In w0 // , TIT- _,>? ...... , . REIFEL ISLAND . ._.. .. . --,,,,. ,.,, .~.~'·· "- "· .·· :. . .: "·····" ...... " .....":::...... :... . : '•., ...... ·· .. .. -· , ...._ ,... .. ! ..;.· ...; ..· : • -·.. '" .... •••······._.. ..·.· ...... • ..... dwar d •: .. •... "·' •-•••• ,,.• W 0 0 d ,' • .. I ,~ •• " ,., 1•-., '• •• • .,, • S • I ,<; • ~ ...... ~· ·:...... I I a n .. ' \·~=··: ·, ·" WESTHAM. \ \. : ...... , ·.' ... ~· ~~ •••• ·" ...... ,.. ·'1 ,J> ( ...... ; . ·...... ·········· LEGEND ( ") 0 1000 3000 5000 ...... Mud Flats rrebc• -, eej h;;;Ja- '" CD Sampling Stations Scale In Feet

FIGURE 6 SAMPLING STATIONS AT CANNERY CHANNEL "'.DISSOLVED OXYGFN SllRVFY 1q7~- 7Lt DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND TE lv1 PER AT UR E PLOTS FOR CANNERY CHANNEL, 19-(3 II ..------·------·------1 STATION ONE 10- •

>-=~~~-~ • r--'--~L~E~G-~E~N-=-0-----, 9 r...--~ ~ -0- SUHl'ACE e MIDDLE 8 - + + + + BOTTOM ------TEMPERATURE ...... 1 , 15 I I ' ...... _ _.,...- ---"--...... I .- ---._,.,.... ----- ...._ ....._ 6- I '....._,,,,,,---, .,,,,,., 10 ' .,,....,,,,.- ..... ,

5 -1--...--r--.--;--...---.--.--.--.-.,---,---,--.---.---.----.---,--,-1'-- 5 6 12 18 24 30 G 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 G 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 JULY I AUGUST I SEPTEMBER I OCTOBER I NOVEMBER II STATION TWO 10

9 + + 8 •

7 IS Q) L...... 6 10 _J 5 5 L. Q) 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 · 18 24 30 I I I I Q) a.I I "C If) c STATION L. E 10 Cl 0 . L...... 01 c 9 Q) {.)

~ 8 /'-...... --1:.. • + 15 If) / "'-....._ _.,. -- ...... ,,, __ - ...... Q) I ...... ,_.. , __ ..,. _,,,,, ', ,---, + Q) 1 , + ...... ,,/ ' ...... _ 10 !::;.. Z .,, ,...... """'" I.LI + ' ,,.. ... Q) (!) 6+--~-r--.---,--.-----.--.----,---.-~-.,----,.--,----,--,----,.---i----,--.----i--r---.----,--,--,---;- 5 Cl >- 6 12 16 24 30 6 12 16 24 30 6 12 16 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 - JULY I AUGUST I SEPTEMBER I OCTOBER I NOVEMBER X 11 w o STATION FOUR a:: ::::> 10 • Cl + I­ I.LI .+ <( > 9 a:: _J I.LI 0 8 • £1. CJ) ~ CJ) 15 w Cl 7 I-

6 10 • +

6 ··-~--~-~-, -~--r-r--.-...---.-~--~-~~- s 6 12 18 24 30 G 12 18 24 30 G 12 Ill 24 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 I ST All ON FIVE I 11

10 • 9

6 / ...... _ 15 / ..... ---,...... __ , / ...... ,_- ...... ,___ ...... ,,---, / , ...... ,,.. ' __ ...... 10 7 ',_.,,,,.,,.,.."' + -.--r-1-· - I ---,---r-- "J •• - i---- r-·r-·t---r·-r--,--r--r--T--1·--T-r·---1-,-- 5 12 1B 24 ;iU G 12 10 ;~4 :50 G 12 l!I ;~4 30 C Ii' lfJ 24 30 G 12 IR 24 30 JULY I AUGUSl I SEPTL::M!.ll:Fi I OCTC)[l[R I IWVEMflER DISSOLVED OXYGEN, PERCENT SATURATION, AND TEMPERATURE PLOTS IN CANNERY CHANNEL 1974

STATION 4 B II

.. 9 c ~ 10 .. := 8 -$-·-·-·-·+·+·-+·~. + ,..<1'.J + c . . . '--·-..... 0 0.,"'' "'O 20 E 7 ~ 9 .,, 0 ::I ., ~ Ci A>---------.+ 15 ~.~ Cl) 9 ~ 100 + ; n .,o= ·- ..,. .!'.!:ia c~ +-·-·----, + l--~1>--~-~-~-~-~-~---~---$!-.-----,~~~~~-.-~..---r-'-10~ 5 95 \ 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 .. A. JUNE JULY AUG. 4 90 \ ·+ I \ II + 85 . . \ - I 80 \\ . \. LEGEND . I 75 \ . Dissolved Oxygen . I \ 70 -·-·- % Solurotlon \ . \ ----- Temperature . I 100 65 0 Surface \· c +-·-·-·-·--$-·+·-+·~. . \ .£ .. Middle ~- ~.9 -·~ 60 + Bollom \ 0 Cl) c 90 20 0 55 \ ;J!. - . (.) ~ 0 ~ . ..+--r-..t------+ 15 . ::I 50 \ n . -$------$" ~ E Ul _-4>'" __ ,._ ____ ~ -t i---.---..--.--.-~.,...--,-----,r--r---r~.,...--.-~,---r-10~ 4t5 t~ •::!? +------$--.t- \ 15 ~ +· STATION 3 40 . 10 ... o-~-----===::;.;--- \ 3t5 \ ~ 6 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 JUNE JULY AUG. 100 +-·-·-·-·-t-·+-·~·+-._ + c 0 . """--() . 20 = 90. ·- ~ (.) ::I /e--._..h..---$------t 0 : 8 -+ "P 150. ..,. -($------~ ··- E 1--~~~~~-~-.-~r-~~~..---.-~~.....-'-IO~

II STATION 5 -~ II STATION 4 A .,c~ =.. . ·+~ ~~ 10 OE" .. "Clo t : Q 9 o=.. = ~ "':i: + 100 ... 'f ...... Ci-:- 8 c ---+--·-·---· -A....--·4' 0 + ...... ~ 95 ::I 0 '·~ Cl) ~ 9 20 20. 0 .. +--o/;ip-_ -----t -~ 90 15~ Its~ " i:i. ·*------+ [ 0 E Cl) 80 IO~ 10~ -;!.

6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 30 6 12 18 24 6 12 IO 24 30 6 12 18 24 •30 G 12 18 24 JUNE JULY AUG JUNE JULY , AUG. F 1 011 r0 "1 . . ,,,.,.- . / . FIGURE 9

\ I

\ I

LULU ISLAND .:,s \ \ ~ ,'t, 0 \"'- S- 2 \

1 I 15 DEPTH ,.

•w1111 .~· ,.t" # • • I ' • -....___ -:----"'.'"~~--~--~~--~o STEVESTON ISLAND GAUOE-1 \

A

I I ' ·· - MAIN ARM FRASER RIVER z --·-· - --- 0 - tG!lUC! E-? A 6' >::. - -·~ ~ TEVESTO'" r ~ 'r Cl.Ir ~ I ..,i i I "'I I N z l --- ...0 ..,u AL 810N DYKE 'lo. z "' STEVESTON sour~.. J~;T~tN~~· .. * ...... s - 8 1/t S - 11

HA RLOCK ALBIO N 0 YK£ No. ISLAND 1 ALB IO N ISLA ND

., ' REIFEL ISLAND

STEVESTON HARBOUR

SCALE , 111 = 10001 '\ \ MAIN ARM OF THE FRASER RIVER IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF STEVESTON, B. C. WESTERN CANADA HY DR AULi<; LABORATORIES LTD. FIG 9 I ' '

., i'

A.REA ~ I1,000 FT2.

1 i.-S-----· ------· 105"0 ------

9'

. ' 1.'

.SEC..T\ O!'J

soo'

9'

B-B

TYP\Cl-\L 'i - SE. c.. T\ON S CANNE:~y CHA~NEL

WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. FfG 9A ICU 5617A-WCH 2.00, MAIN ARM

t00,000

·_,

0 4 10 M ; .. I· I

100,000 L I

2.00,000

I ' .. 300,000 L l CANNERY CHANNEL (] 12. I.( / uJ J llf..000 10 UJ _.I Djs -{ D 4! g 1-= 0 I w ELEVATION g C!) 0 a: OF WEIR

'-'V) 0

4,000 ----- SANDHEADS ---- ST£VESTON I u/s 0 e.ooo

~IG JO WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. ICIL 5617A-WCH 300,000

MAIN ARM rI I D/S /1 /1 200,000 . ::! (.) r I l.i.I 0 \00,000 ~ <( :I: (.) I.I) Q

0 8 10 M U/S I 100,000 l

(..'. CANNERY CHANNEL lJ. 8.000 I 1 F 12.

Q (l) HOPE == 7'?. 000 - 100, 000 crs.

WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. ICIL 5617A-WCH 500,000 ------MAlN --Ar:

. ~ 400,000 <.> ~D/S ~ <( 5 ~oo,ooo <.n Ci

.2.00.000 ---....--.--...---..----,--·---.------,----r·-·---.---+- 0 2 4- 6 8 10 N 2 4 6 B 10 M

CANNERY CHANNEL

.""] I) '4- /-,. 12. ;- I ·., ''\. ~ UJ I / ' '\ ID .JI I , '\. <( ,/ ,"::'>: ~-f ,· \-= I J \ ~--t--f-+--, +-- --+. - .. -f--. -· I ··-- +---·-+--.. ·-+-- --+-'1\...... --+1---- 6 ~EY~_TIQ_N_ sz :1. I 4 6 S 10 N 2 4 6 8 \ 10 M OF WEIR I \ I \ 4 I \ I ------Sf-lNDH£AD.S \ I \ 2 I STEVESTON \ I \ I 0

Q 46l J-lOPE ~ 350,000 CFS. FIG I? WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. ICll 5617A-WCH /. ; STEVESTON ISLAND 1974 BEACH SEINE SAMPLE STATIONS

.• LULU

. ISLAND

... ·.

REIFEL

BANK r ?~ WESTHAM ISLAND Ft \..] Iv """ ,.

,,.. -

'-.. I I

DISTRl8UTlON OF COMME..RCIA.L FISHINCir VESS E. L'S. BY ARE.A \975 /

Acdi7'1oria\ i60 Vc:ssci.::; t-..ic+ D1::+r16utc::...d :n Arc-:1

l'i:ae

STEV~S70N·- ~ \

. T' -;__~ -~ ''° . . ~' _I _ . -- - .... . -~······ -~G) - ·~ APPENDIX I

1. Excerpts from Howard Paish & Associates' report show­ ing alternate proposals for Steveston Island.

2. Richmond Municipal Council's letter to the Minister of the Environment endorsing Steveston Island develop­ ment.

3. Small Craft Harbours Branch's letter to Richmond Planning Department requesting review of the social impacts of waterfront development.

4. Richmond Council's letter to the Minister of Fishe­ ries endorsing Steveston waterfront as site.

5. B.C. Deputy Minister of Lands' letter to Small Craft Harbours expressing desire for study of waterfront areas.

6. Property ownership in area of proposed waterfront development.

7. Proposed Construction Schedule. __ Howard ?ciish & AsSO<:iJlc·<. Ltd. ______

I.

sTEVESTON WATERFRONT

_5c_ SAND DEPOSITION

FRASER RIVER DEEP-SEA NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL

CONCEPT 1

Co11c.e..p.t 1 Wa6 tr.C'.jec;te..d a.Cmoot (itr.om .tire 01dhe.t. Th.{,o conc.cp.t ac..t.ua.R..1.y da:t.e..,o back. to the. e.a1i.ly 19 50' .6 and .<..J.i 1Le.6-f'-e..c.J:.iv(!. o 6 a peJuod ..i.n time. whe..11 LL:tttc. -i..6 anlJ e.c.o.f.og.i.ca.f otr. tr.c.c.tr.e..a;t.i cma.1. ..i.mpolL-ta.nc.e. WM p.f.ac.e..d on tfte. e..cu:it(!_/rn e..11d 06 .t/1e. h.f.a11d. The.

goa.f.J.i weAe. o.<.mpflf to op.tA.111i..zr. tfte.. u6c. o(i .tf1c J~C.and a:S a oand de.po!i;.,.ti..011 and cl<.!i:f/ubution IiLte., and .to mi11i111i.z.(!_ .tfte. e11gi.11e.cJi. i.119 and de..ve.topme..n.t cMdh o 6 the ha11bott!L Liu pf.ace' 119 .Lt a.t -the ca;., te11.11 -· e..nd 06 -t:fie.. Iofand, tlzc.11..cbu he.e.p.<.119· ac.cc,s,s co-.\(,~ at a 111u1rn1u111.

51 ______I low.ml P,11,h ,\: ;\''o< i.tl<"' I td. ______··-- -·- ·---- ____ _

sTEVESTON WATERFRONT

~~:t-~JJ __5(__ SAND DEPOSITION

FRASER RIVER DEEP· SEA NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL

CONCEPT ·2

Conc.ep.t 2 ac.knowf.edged .the impo1t,tanc.e o 6 .the. caJ.i-te..Jc.n l1cd(i o 6 :t.lie T.6,f.and M an cu1.ca Mu;t.able 6oJc. itetcntfon a6 a ncdwra.f cv1.c.a oJc. deve-C.opme.nt M a tie.c.Jiea;t..,{_onal. cviea. Tlw .tlzhce. .6alicn.t 6ea..twte.6 o 6 tli-05 c.011c.e.pt a1te:

1. :the. ,f.oc.a.t.i..on 06 :the ha1c.bowt a.t .:the. weA.tc.Jm end 06 .tire T.6,land. 2. .the p1c.ovl6ion 06 a .6and dcpo.6ilion and d,Ll:tJubtd.i.011 Me.a, a1·1d 3. an ac.c.e.6.6 1to1de. .tJtavVV5ing .tlte. 111i..dc/Ce 06 .tite T6fcrnd.

Tfte c.onc.ept wa.6 tiejec..tcd on .tl1c. oM.{.6 06 a co116.fr[(1.Jta:t.io11 oi; tf1.:. de..6 tJtuc..t,i..v(J_ e.(i 6e.c..t w/z.i..c.11 .:t.lcC?. hcv1botllt wo1Lf.d l1r:ve. 011 .U1e. ea6 tcJu1 ha.C6 06 .the?. I6land.

52 __ f fow,mJ Pi1i'>h & A'>~on.il<''> I tel. ______. ___ . ______

WATERFRONT

SAND DEPOSITION

FRASER RIVER DEEP-SEA NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL

CONCEPT 3

Fir.om a dc..o.i.gn 6.tLrndpo.i..11.t t/1.ili ,{J.i tl1e_ mo6-t in t"Jti.gui119 c.011c.ep.t o66eJr.e.d. It dividM .:tlie. 1.6lancl-i.n.to :two, /Jf1Me1tv.{.ng .t/ie_ eM-te.1t1t e.nd o 6 .the. e.x.i.6 Ung 1.6land M a na..tww.e. all.ea wLtli onfu fioo.t ac.c.Vi-.'i. 1.t hcVJ A..nc.01tpo'1a:t.e.d ,i n..to il /JJWvL~.{.on 6oJz. the.

depo.o..ition 06 .oan.d and 6oJz.. .the. haJtbouJc on .tlir_ Wt1.6te/LH poJz. .. ti..011. Ve.li..i.c.uC.aJz. ac.c.e .. 6,.'J woutd be. p!tov.i.cled by '1owl crnd b11.-i.d9e. to G(l)l}(.1j Po.i.n.t. Tlie.Jz..e. wvce. l10wc.vc1t, :two 1Lc.ctw116 {ioh .U.6 1u!_je.c..-uo11:

1. .:the Ga.JL1Ly Po..i.n.t b1r...i.dge WM not 6c.a.o.-ibe.e. 61wm aa e.ng.<.1H•.eJt.fog .otandpo..i.nt, bc.c.au;.,e_ in o!td

.f.c.ve~ ( 8%) ac.c.eM hamp.6 mc.MWiing app1wx,i111a ..tu.l'.y

1, 000 (ic.c..t .in .teng.th wo1ild be. lt<'.([LLiJ1cd.

2. -the. m.id-.i...o fo11d c.hannel., upon be-i.n9 .te.o le.cl vu litjd1rnuc.J.c_ model, WM 6ou11cf .to be. w1ac.c.epta.bt.c (i•w111 a 111a1Li11c .tlta(i 6.i.c. and oc.ea11og1taph .. i.c. .o:ta11dpo-i_11t.

53 __ Howilrd Paish & Assrnit1t<·s ltd .. ____ _ ---"·------

co.~JCEPT 4

(A) Mai.. n ChanneI Ve.luc ttCM Ac.c.e.B Conc.

SAND DEPOSITION

FRASER RIVER DEEP-SEA ThC'. p!tec.c.cli.n9 e.valua,ti..on6 ltad NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL .{.ndic.atc.d .:tfia.t nuthvr. a b!Udge. nOll a nu.ddie. 1.6land ac.c.e.J.i.6 WM de..6.<..Jtablc.. Two a.Uvr.native..6 (B) In.6-i_de. ChaimC'.t Ve.luc.uiM Ac.c.e..6.6 Jte.ma{.nc.d. Pf.ac.c. .tlie. !toad wliVt .<..1t ..tl1c. .<..n.o.i.dc. c.ftannef. olt tfte out- sTEVESTON WATERFRONT .6idc. c./icurne.f. TltC'. S.tudy G1toup 1te.c.091u.zc.d tlia.t .tfi.U., de.wi.o1t .<..nvolved an e11v.0to11111c.1ttat btade.- O t)6. An ou.,U{dC'. chairnc..l f.oc.a,t.{on wouC.d v.

AGRICULTURE value OH .tlie ottt6.-i.de.. beac.hc,~ .t!1an RESERVE AREA on :tlie. ,i,11,~.lde. c.lwnne.. l ma.Jw!i, ac.c.(J)ul

.<..119fy (Ul .<11.~,lde c.ftll.JlHC1. Jc.O!l.te WCV!l STEVESTON M.Ced.cd 011 :tlic. c.ondLt-i.on tlw.t .<.11.tJut6.<011 .into U1c. mcUt6fiC'_6 tt\::1Lf..d be

ml11 imi.z c d. T/1 c M'.. 111tlf1,) he/~ lia vc bt• C'.11 ac.c.wrn re Cu rlc.C.i 11cn.tcd w1d tl1e

SANO DEPOSITION a CC (' 6 ._\ .'((I (( ( (' ,) l' l (' C t Cc{ ;) ()/[ .( ll C ['Id ( ('I!

wUlt tit C'. c (JJlC.C /J t w 1d (' f[ !t<'. l 1 i Cll'

(c 0 II c (' t1 t 11) I 1((._\ Li I! C. I l d l! ·) i ~iii I.' d .t('

Ill UI Ull < :: (' .({I(' .( JI ('(({ '.> i C' i I (I (i ({ 1l!

GCC('MJ -~

5'1 .. \

October ?2, 19711, File:

'J'he Honourable J cnn11c Sauve, .Minister of the Environment, rarliruncn t P.uild in r~s' Ottawo., Ontario.

Dear Mo.clam:

I wish to advise that my Council, at; a 111ceLinr, on 'l'ucsday, Oc Lober 15, 19711, consiclcred a report r.ubnd ttcd by the Clrn.irmnn of Lhc P.Lallninr, Co11md l; Lee of Council, wherein reference waLl made to u JH'Ol1or.crl fir;h i rw J1:i.rlJClu 1· on f;Lcver. Lon (Slmtly) h;lai1cl.

'J'he rc1mrt pointed out; tllaL duri11r: J\111~11r;L of Lhir.> year, the Municipal Council of 'Phe Corpor;1[;j Oil or Lhc 'l'own~;J1.i.p of Hichmond atlopt.ccl a I'lnnninfj Co11unitt.cc rcco111mcrnJnLio11 that the r;eneral concept for the dcvclop111cnt ancl u:;c 0f' Lile I:;Jnwl nr. n11 inclependcnL co1111ncrcial fir;h boat rnoornr~c~ fad] i.Ly and rccrt~ational area, as outl:i11cd jn n report. prepared by tlLir. Mu1iicipa]:i.ty's Advisory Plann:i.nr, Couunission. A copy of tl1c report; is al;tnchcd for your information. -

It war; llO"l.crl that concern Jwr; lJC'C'll l'C/~i f; Lcrcd LIIaL no action liar. 1.Jcr.11 LnJ;cn to convey tlI:Ls clcci:;ion Lo Ll1<· Federal Govcn11nc11L ;,j 11cc f11ml;; will IInvc Lo be allocat.ctl a11tl ncc;oLiaLions co1111nc11ccd on Lhc re.Lated problcrnf; of nand clir.po:;al, accc::;f; to the Island, etc.

Tt was the rcconnncndaLion of tlw reporL, which was udopl.cd by my Council, I.hat an official let; Lcr be tU.r.paLclicd i1mncc1.iatcJ y to the i11Lcrestccl Fetlcral auLhori Lier; cxpresrd.nc; tliis Corpora Lion 1 s dc~•:i.re Lo <.cc a portion of f>Lt·vc:> Lon T::lam! dcvrJ oped as nn inclepc11tlc11L co1tm1C'1·cin.l fish boat; harbour. JOCT' 301974 DLPAH'l'h,1LN'1'1\L Sl~CHETJ\IUA'l'·

~ (J :·:: / M1 ~J FI - L/-oh 7 OCT j 1 i~1l~ ---'------·-· ···-·· .. -· -·----··------· (20 UCT JO 1974 ~------·-----·- Ollico of the Municipi1l Ck·1k ______.... Mini.sLcr of the J·:nv.i ro111nenL

Will you pl cane, therefore, f~ iv l' l.Jd:j mD-L Lcr your con;.idera­ tion and in due cour:;c aclv ir;c me of wlin.t ac Liou if proposed by the Federal.ion Goven1111c11L, relaLive to the afore111cnLio11cc1 mu.LLer.

Yours very truly,

II. V. Por Ler, C. f.J. C. , C . /\. l·I. , Mun:icipal Clerk. HVP/dl Encl.

cc: Minister o[ ~;l.al.c for Science eG 'l'cc!J11olor,y & Ptib1ic Works 0 t tru.zaT-&11 l:ct-r:t'-itr-:.;------

------Natio110.l l!arboun; Board 330 Spo.rb; SL n~c L, 'l'owcr 'C' , Ottawa, Ontario

Minister of Lands, Forests & Water Hcsource;., Victorin, 13.C.

Mr. J. Rcyno1cls, M.P. Mr. II. St.eves, M.L./\.

Small Craf'L l!aruour:3 Bom·d., 1090 \ford, Pc11dcr SLrecL Vancouver, I.LC.

Federal Department of Public Work:; Marine PJa11L (;. Jlrct1L;i.I1{~ ll1lil1 /\ll)(:rnl Litrect Vo.ncouvcr, B. C.

Stever>ton Merchant.:;' /\r;r.;ociation Adv lsory T'l~11rni11g Co1mn:Lrjsion Mayor G. J. lUalr Chief /\d1ni 11i :;LraL:i ve Officer Dlrec Lor of Pla1111i11g Mu11ic j pa] 'J'rca:.;n1·r'l' Mu1i:i.cipa·1 noJ i ci. Lor Municipal J•:111ji11ccr AWR/emn I • I cc Mr. J. E. Hall - OTTAWA

Mr. R. Wallace D.P.W.

5832-'lO­ S.1320

August 21, 1975. ;•ir. 1;. Kerr Director of Planning Richnond Municipal Offices 691 No.3 Road H.ichmond, B.C. V6Y 2Cl ! ! , . Dear Mr·. I

rarlicr this year, I-iow~rJ Paish o.nd J\ssociii.t0s I I produced a prolir.1inary E11vironmcntnl J\sscssr.:cnt R·Jr><·:rt li:1::.0d I I on ox is ting

The social iss-;Jes affcctinr; you ,,,i1ich m11~;t 'lw a

Mr. W. Kerr, Ridmond, B. C.

'iheso issues are 7os~..:~tc<.l below. Acco1·d.in;;: to

i tho Stcvoston Stutly 1 the core arc::i of Stcvcston hn.d been

Their coi:1mon thar.1.o is that th0 ho~1.t }:u:l·hour should bo developed on tho Stoveston \'!l'.'.·L:cl~:'.:ront (as O;)po:it:d to dovelopnent on the shores of Stcvoston Isl~nd) to r0in­ forcc the rcvitnlization process of .Stcvcstcm.. 't'his cnnc 1'pt was cxnraincd before and rejected because of i~s coDµlexity and n.i)pa1~ont high costs. Eoweve:--, '\:!O are i)'rcparccl to To­ examinc this ~oncept in grouter detail proviJcd that it i~1- dced will reinforce the revitalization process of Stcvo~ton and that its costs can be justified.

The Consultant suggested t~at sovc7al nlter­ natives be examined, oao which might consist of n siDGlc development like nr. Saka~oto' .s concept U:.1(~ <1notho1~ Hhic:1 Jiliz.ht be a slightly mo~ce diffu~c

On tho other iw.nd~ if tho al tcrn:•.tc scjwrno has no overw1:clming advnntci.2:CS ~ we intor;.d to pn:-suc 01n· original p::-opo!;al to develop t'!:.e conu;1cTcio..l fi~;:--.. 5.r.z 'i1:ir.hcl1n~ on the Stcvoston Islnnd side of the chan~cl. 7ho Consultant identified several issues which must be addressed and ~e­ solvcd if this choice is to advance.

. .. . . 3 .· - 3 -

j Mr. W. Kerr, Richmond, B.C. I

) First, the concept that tradinc off tho in­ ! shore marsh will save the sandy beach on the river si

Secondly, the Consultant w~s concerned about the destiny of tho water areas which will be L~ocd as a result of our development. If the fishoriflcn Hho now utilize conpany facilities at Stcvcston·dccidc to seek accommodation in the Federal Govornmcnt h::.-rbot:cc, the spnce thus vncntc

We will need to cstabli!.3h dcsir;n :;t::mJ:irrls for the harbour and its assoc.::in'i:.•Jt1 fac.ilitic:;. '!ou m;iy wish to set criteria which may be desirable or necessary to ensure co111patibil i ty a:.:: the intcTf~cc betHccn our works and your3. You may also wish to develop appcar~nce critnria which will enable us to design our Eacili'cics to ra::l'tch or \ ..I,., , complement the character of Steveston. I would welcome } your views and proposals in this matter. .I Vic have alL~eady established that disposal of the san

p;:-opa1·cd to ~10 lp us in this and that you we To wa:. ting £01·

~I this confirmation before launching r. full-scale stu

W. Parkinson, Manager, Small Craft Harbours Branch, Pacific Region.

•I ! I: I l 'I I J I ! .. ,,

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP oF RICHlviOND RICHMOND MUNICIPAL omCES, 691 No. 3 ROAD RICHMOND. B. c .• V6Y2Cl (60-i) 278-5511

February ~G, 1976. File: 2920-23 lJ ...... ·., ' .. I " t1 ,Jd I "I ". Cl f I

The JionourabJ c Hom·::o Le Blanc, Minister of ;;t,1.Lr: for Fi:;l1f~ric~;, Parliament f\uj J dinr,~;, 0'1.'TAWA, Onturio.

Dear Sir:

It is advised that my Municipal Council ou Feuru~try 9, 1976, considered the attached report from its Planning Cornmi ttce recommending that the Federal Governr.1cnt be ureed to proceed with the development of a 1,000 Vessel Fishboat H:.i.rbour and ancillary facilities on the western end of Steves ton Island, accessible via a cam;eway east of No. 2 Hond.

Followin[~ a nwaber of submission~> rn:.i.dc by certnin indivi­ duals and various orr;aniz

On Mond:.i.y, February 23, 19'(G, the l-!unicipal Council received n :further report from its Plann:i ll[', C01;1;:ii t !;cc recon:noncli ng that Council urr,c the Fec1ern.l Govcr111n:~n t.; to proccc(l with t'.':e development of a 1,000 Vessel Fi:>hl.io:i.t 11:-l.rbour on tl!0 Lulu Island side of the hnrbour., and tlwt your. co-opc1·ation be souc;ht in furLllcr.i ng tlri~, project [HH1 plc~c1r;in1.; l·illn icip'.:!.l S'JP­ port., for o.n immc~diate !:;l.rrrt on tld ~; very .i.rnporL:Lnt. projec'c.. The recom::iendation, aG made, was ntlopted by my Council.

• • . . . . 2

------Officn of tho Municipcil ci.-~1 k ----·----- I

- 2 -

It is respectfully requested, therefore, that you initiate whatever action you can possibly take to brin~ this project to early fruition.

I have copied thiG letter to a number of F'ed<:!rnl ru1d Provin­ cial agencies who have taken part in discussions held on this matter, and would also request their co-operation and action to bring about an early start for this most important de 1relop­ ment.

Yours very truly,

G. Morri:;, f\.ctinG Municipo.l Clerk.

f\.tt. GM/rl cc: The Jlonourabl c .Jean Marchand Minister - I•:nvj ronment Canada Ottawa, Ontario 'J'he HonourabJ e ,T. Nie ls en, Minister of Environment, Victoria, B.C. Mr. J. Hcynolcls, M.P ... Ottawa, Ontario

Mr. W. l'arkin:;on, llircctor Small Craft Harbour Branch

National llarhour:; Branch Sparks Street, Ottawa

Mayor G.J. Blair /\ldennan K. Kwnar~a i Chier Administrative Officer Municipal E111r,i11ccr Munici pa 1 'J'rca;:ur(!r Muni cl pal f)oJi ci tor Director of l'lanninr, .. ..,

DEPARTMENT OF LANDS, FORESTS AND WATER RESOURCES OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY' MINISTER OF LANDS

THC GOVEnJOfENT or TH[ Pl'IOVINCC OF ftRITISlt COLUMBIA VICTORIA BRITISH COLUt·1AIA fLJ·., .. , .... IN'#:>. f:J· .. ,. •• _ CANADA O ... :::~rr: r·1. f1 ...... vav 1xs ;,' 1 .,:1•J ! I Fl i.N 11 .. December 30, 1975

r fl• I 1• '·· t .• 1 J ' .. ' I _I

1 Small Craft Harbours Branch I l Environment Canada - Fisheries Service J\'.'~ I. , , i.l ... \.J•

1090 West Pender Street 1: .' lf:I', 1 I fl Vancouver, B. c. 1.. ·.Jt l SC/{··· Attention; Hr. Wnrrcn Parkinson, Man~ger Scfi'~- 70 -S/3,;zo Dear Sir: '~ r) . " (' 't l] l •; ~) ) ~: fie; StP.vCl]ton lolc:tnd Smyill Crnft Hnl!'.'bour P'ioponn.l

As requcotcd, the concerned Provincial Ggencies have cxru:ained the preliminary environmental assessment of the above proposal prepared for your br~ch by llownrd I an I Paish and Associates. Attached please find integrated summary of Provincial I agency comments. i ·1 While we remain stt;oni;ly in favour of your provic.lin3 for c:~pondccl. fiRh bont harbour facilities at Steveston,, we feel that there .nre shoirtcm:iint;:J in the Fi~rJeral Small Craft Harbours Ilrllllch propooals to meet thio end. I therefore suggent that a meeting be convened between officials of the S~ll Crtnft Harbours IJrooch and the Lnnd Hanagencnt Ilro.nch to discuas theoe and to discuus the full appraisal by your Dranch of alternative approaches to accommodating fish boat harbour facilities in the Stcveston area, Details of thin meeting may be arronged with Mr. J. P. Secter, Co-ordinator of Environmental Services (387-5991). ·

I It is our hope that Environment Canada will be able to arrive at a solution that will reinforce the aspirations of the Stcveston co'il'::llunity for :implementation \ ··! as soon as possible. w~:~~:=~~~. NOfti.:iAl~ PEARSO:I Deputy Minister ··, "l ··~

. I , ~ >' ; ' ;. ·, • ' --··~ -·· ___ ._ ... _.. __ ·-···-·- ·-~-·--·--

TO...

l:ci~dou:: ~:>,:-.:-!:-:.cl1 of th~ C:).:1~1~1:;! B-~pn::t~,..,,ertt of E~.. ~··..vl;..·\.:· .,.~ :~::,/: :·. ·id~f:f;:J(.::: itc;..::1£ to t::1r! rcqi..1irc.1~,r;·.i.t s of tl;.£! 1'.,e,d~:~:~l T~'•"f''J·i.:~:01:\~:!a~J.t :.1). Itr.;vir.::-:.1 l1 ~u1.::e~Jr:: .. '1.. ·:tis ;:L!·vJ.e:tt i~ c i:~c::cd in rcDr">un~~~ to a l:(~t:1'... 1~:.-;t tl1::it .::_'..ll it1tcg:.. ::·.~~·..-:d pr.c\,·i~t~:i~~ ... I:"i... ;\riC;~:t of th·:.: ca.bj1,·!.::t n,3sc~3- 1::e:lt rcpcn:-t be S\.1~.:.:.uitt:cd f0;.: .ct.. ;;.~r~~:.lt·:.:::C;,\:-. ;. 1~"~1. by t1tl~ J~.. c!::r"-(;.i't~-.:.!.. E.~~:.:.:;:'."!.~."-!~~1:7... i13 t~·:!'~ Cr~.i-"'1.)t"din­ cti11g Co~::111lttc'3 o.Z DOS i:~.!::;~)c:~~::-;iblc fo~~~ ·:·~:·:vi~-;:~:i..rzIJ tl?.c a.bo·"~·.:~ d~:;":.r:.:101~~... ,:?.:n.t p1::o .:: .. ~~al p~ior to tlte iGCU3.r:c~ ....,~~ l7 ctl~;:ol c?.~v~~·:.-.::.:i.:~·?.:llt p(;'..:...L~~:tt.::..; ;,::::;.t1/v:·... • fUi"ld..i:.13.

~-Tri!~ ::ci1 CQt.~rJ·Cnts ~c5tn:d:!.11~~ .tl~I;.; (tbo·vc '(·;~r\.? rccci\t"C!(J. f:..... Ci\~ B ,.C (I L::J.:ld~ s~j_"'\J"icc r:.:.:.J tl1~ JJ ~C. ~·later ll~sou:!:ccs Sez:vice. Con:r;~ents f:ro~·:1 tl'"'..~! I> .. cc l:-iG~:1 ~·:..r-,

tb,::! ::-:P·:-r:; 1 ::ei.: t'"C!IJGJ:t sci.t:i:.;j~icr; L~t~ t.:e1..... c1·;; of 1·l.!:~··_'.:~'"1_;i.>~'·! :::·s.... ,... ·. 1.r.r: ...~~c.1 :C:::.:~~· ti~·/ ::.:u·.. ·.:'~ L-i. .. ·.~ l?ro\J·:i:ru:: ..~ C\.)ttt<.';r~~ci~ tl1~1 t it ir.; :Lc.ttr.dc~q\.::::dcc to c:.!:~\T() :~~G a. r:o~: .. : ~i b.::!.::t ~~.s :i~~·\. ..: 1:.~ c: :.· .~. t:~~.c:: ·.:~ deci!3iV;.1S u!1icl1 nn.1nt be 1:;r1}~~J!·i0;.:..\ b·:l ~~'\:-:,_.. :C!i·.".::·J .. !.::.:.~-;-~'~:~ C:_-~.-~.(tr: r:~,r~1~u·cr; T~:c:.1.11cl1 t:ld p::cyid.C!~j t:.t b:-.-o.;,:~t-l :::.. r:r-::!..y o-:: ~-1.~.:~1..)~:1 i~'tJ::tcJ~:i CG ..".:~r::~:~:;.:; ...... :~:; >.:c~-\~~ .. !"'/,::~.(.r~.. :: ::..~;..;; 1>1~-~~;,;.; :£0:: tbc Ste\.vt;::;tc»~i cn:.. c~ it~ i.:l·!·:..: plL.~"!r\ir::g cc;·':)~e::L: c:Z t!.:.~ j:c.:.~ ... ·Jr.~: .,. ~~:-~.;~L:Le:t~~~~t c;:rv:t~:o.~1i~~~:."tt\.·~1 ir~f();,.-.-Jatioi1 1.G P~"C:!;c~1.te:d to ir~,?~:ti..:.~1t:c; t~·,.~~t tYH;. .i,::•.~ .. -:,·;.;"-.:ci ~1~:"-.,i] «'·r:~: ~~:: lvc~~~.:.:..uJ. :::'1d c.1c~1i:~.:1:;.~,J is not c.:::.--1i ...co:~t:·!·i!1:.t~J.lly o·.. :'2"·.trJ~~1(l ~:\.:.·:tl~c.:::~,:·.J~=,~~$ L~2~;·,..-.,:L~~~·. ;::.:~; ~.,.:.t:r~:..1~;

.... ,.. ~:...... t::':'! ~tt1Jject tla.~c;3;:-rr:-:..~ ..:.t ·fc~:~.. l:.; to o~:;~t;~: t:1~ lo~:;:lc:::-.J. !:L:c~:·.: 1 ··:·~,~·.1.(:l::::..::.c·(.l t~~·:.·:: ~:J.i:1~·.::~""::1!:1..".;·:! \t~-;j~.~: i.1'.l~·J i.:~~~t.'·.:'i c)r f:.ccG~f.i.1.0t..:.::i~i ..t.1:; t~-.. 1 ::: i:·:~:::uli:cility of t1·~:'! :.~;J'i:·i..; j.J.:-r.~·:;i:;:l.'~~~ $'.:.-.;·-,:i·-·~:.;f:G:·1 ·.;~:.~: .. :..~.. _;:·:v:~::

o~e p:~-;:t5.. C'l~J... ·.~:;: r.::r::r:lt :i..:~ "<.lJ,(~~·~; ('. ~= t:~-.! iL:-:::-1t.:L~Z~.(~t,~ .... ·.. ::;:J:~.. :;.~ ... '.~:i~:·-:::.~ Ct,~.. • ~:~·: ..:: s::\:...... '",:::;t·::·:~ f~'.·_·~:.: IL·:.r.t:/. 'i';1'.! :i.\:1;"Jli.<;;~t:tc~13 oJ: (.~,2::\~· ...~~. 1 .)~.-:·~:~'..'"i.i: \).( c:;·~l)~.\~.. 1:.1·::!\l i:i~:!:·./_t:.:~ \1"2_:·.1~:.·~!1 1··... )•:...... "::·"·.~~ s:~·~:::·:.. ~:~.~:5.c..i. .': ::..~

t!t.!~ j ·.:;ct(:.,:~ to co::; ~"'>~".. "";l1(;:nJ :i.\h'.! ;:~t1.d t:·1~Jl."\)U~~11 en'Jl"· .. "~:;~1:..:,~~.·;.1ta :l 3!1 :)C; .::. ~.:7.::.:~i.·:, ;: <..: Z i::.•.l l :-.. l tL.::: i.:·.:':.,·:;..~: i '/::..:.1 if it i~ t:v b.:! l·(.~8ponsi1)1~/ ~tS\r.:.~r;.c.:.:d.

• 2 2

T ~·; to.I .. l:" 19'15

'l... ::.:-! £0 'L ~- c1-:: .4 :t::.3 co;~·\··:·~i;;.·t::; ,~::,'i:.~ t:~t::\::(~ t2d to 50t.:(! of tl:t~ c. ~1,cn: tco:·~L~!:~z:.. oJ2 the..: .:.~::.~~~·..:~-;[_:·": ~:.1t ~~~rtd·::·:..~ :.:«::'t... r·L-:./~··· \·/.1 i(! ~1 ).:~ca~:..!:: it :f.1.·1·.:~~:::.~flH~J tc c·r:.tJ 1• .t:.:~-~~c~ptab lo v;i t 11 L: C-,;. .:;l)'..!·::. t to t. ::..:~ l.-1·f! ..... "'I ··<·~ ~ ... ,.~ ....,.r•r,.·-1" ... •'"t ...... _,,,-ll ... • _,.\...._ '\ .-,"-, ...... /'';;, J~·.-. "'•'·'-'- (,1.- '· ....1,.;,.:.l..,..,.1l,.•.-o.l l,H_..1. l ... t.l,,.l: .. ~ .. () t..L '.J ',/• ... •

I!.::, l10t··:cl c.bi::l·vr2 11 tl·:~ r:~o.:>t C':*..t:::..;t.::·ndi11g Gl1cf1:t,;(:.i·~1~r..3 n::. n\.::)jt:~c.t rc1)t,;,_·t ;,.s ~:. pi:o't·.rtn.;::~t J..::c!{. of conr,:tcl.~r~·::~1.r.:r:; uE tl·;~ a1)c.cific i::n.\,·.:.i:u!::..~·.~·:,;7".):t.~1 :~:1 .. 1 nc2::tu1 G~:·~t~b:i.l~.. tJ1 of h:: 1.;:bc!_1 ·~ C..:~\1t1lol~rn21i.'t ~t t(>:: ·~J::"o,jw1 :JC!cl locc.ti•.:.;:.;. '..li~~ il.~r;;lt1r1:to-..1 C/:2 ~i.!~~1 cc::~._ .. :·.. ::·::::~:d.:i.("·:~.'J .. a1i. Cri~·;~"il~:~.. al co'1l~JUil·'2!;n.:: of' ct1\~J..;~o:~:-.:;'!:1t:1l -:.i[;G2!:.!~;::i.2:.z.~, L~n.::l ·\,'t>Ul\.: !1:~-ve l.;::o•.~· ·,~:: o ..... ~ .s::;-./~.!·i:-·~!. a.s1:,~c'!.:£i of 11::tc1~ottr dc... v-.al:.;p:r:.2:i.·!~ :lt1 ttl"~f:(:." tc~·~c:t-r~:~).t ir.1 tl11e t:o~·.:_.~l~h:;.:::~.l:: t.t:::dar rcv·lct;-1. l·'cr c:::~··.·~:)l<;,. th::! su~;j·2. .:: .: ':.:."~i:~:;~ r~:-:.!\. 1...::s qual:t:C~:.~-0;..,;.:i::.1.~-~1 t-:o D. ~;~~"-;:t~... ::=1.c~-.: .. : C.:"!g-:-c~. il13tcctl of o~re1~-:i..!.-:::~ r·:i opir.:.icn.1 t:o tl~~~·i.t c=.:-~ci.:t: c.:~~d ·Gt\~·:~ ..!·cti::,:3 .:--.. :~.:-.. ly"D:~s vf nlt~::n~ttivc: locl:ltf.on.:J c-:~d 0: .. ~!1i.~',:.1::> fc~'A.- tb.. f-! p~:·ot:us~::-:~1 p::ojcct, t:·!3 i."C»port D.tt;..:_;;.::-~:~-; to CCV"'Z::-o:2f it:J rc:;p~)~'1.31b:t.:~:;.. t:~l ii1. th.o.t rcg3::;1 by poit1til"tZ, cu:: t:h.. :.\t tl:e; ~:.:~bjc:.!L: p·i:-a!_10."' is "b~in2; cc~lGicl(.!:1:"1:-!d 5:a ti1~! ;\l>!'>('::"fl:.::~ o~ boc::!: a) to

1 of it:~?:~.c tG :L~l. s. r,;·::::D.fl:i..11~~~ful c::~ t'ttnr~_t!~:! l~'.~i ..";;~1 :!· ; t:L ·v.·: 1 .::·:~'.1:1 1 b) .:-t cc.~:1u~~ch~~:;sive

·.~,. *l ••• ~ .•:~ T11~tG :i. c:c.:·ci t :l. f i.c~t 1.. o~""l of ii:1:.::.l~·i!Cp.. =~~~:c_; 1)f~D~l ir-;:·:~ c~·».\!:t:~~l,::~::c::~~' ~ .:.~ :L .1 ••••• ·.1 ...... nntl ot tl·t~ µ1,.c:coin.:; nr....!C:!l1 fo1:- ;..\ cc·:~Yt}:~(~}i~1'1~~;:lv·~1 l;i:ib~t:\:.t: ~>::-(\:.:L~~~·:::~c..:'! ~:.i.:·-'"· l:~~::::: l!f.;,~1 • p:.~:·~! f.0:.· tl1e r·~~~::.;c.r I:ive:r U~:-!1.tl C5tl.1:,\~:"j to lc:i.:~d rt rr::~~~:.1.1.1.[~.Lt~l. c::;tu~~;:·L:.-::; r::!· .. ::-:~~p~·=~t:i:\i'~ to I.~ ~\.r"~.'!J.(l:·:.~::-.::r'!.f; p::opo~Hl.LG ::.::; v·~~~r corr:T~~·~i!\.l{.:.blc.:", l~o~iC\.,.2:..·, the ~t'r.b j c~~ t ::c.r:o:.... ·t: ccu~~( ..~ i~(:.'../ 1:: ~~G:~·~~ r.::. ·.~ r.; !.:e i> ftt~th·:.:·,: i.i:'l. thc.t: rc.st1:?.ct to ~a1;~;:~~cr:t: t~·1a.t altc~:r~:.:.i.~::=~"·\.:! l(".. ~::~.. ::::Lc:~r; t ~L:i_,.:.::1 <.'..1:~ c:: .. :::~:"::.. :~~ t'l:~;::tui:·b~:·G ~-~~ co~1r;ic:2-;:... r.:t1· ~o~·.:- the>: p;:opo~.;c.:d p~a·:j~ct ir: ,,~~·u\:'.;i: to c\·::._J.~".:c:.·;~'\... u \,:~~.': t"':-.;·::.~.. r~ ::t~"..:02!~· c.:1d c'color;:L~~;.~11:/ v~altt::-:.blc ~;.rcL.~• t~:.... c~ ~~e:1;1.~!i11it~f:; l~~-":.:~~1 r:t:.:.::.1 t: :~:~·~'.! :~.~; ::l~,~: ~- .. !~:~·.:./_~ ~ ~:.:>.:·: :i.~'-:! r.1~1tu ~:.t~d 1L~iJ:: ·u.::;c pol icier:; 4:r,~ ~01·r:~ul[t.tCd.. T:.:.":.!.~ t1.~~;:.r.: ~~(t::-l: O~~.: p:~-::;,:·~-.. ~·_:,:£:5.\r,_:! i:. ::.-.~~·! )_:.~CC;":: .?Jj~.. ~~.t::.. : ·~.. il'"!::o t~1~~ subjcr;t c.. s;.·;3G~:;;,:-:~~·1t '::; :~:'l~.-,·u·~.cl1» tb.r.:: \ti::.;..J..t:r.:::G c~:c:·. r.:: ...:::ci!::: c;2 J· .• ·.:.~··:·~r.i.~1:; S~:~.".!\.- ..~;..~..:-:.:1 IG 1..::~·;~l ~::'?.d .~s tu.::Cr.:d i~i. or... :': .. ;: to p:.-\2:Jr;::ve Cl) t::I.o:i~ :;.:u::: ft1i:tn.... l~ tic.:::L·~r~-~;.:.; :i:-·c,i: £:~·..::.; ::>::.<.::·~c! ~-;;

J.."'CC~C!~:.':io:1:.· nn.:1 cor..ce'CV:l·'::io11 :irt tl~.:'2: Stc\>\~::;tu~:~ ::.:.·:c~:::. ~;ot._lc1 11::,.".r~ :;..::~:1. t..~ttL·::... l;·.. tt1::::: s.;:··:!~tt.:!:,.;

p1·o~il0~1.:; .:~:.Jsoc:t.~j.1:e-.! \;:Lth d~=·!~!.;.;rt crit;:!~:-:Lct:; tl1c r:~-;:·::J .;~·c;.;~- ~j 1.. t·.;i~(r.:t ::r:~:~.I:~.t·~r.;~-.;, -7.~·:,;·:: -::b.::. prU!)~)8~d s~(;V'-Z:.':StGn IGlD.~1.:.l 11,ry:bc<.;:::- '=·lO~~ild 11.:.;\l'L! l;.;.;:.~;.1. Z."..'.·:::7.. 1::.. \::.-.~.~ 1..:!d ;~::~ ).:~~~:,~ c::: ~~ 1.:::;::~:·,:".;'..:-::.. ~.. ".::

lccD.. t:i..~·~~ :-:.nd f;itc :::.1..1:lt:_-\bility cn:~.~:;~:d·:'.!1~;;\tion::; to "it1 cc.2"'::.I.i.:.~;:tc~·:..~. G.::.·~.~:::·::.1 c.~ t.~... -~ ~.~:.. .. :,.i~~. ~:l'.~::.. p:..·ovii:1.ciG.l l"'cv·i"..!':-i fin

~t:iS'~~1~~·;.1?:i~.t o2 t\l':..! ~)~(::.\r~n~~.C!.l I~·;l::-,~·;.·~l lL:.,.h~1o:.t:: I'rOi_J0;~1.:.:.l ~~ .;:; ~~~.!.}:·, ::o·~.i .. :.:'t~ ~D 1:..:; :t:.tc.t.::·~~-~~~:-.. t:~~ ::.:.-:d )_!_~ t\£.1G.ce·~·L,::2b~Ltr~ to ;:;·;::·,:·\r.~ <:":~~ n t.ou~;.J b~1.3:J.r, fv::: £::1-:2 <.X'°'~1~:::...::.:n:tr.; t:., ~::..:.: ::t.~·:,:.: \::~_:::~ regard \:0 th<:. p':°0p0ZC.

...... ) . ~. .. 3

,_ I " cu:-!Jil:.::.t: c.:>.::\1~s:~~~~ tb.c fc~~:}i"uility· uf ~ v~rit!i:J of L!.lt~rr.1::-~ti.vc C.•iil::~_u:.'!3 :Ll.1. tl·.,~ S'l:~"!..... ,~~tc.-"~t '\./~1tc.!:r-Ero;:1t c... ::ea fo7.· c:~,".!o:-~~:~o·.iutiii.J t~'1e p::upo:;c:c! 11r?.l:b0ut" f;.:..c::ilitic;.; c}...::;(.~\·1:1t:~rc ti"?::J~1 ca. St,:;vc;si:Ol'l Islri.:-:.ld pl:io:c to COl1.~idering ·furtl:et· [tclvc.Tii:".. cC:';i!.,:nt of t11:.:: S\;bjcct pro;_;o.;;<:Ll.

/!/' ;: I -,1~i •,, ,,--::~('. ((. ,(.::>.,,, / ;\-t If, "-ti U1J·1." ·· L h/ G. K~ L:::.maer~s~n Biolo::;fat Envirci:.:u~a·.-i.tal S(!rvicc3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP - STEVESTON WATERFRONT

B.C. Packers Lots 5-9, 20-23, 12A, 12B, llB, llC, lOA, lOB Plan 249 Total Area 2.09+ Acres Queen Charlotte Fisheries Ltd. Pel. D, Lots 10, 11 - Plan 249. Total Area 1.14+ Acres Canadian Fishing Co. Pel. C Plan 77 36 Total Area 13.15+ Acres B.A. Oil (Gulf) Lots 17, 18, 19, lA, lB, lC, 2A, 2B Plan 249 Part of Lot 25, Plan 25758. Total Area 0.95+ Acres George Easthope Ernest Easthope Harold Easthope Percy Easthope Lots 14 and 15 Plan 249. Total Arca 0.3+ Acres C. A. Reisterer lloldings Ltd. Lots 16, 17 Plan 249. Total Arca 0.26+ Acres Federal Government (Harbour Commission) Lots 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16 Plan 249· Lot 21, Plan 26081 Total Arca 1.39 Acres

Total Area: 19. 28+ Acres St.C, .. 1-T

_J I _ILJ LJ .___I___, l I L

I CHATHAM ITltllT ... . . a. - - • ------...... Ill ... II ID 9 71 :a 9 I 7 Ill IO 7) ... II ... :a •• • :a :a • • :::t •• .. ... • •Ill Ill ....__...... _.__ •Ill .,.____ --t • ... l • ... > Ii D6 w > c ..,._ ___ 7 > ... • • ...... c > .. "6 > ... ' c . c 1-----i4 c • •• ... SI I ... •• ... I '- ... •• .. • s. •• ... z ...... j c .... ll • w • •• ... 55 • ~ ' f1 a 2 I J I I • 1 I• .. z • - ~Ill • •• _, • wl _, .... ,. - -T. ... -· - """ ·- '• - ' •Ill llOMCTOI • ...> , • Q •~f2111D9e76.S • .. z ~-"---4' ... ~~~-1 i i •

2 ~ "'...;.;... ~~~--- ...... '"... .. ~ ...... -•. ' .. . - ~~- ...... -:: ...... MONTH 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 Acquire Property .. ---- , , Final Design &Tender Documents

, I Tender & Mobilize Demolition I Diking L Dredge & Dispose I

, I Dredge & Fi 11 ,, Rip Rap - Upland Services Roads, Walks, Pave., Landscape Office & Washrooms Float Mooring \I ,, Float Services Relocate Oil Lines L Float Construction Wharf Construction I Services L CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Phase I t10NTH

0~ 3 6 9 12- 15 18- 21 23 Authority ---- - Final Design &Tender Document " Tender &Mobilize ' I Dredge & Dispose l Upland Services Paving, Landscape, Fence l Office & Washroom Extension Float Mooring " ,, Float Servicer Oil Lines i Float Construction ,, Wharf Construction Services l

CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Phase II MONTH

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 Authority ------,, Final Design &Tender Document Tender & Mobilize " J, Dredge & Dispose Upland Services Pave, Landscape, Fence Office & Washroom Extension

' I Float Mooring ,, Float Services & Oil Lines Float Construction ,, Wharf Construction Wharf Services t

CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Phase III