THE CORPORATION of the CITY of NELSON Committee of the Whole AGENDA

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NELSON Committee of the Whole AGENDA

Monday, April 16th, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, City Hall 2nd Floor, 310 Ward Street, Nelson, B.C. (Acting Mayor takes the Chair)

Page 1. Call to Order 2. Introduction of Late Items (a) Mayors List (b) Councillors List (c) City Manager's Additions 3. Adoption of Agenda (a) Adopt Agenda 4. Public Participation Acting Mayor permits comments or questions from the public -- (Maximum 15 minutes) (a) Acting Mayor permits 5. Delegations (a) Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) 2-18 (b) City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan 19-42 6. Recommendations from Staff (a) 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Funding Recommendation 43-59 7. Late Items 8. Resolution to Adjourn

Page 1 of 59 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NELSON AUDIENCE AND PRESENTATION

DATE: April 16, 2012 Committee of the Whole TOPIC: Delegation – Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley, BC) PROPOSAL: Presentation on Tourism in the Kootenay Rockies PROPOSED BY: Staff ______

ANALYSIS SUMMARY: Wendy Van Puymbroeck has requested an audience with Council to deliver a presentation about the Kootenay Rockies Tourism. Based out of Kimberley, Kootenay Rockies Tourism is a Destination Management and Marketing Organization (DMO) which generates incremental tourism revenues for the region by developing, coordinating and delivering collaborative destination marketing programs in partnership with a range of tourism partners (see www.krtourism.ca) and the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Innovation.

BENEFITS OR DISADVANTAGES AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The presentation is for Council and the public’s information.

LEGISLATIVE IMPACTS, PRECEDENTS, POLICIES: It is within Council mandate and authority to hear the presentation.

COSTS AND BUDGET IMPACT - REVENUE GENERATION: There are no costs associated with hearing the presentation.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: None

COMMUNICATION: Hearing the presentation educates Council and the public about the Kootenay Rockies Tourism mandate, marketing structure, revenues, partners and community programs.

OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES: 1. Receive the audience and thank the presenter. 2. Refer the matter to staff for further information

RECOMMENDATION: That Council hears from Ms. Van Puymbroeck and thanks her for attending.

Author: Reviewed by:

______LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

#5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) Page 2 of 59 #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

Kootenay Rockies Tourism

Page 3 of 59

April 16, 2012 #5(a)

- Mandate Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

To enhance the regional visitor economy for the benefit of businesses and communities through the delivery of destination marketing initiatives and the facilitation of connected travel. Page 4 of 59 #5(a) The Marketing Structure - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) Page 5 of 59 Tourism Revenues #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

$13.4 $73.4 Billion Billion Page 6 of 59 595,500 jobs 127,000 jobs 9% of total employment 1 in 15 Tourism Revenues #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

Kootenay Rockies $ 1,300,000,000 $73.4 Billion

$13.4 Billion Page 7 of 59 KR Visits by Canadians #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

British Columbia 28.2% Alberta 66.2% Ontario 1.4% Prairies 4.2% Page 8 of 59

Source: 2010 Travel Survey of Residents of Canada (TSRC). Includes overnight travellers whose primary destination was the Kootenay Rockies. Other BC #5(a) Visits by Province - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

Vancouver, Coast & Mountains Thompson Okanagan Share of Visits by Province, 2010 Share of Visits by Province, 2010 Atlantic Atlantic 0.2% 0.4% Ontario Quebec 1.0% 1.6% Prairies Ontario 1.5% British 7.6% British Columbia Columbia Alberta Prairies 76.9% 74.0% 20.4% Alberta 3.2% 13.1% Page 9 of 59 Tourism Partners Program #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

Other Internet 6.89 Production Tourism Partners Program 29.2 8.04 • Budget $1.2 million Shows 14.56 • Cost-shared at 50/50

• Stakeholder planning sessions TV Magazine 10.78 13.67 • Business Plan approved in Newsprint Radio advance by Tourism BC 9.36 7.49 Page 10 of 59

A Balanced Marketing Mix Trade Activities #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) Page 11 of 59 Media Relations #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

In 2010

• 1,000 articles • $4,990,493 value

Page 12 of 59 Publications #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

• KR produces 9 publications

• With online or e-marketing components • Downloadable • Online contesting • Scanning devices • Mobile promotion Page 13 of 59 Community Programs #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

Community Tourism Foundation Community Tourism Opportunities Program Program

Assist communities to produce a plan for Assist communities to implement their the tourism development and marketing own tourism plan activities Page 14 of 59 • Budget $254,000 • Professionally facilitated • Cost-shared at 50/50 • Based on consultations and workshops • Community Driven • Suited for every level of development • Community Delivered • Tactics approved in advance by Tourism BC KOOTENAYtag #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) Page 15 of 59 Connected Travel #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) Page 16 of 59 #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley) Page 17 of 59 #5(a) - Kootenay Rockies Tourism (Kimberley)

Thank you!

Questions? Page 18 of 59 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NELSON AUDIENCE AND PRESENTATION

DATE: April 16, 2012 Committee of the Whole TOPIC: Presentation — City of Nelson Tree Management Plan PROPOSAL: Review and discuss the draft Tree Management Plan PROPOSED BY: Staff ______

ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Executive Summary of the Tree Management Plan indicates that approximately 30,000 trees can be found in the parks and public lands with the City of Nelson. Aside from the formal street trees, specimen trees and natural treed areas; Nelson is also known for its “heritage trees” (approximately 480 of them) which were planted in the 1920’s. The proposed Tree Management Plan has been formulated to properly “protect and conserve City trees; manage the removal of City trees and subsequent renewal of the City’s treed character.” Karen MacDonald is the City’s Works and Parks Supervisor and will provide the background and highlights of the proposed plan and answer any questions Council may have.

BENEFITS OR DISADVANTAGES AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The presentation is for Council and the public’s information.

LEGISLATIVE IMPACTS, PRECEDENTS, POLICIES: It is within Council mandate and authority to hear the presentation.

COSTS AND BUDGET IMPACT - REVENUE GENERATION: There are no costs associated with hearing the presentation.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: None

COMMUNICATION: Hearing the presentation educates Council and the public about the City’s Tree Management Program and gives Council the opportunity to review and discuss the intentions of the plan.

OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES: 1. Receive the audience and thank the presenter. 2. Refer the matter to staff for further information

ATTACHMENTS: 1. DRAFT City of Nelson Tree Management Plan

RECOMMENDATION: That Council hears from Ms. MacDonald and thanks her for attending.

Author: Reviewed by:

______LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 19 of 59

The Corporation of the City of Nelson

TREE MANAGEMENT PLAN

April 2012 Page 1 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 20 of 59

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 5

2. GOALS, POLICIES & ACTIONS ...... 8

3. TREE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ...... 12

3.1. Tree Classification ...... 12

3.2. Maintenance & Monitoring ...... 14

3.3. Removals ...... 15

3.4. Renewal ...... 17

3.5. Protection & Conservation ...... 18

3.6. Communication & Education ...... 18

4. CONCLUSION ...... 20

APPENDIX A: INVASIVE TREE SPECIES ...... 21

APPENDIX B: TREE INVENTORY ...... 22

Page 2 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 21 of 59

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There are approximately 30,000 trees in our parks and on other City owned properties that make up the City’s urban forest. These trees include formal street trees, specimen trees in our parks, and the many natural treed areas throughout the City and park areas.

The City of Nelson is also known for its “Heritage Trees”, found within the City’s Downtown and Uphill neighbourhoods. These include ash, maple, oak, chestnut, and elm tree species. These “Heritage Trees” were planted along the streets in the 1920’s and have reached maturity. There are approximately 480 such heritage trees in Nelson. These “Heritage Trees” can be found in the City’s historic core. It must be recognized that many of these older boulevard and park trees are in a serious state of decline resulting from a combination of advanced age, construction/utility projects, past cultural practices (i.e. improper pruning), traffic and disease. The City of Nelson’s Heritage Register also identifies the Western White Pine as an important tree for its environmental, aesthetic and cultural values, particularly through its reflection of the local natural environment, its contribution to the character of Nelson, and its use by First Nations peoples. Over the next two decades many of these trees, particularly those situated in the Downtown and Uphill neighbourhoods will need to be removed as they continue to decline and become hazardous.

A Tree Management Plan is required:

• To plan for the protection and conservation of City trees • To manage the removal of the City’s trees and • To plan for the renewal of the City’s treed character

A comprehensive and proactive Tree Management Plan will ensure that the trees within the City are managed responsibly and according to best practices.

The City of Nelson has made many commitments over the years to care and preserve all trees on City property. The City of Nelson will strive to attain the goals of sustainable planning, planting, protection, maintenance and care of trees, urban forests, green space, and related resources for public benefit.

These goals include:

a. To develop a comprehensive, coordinated and proactive plan to manage the renewal of the City’s aging street trees.

b. To create policies and bylaws to protect and preserve public trees, and to manage removals in a coordinated fashion when necessary.

c. All trees and treed areas on City property or property managed by the City are the responsibility of the City of Nelson Parks Department and are to be

Page 3 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 22 of 59

managed in a cost effective and environmentally sustainable manner.

d. The stewardship of our Urban forest should be integrated in the planning processes of all City departments, including new construction and private development.

e. Ensure the City’s urban forest is managed in sustainable manner that reflects best arboricultural practices and that recognizes the economic value of the urban forest and City street trees.

f. To create programs and policies that will inform, involve, and gain support from the public.

g. To improve safeguards for protecting the investments made in planting new trees through proper ongoing maintenance and coordinated planning with City departments.

h. To maintain and work towards increasing the tree canopy for the City of Nelson, and to maintain and work towards increasing the number of trees within the City of Nelson.

This plan identifies short term and future actions to achieve the goals identified in this plan.

Page 4 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 23 of 59

1. INTRODUCTION

Mission Statement The City of Nelson will protect, replace and enhance our urban forest to ensure the economic, environmental, cultural and social benefits of a healthy and vibrant ecosystem for our future generations.

The City of Nelson recognizes the importance of the City’s “green character” and has the following policies within the Official Community Plan:

“The City will give a high priority to adopting a Tree and Vegetation Management Bylaw, or whether alternative means to manage, maintain, and enhance the "green character" of Nelson should be employed.” (OCP, 2008, page 80)

The importance of the City’s natural areas, protection of the local ecosystems and biodiversity is also reflected in the City’s Path to 2040 Sustainability Strategy.

Nelson’s character owes much to its trees. From residential streets lined with old maples to its beautiful shady parks, the amenities and distinctiveness of our “green” infrastructure help to create the ambiance that provides for a high quality of life for its residents and attracts visitors from around the world. There are approximately 30,000 trees in our parks and on other City owned properties that make up the City’s urban forest. These trees include formal street trees, specimen trees in our parks, and the many natural treed areas throughout the City and park areas. This natural and historic beauty, perhaps unparalleled in the southern interior of British Columbia, and well documented in visual and print media, derives in part from our setting in the Kootenays but also from the legacy left by our predecessors. Many of the trees in our parks and the older areas of town were planted in the early decades of the century. Those who lived in Nelson before the award winning revitalization of the downtown core in the 1980s may recall not only the unremarkable facades of Baker Street, but also the absence of any living thing in the bare streetscape. The process which led to the renewal recognized the economic and social value of “green” components in the urban landscape.

Nelson’s urban forest is in decline. Many of the older trees on our streets and in our parks are becoming advanced in age and suffer from a variety of problems related to poor planning, management and care, traffic and infrastructure conflicts. Over the next two decades many of these trees, particularly those situated in the Downtown and Uphill neighbourhoods will need to be removed as they continue to decline and become hazardous. Quite a few are failing and unsafe.

Page 5 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 24 of 59

These older mature trees have deteriorated to a point that they have the potential to injure the public or cause property damage. A Tree Management Plan is required to plan for the conservation of City trees and to manage the removal and replacement of the City’s street trees.

An urban forest should have the same recognition of importance as any other City utility and infrastructure. Trees should be considered “green infrastructure”. For that reason, care in planning the City’s public works and utility projects is necessary in order to minimize impacts to existing trees. A Tree Management Plan sets the framework for establishing processes to consider ways to mitigate negative impacts to trees prior to routine and planned infrastructure projects through such measures as tree protection fencing, root pruning, and modifying practices when possible to accommodate the tree.

The Parks Department of the City of Nelson is responsible for the management of all trees and natural treed areas (urban forest) on City properties. This includes the administration, planning, management, procurement, planting, maintenance, protection and preservation of City trees.

Page 6 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 25 of 59

The numerous benefits of an urban forest include:

Infrastructure Benefits Prolong the life of pavement by shading thus reducing summer surface temperatures Control dust, erosion, and sedimentation Reduce storm water costs by intercepting rainfall and absorbing slow water from rainstorms Moderates the affects of wind and buffers damage from windstorms Provides buffer screens and arterial roadway enhancement Carbon Sequestering

Community Benefits Promotes community spirit and civic pride Encourages people to visit and creates a livable community Increases property values

Economic and Environmental Benefits Reduce energy bills from summer cooling and winter heating Supports sustainable transportation by encouraging people to walk or bike Reduces noise Absorb pollutants Supports biodiversity by providing food and shelter for wildlife Ecosystem services Trees are economic assets

“A healthy urban forest is one of the only municipal capital investment that will appreciate in value over time”

ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) Local Governments for Sustainability) http://www.iclei.org

Health Benefits Trees store and sequester carbon and produce oxygen therefore providing and improving air quality Improves water quality Provides stress relief by aesthetic appeal Offers educational and recreational opportunities Page 7 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 26 of 59

2. GOALS, POLICIES & ACTIONS

2.1. Goals

a. To develop a comprehensive, coordinated and proactive plan to manage the renewal of the City’s aging street trees.

b. To create policies and bylaws to protect and preserve public trees, and to manage removals in a coordinated fashion when necessary.

c. All trees and treed areas on City property or property managed by the City are the responsibility of the City of Nelson Parks Department and are to be managed in a cost effective and environmentally sustainable manner.

d. The stewardship of our Urban forest should be integrated in the planning processes of all City departments, including new construction and private development.

e. Ensure the City’s urban forest is managed in a sustainable manner that reflects best arboricultural practices and that recognizes the economic value of the urban forest and City street trees.

f. To create programs and policies that will inform, involve, and gain support from the public.

g. To improve safeguards for protecting the investments made in planting new trees through proper ongoing maintenance and coordinated planning with City departments.

h. To maintain and work towards increasing the tree canopy for the City of Nelson, and to maintain and work towards increasing the number of trees within the City of Nelson.

2.2. Policies

Establish a Tree Bylaw to ensure that all trees on City properties are adequately protected from unnecessary destruction, loss or damage caused by any person, and include measures to address compensation and/or replacement.

Establish a tree reserve fund with funds received for tree losses and/or damage to be used for the procurement and planting of trees in subsequent years. Any reserve not used shall be carried forward to the next year and used according to policy. Page 8 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 27 of 59

Co-ordinate all City tree planting programs including boulevards and roadway landscaping; parks and facility development; and naturalization and beautification programs to ensure species diversity and an emphasis on native species where possible.

Liaise with the Nelson Fire Department to develop a strategy for fire mitigation control

Continue the development of safe working policies and procedures.

Develop a policy to utilize waste wood from approved removals.

Provide appropriate training opportunities to ensure there is adequate expertise on staff.

Develop a comprehensive and coordinated set of procedures for all tree maintenance activities: planting, watering, staking, fertilizing, pruning and tree removal.

Develop a community education and outreach program on invasive plant species.

Develop a process and policy to encourage and support community based initiatives to plant trees and be stewards of the existing trees should be considered.

Develop appropriate public relations strategies to inform and educate the public about the City’s Tree Management Program.

To quantify the value of trees as assets to the City of Nelson and to develop a business case to finance tree renewal programs.

Page 9 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 28 of 59

2.3. Actions

Short Term Future

To update the City Street tree To develop a comprehensive and inventory. coordinated set of procedures for all tree maintenance activities: planting, watering, staking, fertilizing, pruning and tree removal. To revise the Tree Removal Policy Co-ordinate all City tree planting No. 6300.00.005 to further develop programs including boulevards and the criteria for the removal of trees. roadway landscaping; parks and facility development; and naturalization and beautification programs to ensure species diversity and an emphasis on native species where possible.

To develop a City policy for the Establish a tree reserve fund with selection of tree and plant species funds received for tree losses to be planted on City property, and and/or damage to be used for the specifically to eliminate the use of procurement and planting of trees in invasive species. subsequent years. Any reserve not used shall be carried forward to the next year and used according to policy.

Establish a Tree Bylaw to ensure Develop a policy to utilize waste that all trees on City properties are wood from approved removals. adequately protected from unnecessary destruction, loss or damage caused by any person, and include measures to address compensation and/or replacement. Provide appropriate training Liaise with the Nelson Fire opportunities to ensure there is Department to develop a strategy adequate expertise on staff. for fire mitigation control

Continue the development of safe Develop a community education working policies and procedures. and outreach on invasive plant species. Annual monitoring to see how plan Develop a process and policy to is working and update when encourage and support community necessary based initiatives to plant trees and be stewards of the existing trees Page 10 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 29 of 59

should be considered.

Develop a City web page for the Develop appropriate public relations City’s Tree Management Program strategies to inform and educate the public about the City’s Tree Management Program. To quantify the value of trees as assets to the City of Nelson and to develop a business case to finance tree renewal programs.

Page 11 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 30 of 59

3. Tree Management Program

A comprehensive and proactive Tree Management Program should reflect and balance forest and ecosystem health, ecosystem services, aesthetics, social values, and risk management. The Tree Management Program will focus on the following areas:

Tree Classification Maintenance & Monitoring Removals Renewal Protection & Conservation Communication & Education

Adequate funding of a Tree Management Program is crucial to ensure that all aspects of this program are in place.

3.1. Tree Classification

All trees and treed areas on City property or property managed by the City are the responsibility of the City of Nelson Parks Department. Policy is determined in consultation with City staff and Council and implemented by the Parks Department under the direction of the Parks Supervisor.

This classification system is designed to present a clear comprehensible classification to enable the establishment of policy and regulation for the appropriate management of trees in each category. This classification system will form the foundation of the Tree Management Program.

Class A: Heritage and Rare Trees

Heritage and Rare trees are of high value, usually non-native and planted. Trees in this category merit special considerations for preservation and conservation. The heritage tree component would include many trees in the original historic core area roughly bounded by Front, Hoover, Falls, and Park Streets, as well as many of the older trees in established parks.

Page 12 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 31 of 59

Factors to consider when classifying heritage and rare trees include:

Species Size Age Uniqueness Community value City of Nelson Heritage Register (e.g. Western White Pine)

Class B: Boulevard, Park and Street Trees

High value, usually non- native and planted. Includes:

1. All ornamental trees in established park areas such as those found in:

Lakeside Park and soccer fields (all areas north of the CPR tracks between the Nelson bridge and Poplar Street), City Campground Queen Elizabeth Park Lions Park Nelson Memorial Cemetery Cottonwood Falls Park Gyro Park Davies Street Park

2. All trees in the downtown core and, 3. All street and boulevard trees outside of the downtown core.

Class C: Trees in natural and semi-natural areas

These areas include wildlife corridors, urban/forest interface zones, green spaces and other minimally managed areas such as:

1. Undeveloped right of ways and otherwise unused City property, 2. Gyro Park bluffs, 3. View Street, High Street, Front Street and Douglas Road, right of ways, 4. Davies Street Park slopes, 5. Prince Philip Park, 6. Art Gibbons (Rosemont) Park, 7. Highway arterials and interchanges.

Page 13 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 32 of 59

Trees in this category may be ornamental and planted but are mostly native trees or naturalized exotics, some of which are invasive.

Class D: Trees in any area which merit special considerations

Where there is a recognized ecosystem or landscape function such as:

1. Trees located on a slope greater than 30%, 2. Trees located within 15 metres or 30 metres of a stream or watercourse, 3. Wildlife trees.

3.2. Maintenance & Monitoring

Maintenance in general terms refers typically to proper pruning. This involves the maintenance of appropriate road, sidewalk and pathway clearances, the removal of dead wood that may become hazardous, and other operations to maintain the health of the tree. Maintenance should also involve regular monitoring of health and pests, pest control, assessment of conflicts and hazards. Prevention and early detection is a cost effective way of avoiding serious problems. The appearance of dead wood in a tree can be just a natural pruning mechanism to remove extraneous material. It can also be an indicator of disease or other problems. While there is no evidence that the removal of dead wood in itself affects the health of a tree, its presence over high target areas is a concern. However, it does affect risk management. Pruning can help offset disease, correct structural problems and positively affect the health of a tree. Often the wrong approach to pruning can do more harm than good. Timing, knowledge and proper technique are essential, as is a long term perspective. A cyclic pruning program, implemented properly, can upgrade the value of the forest, reduce storm damage and other problems and, in time, reduce costs and liabilities. An organized and methodical approach will embody the following concepts:

Regular review of every tree Shift from reactive to proactive management. Improve the condition of trees Increase the overall value by taking care of the forest Monitoring for health, risk and diversity Completion and maintenance of record keeping and inventory Certification of tree workers and contractors

Page 14 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 33 of 59

Preparation of annual work plans ahead of time, including a pruning program in the winter and summer, and the care and establishment of young trees Expansion of record keeping into removals, pruning and inspections

Trees in Nelson will be managed by determining which trees are deteriorating to a point that they have a significant potential to injure people or damage property. This plan proposes to have the largest and oldest of City trees assessed by an International Society of Arboriculture Certified (ISA) Arborist every five years to evaluate their potential for hazards, including loss of major limbs, trunk failure or root mass failure. Each of these trees will be assessed using an ISA Standard Tree Risk Assessment Form.

Trees that are rated as: an extreme hazard (10-12 points) will be pruned or removed immediately

a high hazard (6-9 points) will be pruned or removed within five years

a moderate hazard (3-5 points) will be re-assessed in five years

a low hazard (1-3 points) will be left alone

Pruning to maintain clearance for power lines, an essential part of Hydro operations, should be done in a manner which creates the least impact and preserves individual trees as much and for as long as possible. Trees under power lines will be replaced with more suitable species in the future.

3.3. Removals

Removal of trees can be a contentious issue. While it is understood that there are many legitimate reasons for removals, it must also be understood that in many instances there are also very good reasons for leaving them untouched, such as during bird nesting season. A proactive and sensitive approach would define exactly why a removal is being considered and weigh that against the advantages. Leaving a tree alone and considering an alternate path, as is often required for environmental assessments. Obvious factors leading to the removal of a tree include hazard and risk management, conflicts with infrastructure, mortality and disease. Except for the first, all of these factors may be influenced by situation, location, social and ecosystem values, wildlife considerations, etc. The primary reasons leading to the removal of trees include:

Page 15 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 34 of 59

Infrastructure - Tree roots heave sidewalks and cause tripping hazards - Tree roots cause pavement to lift

Utilities - Tree roots growing into sewer lines forming a mass of fine root hairs within the pipe, these clog the pipe obstructing sewer flow, causing sewer backups

Hydro Lines - Trees conduct electricity, therefore trees planted under or next to power lines must be regularly pruned or removed to ensure public safety and maintain hydro supply - When branches come into contact with hydro lines, they can cause fires and power outages - New hydro line construction

Fire Mitigation - Trees have to be pruned or removed if there is a danger of fire - Brushing is done on right of ways and overgrown areas to minimize the possibility of a wildfire

Risk management - Removal of this type constitutes a hazard to life or property or is a public nuisance, is dead, suffers from major decay or disease - Trees are also removed if suffering irreparable damage from vandalism, rodents, vehicle collision or weather conditions

Development - Trees are sometimes damaged or removed to make way for new developments - Developers will have to monetarily compensate or replace removed trees from public right of ways and public property with others of equal value

In the case of risk management there are established industry standards and procedures to determine potential for damage, type of damage likely to occur, presence of targets, etc. When considering removals for any other reasons, it is important to consider the actual value of the tree and weigh that against the advantages of having it removed. If the tree in question has been there for many years, and is classified as a “heritage” or “rare,” tree, or it has a recognized landscape or cultural function, then its social and economic value may outweigh the rationale for bringing it down. It is common practice for developers to simply remove everything and then re-plant afterwards. This practice also does not take in to account the value of trees. The City

Page 16 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 35 of 59

should restrict this on right of ways and other public property when development permits are granted. Policies for the protection of retained trees should also be established. If there is no hazard, then consideration should be taken whether or not removal is necessary, or if it is possible to work around the tree.

Tree Removal Process

Other than in emergency situations, trees will be removed only in accordance with objective tree removal criteria, as developed through City policy, and by following a clear process of evaluation, consultation and public notice. The establishment of these criteria and policies should be through a cross disciplinary and inter-departmental approach which centers around the understanding of goals and objectives for long term management of the forest and the minimization of impact. Annual work plans, prepared ahead of time, should coordinate slated and anticipated removals, driving an organized and safety-oriented approach. Any tree removed must be done so in compliance with the WorkSafe BC regulations.

3.4. Renewal

A pro-active program of renewal should be based on best management practices including planting the best tree for the site, appropriate spacing, soil and site preparation. The ultimate goal should be canopy retention and expansion. A best management practice of a 2 to 1 ratio of new trees planted to removals due to mortality of younger trees in urban sites. The exact location for each tree will be determined on a case by case, and site specific basis. The reasoning that guides this 2 to 1 ratio is that 50% of new trees could possibly die in the first 50 years. Tracking of all removals is necessary to facilitate this commitment. Planting should be encouraged in all available areas. This includes unplanted streets and right of ways, commercial areas and parking lots. It should be a goal to investigate the possibilities on every unplanted boulevard and to plant the majority of them. A strategy should be developed to ensure this goal is met, and to review and consider potential conflicts with utilities and streetscape design. For areas where substantial removals may be required due to aging and/or diseased trees, such as in Downtown and Uphill, a coordinated, transparent and well communicated plan should be in place to guide staff and involve the community.

Each year the City devotes financial resources to the management of the urban forest. City funds are spent on leaf collection and removal, pruning and tree maintenance, new tree planting, and tree removals. Additional resources will be required to fund large Page 17 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 36 of 59

scale renewal initiatives.

The City should continue to operate its own tree nursery. This supplies a reliable supply of good quality, affordable trees available to Parks staff.

The use of invasive species will be discontinued on City property and a development of an invasive species management program and City policy should be initiated to guide plant selection on public property to ensure the right tree in the right location. The City Parks department has developed a Suggested Street and Park Tree Planting list, which is available from the Parks Department. This type of program could be expanded to the community as an educational/informational program.

Efforts to ensure the City’s tree canopy remains intact and expands will require community involvement. Developing a clear process and policy to encourage and support community based initiatives to plant trees and be stewards of the existing trees should be considered. For example, the City of London has developed a community initiative to plan 1 million trees in London (http://www.milliontrees.ca/).

3.5. Protection & Conservation

Where trees have been identified for retention in areas where construction activity will be occurring, adequate tree and root protection should be in place to protect the tree and its root system from damage and compaction. Adequate protection zones and techniques should be established around trees and root zones during construction work. This will apply to City operations, developers, as well as any other work occurring that could impact City trees.

3.6. Communication & Education

Appropriate and meaningful communication should occur among City staff, City contractors, the public and the development community to ensure City policies and procedures are understood and followed.

Appropriate public relations strategies will be developed to facilitate acceptance of policies and education about the realities of tree operations. These should aim to keep the public informed and deflect unwarranted criticisms of operations and encourage community involvement and the growth of awareness about trees and the environment. A City web page dedicated to this purpose should be developed.

New initiatives will include:

Page 18 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 37 of 59

Issuing cutting permits for City contractors;

Contractors hired to provide this work need to understand the goals and policies in this plan. A process will be in place for these, and any other tree contractor, which will provide adequate orientation and certify them to work on City trees. Resolve conflicts with infrastructure upgrades/improvements/general works through early and ongoing consultation with the City of Nelson Parks Supervisor

Ensuring land developers are informed of their obligation to protection and retain public trees and incorporate these requirements into the development approval process

Enforce tree bylaw and use fines to contribute to a reserve fund

Ongoing staff training and development of safe work policies and procedures Developing a clear process and policy to encourage and support community based initiatives to plant trees and be stewards of the existing trees should be considered

Exploring community composting opportunities to dispose of leaf and plant materials

Page 19 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 38 of 59

4. Conclusion

The Tree Management Plan will allow us to accomplish our goals. Given the already advanced state of decline in some areas of the City, it is important to preserve the trees we have for as long as possible until renewal efforts begin to catch up. A Tree Management Plan will allow us to plan for the conservation of City trees and to manage the removal and replacement of the City’s street trees.

The challenges in implementing the plan will include: • Adequate and sustained funding; • Monitoring and encouraging compliance; • Developing community buy-in; and • Developing a communication and education strategy.

Each year the City devotes financial resources to the management of the urban forest. City funds are spent on leaf collection and removal, pruning and tree maintenance, new tree planting, and tree removals. Additional resources will be required to fund large scale renewal initiatives. Efforts should be undertaken to assign and quantify the dollar value City trees have to the City of Nelson, and to develop a business case to finance tree renewal programs.

Page 20 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 39 of 59

Appendix A: Invasive Tree Species

Norway Maple (Acer platanoides)

Sycamore Maple (Acer pseudoplanus)

Black Locust ( Robina pseudoacacia)

Common Laburnum (Laburnum anagyroides)

Tree of Heaven ( Ailanthus altissima)

Page 21 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 40 of 59

Appendix B: Tree Inventory

Street Trees A comprehensive Tree Inventory has been created by the City of Nelson Parks Department to manage and track all City street trees. This is a working document which is updated regularly. Copies are available from Parks staff.

Parks Trees The current tree Inventory does not include any of the trees in our parks. One of the difficulties of adding these trees into the database is giving them an accurate location (there is no civic address for a Park and no easy method to differentiate one tree from another). GPS technology is now becoming more affordable and accurate and soon it will allow us to add our significant parks trees into the database.

It is estimated that there are about 10,000 trees in our parks and another 10,000 growing on other City properties.

This list provides a description of the trees in City parks.

• Lakeside Park - Total area 2.7 hectares, (6.67 acres). There are 100 significant trees in this area.

• Waterfront Sportsfield -Total current area maintained is 7.8 hectares, (19 acres). There are 175 trees in this area planted under the federal Green Trees Canada program.

• Queen Elizabeth Park - Total area 0.87 hectares, (2.16 acres). There are 26 tall Lombardi Poplars in this park and one large Douglas Fir on the Behnsen Street side plus several scotch pines and acacias, 40 trees total.

• Gyro Park – Total area is 3.2 hectares, (7.9 acres). There are about 1000 trees in this area including the Park Street right-of-way.

• Nelson City Campground – 1.7 hectares, (4.2 acres) – about 600 large native trees.

• Lions Park – Area 0.7 hectares, (1.76 acres.) There are 7 Lombardi Poplars in this park, a grove of 7 trees, 5 trees in the playground area and 7 newly planted Crimson Oaks Page 22 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 41 of 59

• Rosemont Park - Area 5.5 hectares, (13.5 acres). There are about 3000 large native trees in this park.

• Cemetery – There are 337 significant trees in the cleared area of the Cemetery. There is another 3000 trees in the forested Cemetery lands within the City boundaries (above and below the cemetery)

• Davies Street Park – This is a newly formed park that has an area of 3.3 hectares, (8.19 acres) in size. Five maples trees have been planted on the bank below the houses, five Red Oaks, four Purple Beech and eight Hornbeam trees have been planted in the park proper.

• Parks General – Cottonwood Falls Park, Chatham Street Park, the Hall Street Waterfront Gateway area, The West Waterfront Dog Walk Park, Prince Phillip Park and all other small parks. About 1500 trees.

• All other civic properties including the Park Street reservoir site and many City owned right-of-ways - the number of trees in this group is difficult to quantify, as there are huge numbers of small poplars and other volunteer species. A rough estimate would be 5000 trees.

• The City also owns a large forested parcel of land that is outside the City limits, just south of the cemetery. There are about 5000 trees on this land.

Page 23 of 23 DRAFT – Tree Management Plan P:\Administration\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0550 Council Meetings\02 Agenda\2012\04 April 2012\COW April 16\Tree Bylaw & Policy\Tree Plan Final Draft - A.doc #5(b) - City's proposed Tree Maintenance Plan Page 42 of 59 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NELSON REQUEST FOR DECISON

DATE: April 16, 2012 Committee of the Whole TOPIC: 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program (CIP) funding applications PROPOSAL: Council Recommendation for 2012 grant applications (Nelson) PROPOSED BY: Staff ______ANALYSIS SUMMARY: 52 applications were received for the allocation of $126,445.23 for the 2012/13 Columbia Basin Trust (CBT) Community Initiative Program (CIP) grant funding. Applicants made presentations to Council at the Special Committee of the Whole meeting held on April 10, 2010. Council subsequently reviewed all applications received and a ranking matrix showing potential successful candidates has been compiled. Council is now required to submit a recommendation on the allocation of funding to the Regional District of Central Kootenay which will be reviewed by the RDCK Board at its Board meeting to be held on May 17, 2012.

BACKGROUND: The Community Initiatives Program (CIP) is one of the CBT's oldest programs and supports projects identified as priorities within individual communities. The funding program is designed to help address the needs of all Columbia Basin communities and funds are currently allocated on a per capita funding formula. Further information on this (and other funding programs) is available at www.cbt.org.

BENEFITS, DISADVANTAGES AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Allocation of CBT-CIP funds enables organizations to continue to provide programs and complete special projects which benefit the community and region as a whole.

LEGISLATIVE IMPACTS, PRECEDENTS, POLICIES: It is within Council’s authority to allocate all or part of these funds as it deems appropriate, subject to the CBT’s guidelines. It is pertinent to note that at the February 6th, 2011 Regular Council meeting, Council passed the following resolution:

THAT, Council continues to allocate up to 35% of CBT-CIP grant funding to the Arts, Heritage and Culture sector in 2012 with the Cultural Development Commission adjudicating the Arts, Culture and Heritage sector applications as done in 2011; and THAT, Council and staff meet with CBT and RDCK after the 2012 grant process is complete to discuss integration of the City’s strategic planning goals and objectives in the funding process in 2013; and THAT, staff reports outcomes to Council and that a new approach for 2013 be discussed at the September 10th Regular meeting with this communicated to community groups in the fall of 2012.

This means that of the 2012 CBT total funding, a maximum amount of $44,255.83 is available to the Arts, Heritage and Culture sector.

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 43 of 59 Funding Recommendation

COSTS AND BUDGET IMPACT - REVENUE GENERATION: The Columbia Basin Trust allocates Community Initiative Program funding each year and allocates funds in consultation with the local governments throughout the region. The RDCK administers the funding application process.

IMPACT ON SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES AND STAFF RESOURCES: During past CBT grant deliberations, Council has discussed their wish to incorporate additional criterion to allow Council to give preference to those projects which tie into the City of Nelson ‘Path to 2040’ Sustainability, Community Energy and Downtown Waterfront Master Plans. Due to time constraints in past years, it was resolved by Council that the criterion and process undertaken for grant applications in 2013 will be reviewed for this purpose. The outcome will be agreed with the Columbia Basin Trust and prepared for implementation during the 2013 grant process.

COMMUNICATION: The RDCK advertises annually for CBT grant applications. Information on the application process and public information meetings is provided on the RDCK website which is linked to the City’s website. Successful applicants are notified in writing and the list is published on the City website and newsletter.

The City will communicate any changes that may be made to the criterion for grant requests under the City of Nelson’s annual allocation within an appropriate timeframe and ahead of the 2013 call for applications.

OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend successful 2012 grant recipients that meet the requirements and guidelines up to a maximum of $126,445.23 to the RDCK Board of Directors. 2. Deny any or all funding requests. 3. Refer the matter back to staff for further review and analysis.

ATTACHMENTS: • Community Initiatives funding information • Schedule showing allocation of CBT CIP Grant funding for 2012 • List of 2012 grant applications received by RDCK pertaining to Nelson

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council passes the following resolution: That Council considers all applications received and recommends awarding of 2012 Columbia Basin Trust Community Initiative Program Grant Funds to the following organizations: [Organizations will be listed in the motion once Council makes their decision].

Author: Reviewed by:

______LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 44 of 59 Funding Recommendation Attachment A 2012-2013 COLUMBIA BASIN TRUST COMMUNITY INITIATIVES & AFFECTED AREAS PROGRAMS PROJECT PROPOSAL APPLICATION Program Description

The Community Initiatives Program (CIP) and Affected Areas Program (AAP) – Columbia Basin Trust’s (CBT) oldest programs - support projects identified as priorities within individual communities.

The CIP and AAP are funding programs designed to help address the needs of Basin communities. The programs are flexible and able to accommodate individual processes and they incorporate community-based funding decisions to better meet local priorities. CIP funds are allocated on a per capita funding formula. AAP uses a combination of per capita and lump sum funding criteria. Funds are distributed once a year to CBT’s local government partners: the regional districts of East Kootenay, Central Kootenay and Kootenay Boundary, and the City of Revelstoke, Town of Golden, Village of Valemount and Ktunaxa Nation Council. APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS (Please read) • Please read the Criteria for Projects before filling out the application. • Applicants who fail to submit a financial report by June 30 of the year following the receipt of funds will not be eligible for further CBT grants until such time as the applicable project is complete and the Financial Report has been received. Interim reports must be approved in order to be eligible for future funding. Extensions on projects should not exceed the funding year plus one year. • All submissions must either be typed or written in very legible hand printing. An electronic version of this application is available on our website at www.rdck.bc.ca/corporate/grants/cbt.html . • Attachments must be limited to a maximum of 5 pages. • Applications must be returned to the RDCK office by March 5, 2012, 4:30 p.m. PST • Acceptable forms of delivery include hand delivery, fax, courier, mail and email. For faster processing of the applications email is preferred. All areas of the application must be completed in full. If a section does not apply to your project, please indicate with a “N/A”. • Submit the final copy of the application, do not send duplications. Any revisions to the application after the application has been submitted will not be accepted. • If an applicant wants to follow up with the RDCK to see if their application has been received, it would be greatly appreciated if the application was sent at least three days prior to the deadline date. Phone calls received on the deadline date inquiring about received applications will be deferred to a later date. • Please send Applications to:

Community Initiatives and Affected Fax: (250) 352-9300 Areas Programs Email: [email protected] Attn: Judy Madelung Regional District of Central Kootenay Box 590, 202 Lakeside Drive Nelson BC V1L 5R4

• Local Public Input Meetings will take place during April & May and funding is released in June. Please check your local newspapers or visit our website for meeting dates and times. • For more information, please contact Judy Madelung at 1-800-268-7325 / (250) 352-8170, email [email protected] or visit our website at www.rdck.bc.ca/corporate/grants/cbt.html.

2012-2013 CBT Application 1 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 45 of 59 Funding Recommendation

CRITERIA FOR PROJECTS

Applicants • Proposals must be submitted by a non-profit organization or a registered society. Non- registered groups will not be granted more than a combined maximum of $4,999 from an electoral area. • Individuals must be sponsored by a non-profit group or a registered society. • In general, program funds are for meeting community/public needs rather than private needs. • Any private sector proposal that comes forward must be sponsored by a non-profit organization or a registered society and must clearly demonstrate community benefits. • If sponsored, the application and financial report must be submitted by the non-profit organization or registered society on behalf of the individual/group.

Responsibility of Government • The Columbia Basin Trust Act requires that CBT funding does not relieve any level of government of its normal obligations. • Program funds should not be used to fund basic infrastructure activities that are normally funded through the government tax base such as roads, sewers and water systems.

Operational Costs • Proposals for which the funding will be used for on-going operational costs (rent, utilities, staff, etc.) will not be accepted.

Multi-Year Funding • Multi-year funding will not be considered.

Leveraging • CBT is committed to ensuring that other funding opportunities are sought to support projects in the Basin. Accordingly, project proponents are encouraged to seek funding from other sources to assist with their projects and not to rely solely on CBT funding.

2012-2013 CBT Application 2 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 46 of 59 Funding Recommendation

Section A – GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Application date: 2. Project Title:

3. Legal Name of Applicant/Organization:

4. Is the organization a registered non-profit/not-for-profit organization. Yes No

If yes, please provide registration # ______

**Please note: a single funding amount of $5,000 or more will only be granted to registered non-profit/not- for-profit societies or other legal entities. If you are not registered, you may only receive a single funding up to $4,999.00.

5. Mailing Address:

6. Postal Code: Telephone: 7. Fax: Email: 8. Project Contact(s):

Address (if different from above):

Postal Code: Phone: Email: 9. Project Discription: Provide a brief description of your project (maximum 5 lines).

10. Anticipated Outcome: Provide a brief description of your project (maximum 5 lines).

11. Location(s) of the project:

12. Duration (includes start-up and estimated completion date):

13. Goal Areas (check all that apply): Cultural Social Environmental Economic Other

2012-2013 CBT Application 3 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 47 of 59 Funding Recommendation 14. In the table below, please indicate which areas you are requesting funding from, the amount requested from each, the total amount requested and the total project budget. Please note: • If you apply to more than one area/municipality, the Total Amount Requested cannot exceed your Total Project Budget. • Requests totaling $5,000 or more will only be granted to registered non-profit organizations or other legal entities. All successful projects over $4,999.00 from one area will be subject to a 10% hold back. Reimbursement of the 10% will be granted once the funds have been spent and a satisfactory final report has been submitted. • You will be expected to attend a public meeting for each area you indicate. For more details on Electoral Area definitions and Affected Area boundaries, please refer to page 5.

Community Initiatives Funds Affected Area Funds

Electoral Area A – Amount: Area D – Affected – Amount: Electoral Area B – Amount: Area J – Affected – Amount: Electoral Area C – Amount: Electoral Area D & Kaslo – Amount: Initiatives & Affected Area Funds Combined Electoral Area E – Amount: Arrow Park – Amount: Electoral Area F – Amount: Burton – Amount: Electoral Area G & Salmo – Amount: Edgewood – Amount: Electoral Area H – Amount: Fauquier – Amount: Electoral Area I – Amount: Bayview – Amount: Electoral Area J – Amount: Rural Nakusp and Nakusp – Amount: City of Castlegar – Amount: Town of Creston – Amount: City of Nelson – Amount: Total Amount Requested: $ Village of New Denver – Amount: Village of Silverton – Amount: Total Project Budget: $ Village of Slocan – Amount:

Section B – SCREENING INFORMATION All projects must meet the following requirements to be considered for funding under this program. Check to show that your proposal includes the following elements and give details where indicated. All sections must be answered. If you do not understand an element, please call the RDCK for clarification at 1-800-268-7325. a. Is consistent with the mission of Columbia Basin Trust (CBT): CBT supports efforts by the True False people of the Basin to create a legacy of social, economic and environmental well-being and to achieve greater self-sufficiency for present and future generations. b. Will not relieve any level of government of its normal obligations. True False c. Will not promote any form of discrimination. True False d. Will not cause environmental degradation. True False e. Will not duplicate existing local services. True False f. Requires government approval or permits (e.g. local, provincial or federal authorities such as RDCK, Interior Health, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Environment or Fisheries) True False

If yes, government approval is in place and copy of permit(s) attached. Details:

2012-2013 CBT Application 4 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 48 of 59 Funding Recommendation g. All parties involved in the project have been consulted. True False

g.1 Details: h. Includes financial and activity reporting and accountability. True False i. Includes indicators for project evaluation (i.e. how will you measure project success?) True False i.1 Details:

Section C – EVALUATION INFORMATION 1. Why is this project needed?

2. Please list other project goals and objectives:

3. Workplan – what will be done and when?

4. Project Partners? Please list:

5. Will minors be working on the Project? Yes No

If yes, you, the Proponent, will ensure partners and subcontractors conduct criminal record checks on any person working with minors. You will comply with all Federal and Provincial Government Acts and Regulations that apply to the hiring of employees and subcontractors required to carry out the Program and its Projects. This includes, but is not limited to, the Criminal Records Review Act (pertaining to any person working with minors) and the Workers’ Compensation Act.

6. Is the project labour 100% Volunteer? Yes No

If no, you, the Proponent, contractor or sub-contractor must be able to provide proof of current WCB coverage if requested.

2012-2013 CBT Application 5 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 49 of 59 Funding Recommendation 7. Have you requested funding from other grant programs? Yes No Please List:

8. What is the percentage of funds that is needed to proceed with the project?

Section D – Project Budget Information

1. Project Budget Summary - If successful in attaining CBT funds, you must spend funds and prepare Project Financial Reports according to Section D. You will be expected to provide copies of invoices with your final report to verify how you spent CBT funds. The Columbia Basin Trust (through the RDCK) maintains the right to audit projects at any time.

Items Details Cost $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ TOTALS $

2. Funds From Other Sources.

Source Amount $ $ $

2012-2013 CBT Application 6 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 50 of 59 Funding Recommendation

**The following two pages are for your information ONLY. Please DO NOT return with your application** REGIONAL DISTRICT OF CENTRAL KOOTENAY - ELECTORAL AREA RURAL COMMUNITIES AREA ‘A-Wynndel/East Shore Kootenay Lake’ AREA ‘B’ • Boswell • Riondel • Arrow Creek • Huscroft • Sirdar • Crawford Bay • Canyon • Rykerts • Sanca • Kootenay Bay • Erickson • Kitchener • Wynndel • Kuskanook • Lister • Glenlily • Gray Creek • Twin Bays • Yahk • Lower Goat Riv. • Pilot Bay • Goatfell • Lower Kootenay • Kingsgate Band AREA ‘C’ AREA ‘D’– Affected AREA ‘D’ • Duck Lake • Meadow Creek • Ainsworth • South Reclamation • Lardeau • Mirror Lake • Lakeview • Cooper Creek • Shutty Bench • West Creston • Argenta • Poplar Creek (Flats) • Johnson’s Landing • Woodbury Vill. • Wynndel (part) • Howser • Fletcher Creek • Allen Division • Pine Ridge • Shroeder Creek • South Fork • Birchdale AREA ‘E’ AREA ‘F’ • Blewett • Balfour • Beasley • Crescent Beach • Harrop/Procter • Queens Bay • Taghum • Sproule Creek • Sunshine Bay • Longbeach • Willow Point • Six Mile • Bealby/Horlicks • Nelson to • Nasookin • Bonnington • Taghum Beach Cottonwood Lake • Grohman AREA ‘G’ AREA ‘H-THE SLOCAN VALLEY’ • Hall Siding • Erie • South Slocan • Appledale • Ymir • Porto Rico • Crescent Valley • Hills • Ross Spur • Nelway • Slocan Park • Summit Lake • Airport Road • Salmo North • Passmore • Krestova • Winlaw • Brandon • Red Mountain • Lemon Creek • Vallican • Sandon • Perry Siding • Rosebery • Playmour • New Settlement Junction AREA ‘I’ AREA ‘J-LOWER ARROW/COLUMBIA’ • Pass Creek • Glade • Ootischenia • Fairview • Thrums • Brilliant • Robson • Hudu Valley • Tarrys • Raspberry • Shoreacres Area J –Affected Areas AREA ‘K-THE ARROW LAKES’ • Renata • Applegrove • Whatshan Lake • Deer Park • Edgewood • Brouse/Glenbank • Brooklyn • Fauquier • Box Lake • Shields • Burton • Needles • Syringa • Arrow Park • Halcyon • Crescent Bay • Inonoaklin Valley MUNICIPALITIES AND ADJACENT ELECTORAL AREAS CASTLEGAR (Areas I and J) CRESTON (Areas A, B & C) KASLO (Area D) NAKUSP (Area K) NELSON (Areas E & F) NEW DENVER (Area H) SALMO (Area G) SILVERTON (Area H) SLOCAN (Area H)

2012-2013 CBT Application 7 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 51 of 59 Funding Recommendation

BOARD OF DIRECTORS – REGIONAL DISTRICT OF CENTRAL KOOTENAY - FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - Area/ Director Address Email Address Business Business Home Home Municipality Phone (250) Fax (250) Phone (250) Fax (250) A - Wynndel/E Garry Jackman Box 7, Site 8, RR #1 [email protected] 223-8466 223-8466 Shore - K Lake Boswell, BC VOB 1AO B John Kettle c/o Town of Creston [email protected] 428-5560 428-5567 428-5497 (CHAIR) Box 1339 Creston, BC V0B 1G0 C Larry Binks 1710 Evans Road [email protected] 428-9577 428-4977 Creston, BC V0B 1G7 (home office) (home office)

D Andrew Shadrack Box 484 [email protected] 354-2948 353-7350 353-7350 Kaslo, BC V0G 1M0 (cell) E Ramona Faust P.O. Box 1 [email protected] 229-5222 229-5337 Procter, BC V0G 1V0 F Ron Mickel 1848 Ridgewood Road [email protected] 825-0074 825-0079 Nelson, B.C. V1L 6J9 354-3406 (cell) G Hans Cunningham Box 13, [email protected] 357-9996 357-9676 Ymir, BC V0G 2K0 H -The Slocan Walter Popoff S-4, C-26, R.R.#1 [email protected] 359-7455 359-7400 Valley Crescent Valley, BC V0G 1H0 I Andy Davidoff 1657 Hwy 3A [email protected] 304-8233 Castlegar, BC V1N 4N5

J- Lower Arrow Gordon Zaitsoff 2005 – 14th Avenue [email protected] 365-8421 365-8412 365-8421 /Columbia Castlegar, BC V1N 3Z1 home office K- The Arrow Paul Peterson PO Box 128 [email protected] 265-4451 265-4451 Lakes Burton, BC VOG 1EO Castlegar Lawrence Chernoff c/o City of Castlegar [email protected] 365-7227 365-4810 365-7122 365-4810 460 Columbia Avenue (City) (City) Castlegar, BC V1N 1G7 Creston Ron Toyota c/o Town of Creston [email protected] 428-2214 428-9164 223-8471 Box 1339 (ext. 227) (Town) Creston, BC V0B 1G0 (Town) 428-6506 (cell) Kaslo Greg Lay P.O. Box 323 [email protected] 353-2311 353-7767 353-7184 Kaslo, BC V0G 1M0 [email protected] (Village) (Village) (copy both) Nakusp Karen Hamling c/o Village of Nakusp [email protected] 265-3689 265-3788 265-3322 265-3322 Box 280 (Village) (Village) Nakusp, BC V0G 1R0 Nelson John Dooley c/o City of Nelson [email protected] 352-5511 352-2131 Suite 101, 310 Ward St. (City) (City) Nelson, BC V1L 5S4 New Denver Ann Bunka PO Box 323 [email protected] 358-2552 358-7251 358-7141 New Denver, BC V0G 1S0 [email protected] (Village) Salmo Ann Henderson P.O. Box 1000 [email protected] 357-9433 357-9633 Salmo, BC V0G 1Z0 (Village) (Village) Silverton Leah Main c/o Village of Silverton [email protected] 358-7704 Box 14 [email protected] Silverton, BC VOG 2B0 Slocan Hillary Elliott P.O. Box 220 c/o [email protected] 355-2277 355-2666 (VICE-CHAIR) Slocan, BC V0G 2C0 (Village) (Village)

2012-2013 CBT Application 8 #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 52 of 59 Funding Recommendation SCHEDULE “C”

Recipient: Regional District of Central Kootenay

Program Name: Community Initiatives Program

Project Name: RDCK Community Initiatives 2011/12-2015/16

ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES

1. Community Involvement Process:

1.1. This guideline requires the Recipient to adhere to the following minimum community involvement process; it may go beyond these minimum requirements if desired.

1.2. The minimum community involvement process would consist of:

1.2.1. The community is made aware of the CBT’s Community Initiatives Program, including its application deadlines and processes, by newspaper ads, community newsletters and bulletins and/or community meetings.

1.2.2. There should be at least one community meeting set up to solicit community input on the projects brought forward to the local selection committee.

1.2.3. The community is made aware of which projects were approved so they have the ability to comment on the decisions made by the Recipient.

2. Communications and Advertising

The Recipient must conform to CBT’s Communications Guidelines as outlined in Appendix A of this agreement.

3. Unexpended funds:

Project funds advanced each year must normally be committed by March 31 of the subsequent year. If there are surplus funds in any given year, including funds returned from projects that do not proceed, the contractor needs to make application to CBT for leave to carry these unspent funds over to the subsequent year. All project funds must be distributed by March 31, 2016 and any unspent monies must be reported to the CBT in the annual report submitted by the Recipient.

4. Administrative Fees:

The CBT recognizes that there is administrative work and costs associated with the administration of the Program.

The following guidelines with respect to administrative fees apply:

4.1. The CBT will allow the Recipient to use up to 5% of the yearly allocation to defray their administrative costs. 4.2. This 5% must be taken out of the total allocation made to the Recipient.

IMS #3399 Page 1 of 2

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 53 of 59 Funding Recommendation 4.3. The Recipient agrees to track their administrative costs and will report to these in their final report to the CBT.

5. Minimum $30,000 in funding for municipalities, regional district areas and First Nations Bands:

The Recipient shall ensure that no municipality, regional district area or First Nations Band receives less than $30,000 in combined funding through CIP and AAP. Areas that qualify for AAP funding all receive more than $30,000 under that program’s funding formula. Consequently this minimum only applies to specific areas under the Community Initiatives Program. In calculating additional funding for this new requirement, CBT has added an additional 5% to cover additional administration.

6. Audit

The Recipient must include in their agreements with successful grant applicants the right to permit CBT, its agents, and/or its auditors to inspect all such records and reports at all reasonable times, including after termination of the Term and/or after termination of this Agreement. These audits would be conducted as part of CBT’s due diligence.

7. Project Eligibility Guidelines

7.1. Private Sector Proposals: In general, the allocations made to organizations are for meeting community/public needs rather than private needs.

7.2. Responsibility of Government: The Columbia Basin Trust Act requires that CBT funding does not relieve any level of government of its normal obligations. Program funding should not be used to fund basic infrastructure activities that are normally funded through the government tax base such as roads, sewers and water systems.

IMS #3399 Page 2 of 2

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 54 of 59 Funding Recommendation #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 55 of 59 Funding Recommendation #6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 56 of 59 Funding Recommendation 2012 COMMUNITY INITIATIVES PROGRAM FUNDING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FOR CITY OF NELSON FOR YEAR 2012/2013

Project NOTE: Combined funding amounts totalling more than $5,000 will only be Request Total Regist TOTAL FUNDS granted to REGISTERED Request from from other Budget Organization ered REQUESTED NPOs or other legal Nelson Electoral for the NPO from CBT entities. Applicants NOT Area project registered, may only receive a maximum of $5,000

CITY of CBT # NELSON #

ALL OTHER SECTORS Balfour Recreation Commission 1 141 (Barry Studer) Beginner's Golf Program YES 1,163.00 4,657.00 5,820.00 5,820.00 Electric fendinc and bear resistant garbage can project BC Conservation Foundation for Nelson and RDCK Areas E 2 214 (Joanne Siderius) & F YES 2,308.99 2,482.00 4,790.99 4,790.99 Columbia Basin Alliance for 150 Literacy (Joan Exley) Homework and Touring Club YES WITHDRAWN WITHDRAWN Glacier Gymnastics Club (Heather Safety Mat Purchase and 3 247 Beaudoin) Installation YES 1,434.00 4,302.00 5,736.00 8,736.00 Wilderness Immersion for Guiding Hands Recreation Society Self Esteem WISE teen and 4 182 (David Gilmour) Child bursary fund YES 695.00 3,475.00 4,170.00 55,600.00 Kaslo Area Youth Council (Patrick Kootenay Antique Motorcylce 5 106 Mackle) Website YES 750.00 14,500.00 15,250.00 19,700.00 Kidsport Nelson (c/o NRSC - Kim 6 249 Palfenier) Kidsport - Nelson YES 5,000.00 3,500.00 8,500.00 17,000.00 KAAP help for seniors and Kootenay Animal Assistance low income pet owners in 7 55 Program Society (Daryl Torres) need YES 2,500.00 NIL 11,000.00 11,000.00 Kootenay Climbing Association 8 265 (Shawn Tasket) Portable Climbing Boulder NO 2,480.00 1,000.00 3,480.00 3,480.00 Kootenay Lake Outdoor Skate Park Kootenay Lake Outdoor 9 195 (Rob Levesque) SkatePark YES 30,000.00 90,000.00 120,000.00 600,603.69 Kootenay Lake Youth Sailing Assoc Kootenay Lake Youth Sailing 10 53 (David Oosthuizen) Program NO 1,500.00 3,000.00 4,500.00 7,500.00

Nelson and District Chamber of Regional Visitor Gateway and 11 271 Commerce (Tom Thomson) Business Opportunity Centre YES 38,000.00 12,000.00 50,000.00 150,000.00 Hendryx Street Forest 12 201 Nelson CARES Society (Alison Roy) Garden Revitalization YES 4,100.00 NIL 4,100.00 4,660.00 Rosemont Bike Park - 2012 13 154 Nelson Cycling Club (Jan Korinek) improvements YES 4,950.00 NIL 4,950.00 15,571.00 Nelson Food Cupboard Society (Marya Skrypiczajko and Anna 14 67 Kirkpatrick) Harvest Rescue YES 400.00 330.00 730.00 7,610.00 Nelson Friends of the Family (Kim 15 248 Palfenier) Friends of the Family YES 4,000.00 9,500.00 13,500.00 17,750.00 Nelson Regional Sports Council Civic Arena Upgrade - Phase 16 250 (Kim Palfenier) Three YES 30,000.00 20,000.00 50,000.00 61,500.00 Preschool Upgrades and Nelson Waldorf School Parent Special Needs Care 17 156 Association (Georgia Argyle) Integration YES 2,499.50 2,499.50 4,999.00 9,200.00 Rhythm Roper Competitive 18 158 Skipping Assoc (Chris Mulvihill) Nelson Rhythm Ropers YES 4,000.00 2,000.00 6,000.00 6,150.00

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 57 of 59 Funding Recommendation 2012 COMMUNITY INITIATIVES PROGRAM FUNDING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FOR CITY OF NELSON FOR YEAR 2012/2013

Royal Canadian Legion Branch 51 19 211 (Bill Andreaschuk and Harry Kidd) Legion Branch 51 Renovation YES 15,000.00 10,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 Silverwing Econolgical Consulting Kootenay Bat Project - 20 119 (Juliet Craig) Landowner packages NO 250.00 4,700.00 4,950.00 14,950.00 Slocan Solutions Society (Angie 21 163 Elsmore who is unable to attend) Volunteer Bureau YES 4,000.00 5,960.00 9,960.00 9,960.00

Social Planning Action Network State of the Community - 22 224 (Phyllis Nash and Jenny Robinson) Nelson BC YES 4,900.00 NIL 4,900.00 7,400.00 South Selkirk Avalanche Advisory (SSAA) (Lorne Graham and Cheryl South Selkirk Avalanche 23 265 Smith) Advisory NO 4,999.00 34,993.00 39,992.00 50,000.00 The Canadian Red Cross Society Canadian Red Cross Health (Liza Soukoroff and Carmen Equipment Loans Depot 24 261 Harrison) Improvements Castlegar YES 4,595.00 4,594.00 9,189.00 11,027.00 The Kootenay Swim Club (Chris 25 11 Wright and Cherie Hanvold) The Kootenay Swim Club YES 1,200.00 5,200.00 6,400.00 8,000.00 Transition Nelson Society (Andre Piver, David Reid and Fiona Nelson Good Neighbours 26 263 Galbraith) Program YES 10,800.00 NIL 10,800.00 28,240.00 West Kootenay Brain Injury Reachout Community 27 10 Association (Kelly Johnson) Parnership YES 1,200.00 5,780.00 6,980.00 7,980.00 West Kootenay EcoSociety (Dave Kootenay Rideshare 28 268 Reid) Improvements YES 1,400.00 1,200.00 2,600.00 5,200.00 West Kootenay EcoSociety (Dave Kokanee Park Visitors Centre 29 221 Reid) 2012 YES 1,500.00 7,920.00 9,420.00 40,921.00 West Kootenay EcoSociety (Dave Cottonwood Marketplace 30 270 Reid) Repairs YES 4,450.00 NIL 4,450.00 4,450.00 Increasing jobs in Nelson by West Kootenay Social Enterprise producing a meaningful 31 127 Society (Janet O'Reilly) product YES 4,998.23 NIL 4,998.23 4,998.23 West Kootenay Women's 32 253 Association (Marya Folinsbee) Gender Action Project YES 250.00 500.00 750.00 74,170.00 West Kootenay Women's Association (Tasha 33 151 Bassingthwaighte) Outreach Program YES 2,000.00 4,000.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 Whitewater Racers Society (Tracy Punchard, Eric Sollid and Paul Ski Team Training Timing 34 209 Osak) System YES 750.00 3,750.00 4,500.00 8,058.00 Zero Waste Solutions (Michael 35 267 Jessen) Nelson Energy Saving Trust NO WITHDRAWN 1,800.00 WITHDRAWN 4,500.00

SUB TOTAL (Other Sectors) 198,072.72 468,415.22 ARTS CULTURE HERITAGE SECTOR

Adriana Bogaard (sponsored by the 36 281 Nelson History Theatre Society) Play Reading Series YES 2,500.00 1,000.00 3,500.00 9,300.00

Community Heritage Commission Nelson Architectural Heritage 37 102 (Brenton Raby) Walking Tour Brochure NO 4,686.05 NIL 4,686.05 4,686.05 Health Arts Society (Nicola 38 194 Evertson) Arts Way YES 2,000.00 9,700.00 11,700.00 32,250.00

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 58 of 59 Funding Recommendation 2012 COMMUNITY INITIATIVES PROGRAM FUNDING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FOR CITY OF NELSON FOR YEAR 2012/2013

High Muck a Muck Artist Collective (Nicola Harwood unable to attend 39 245 and will send another rep) Playing Chinese NO 4,000.00 NIL 4,000.00 30,000.00 Kootenay Literacy Competition Kootenay Literary 40 71 (Kristene Perron) Competition 2012 NO 1,000.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 NIL Kootenay Literary Society (Tom Elephant Mountain Literary 41 31 Wayman) Festival YES 8,000.00 12,300.00 8,000.00 27,703.00

Kutenai Art Therapy Institute Kutenai Art Therapy Institute 42 266 Association (Monica Carpendale) Community Open Studio YES 2,500.00 7,500.00 10,000.00 20,000.00 Nelson & District Arts Council 43 271 (Terran Orletsky) Nelson Artwalk 2012 YES 10,000.00 2,500.00 12,500.00 24,000.00 Nelson & District Museum, Archives, Art Gallery and Historical Digital Library : Recordings 44 231 Society (Leah Best) of Nelson and Area Artists YES 2,347.00 850.00 3,197.00 3,547.00 Nelson Fine Art Centre Society (Oxygen Art Centre) (Miriam Oxygen Art Centre Arts 45 246 Needoba) Education Program YES 10,000.00 3,000.00 13,000.00 56,900.00 Nelson History Theatre Society 46 280 (Richard Rowberry) Red Sky Over Nelson YES 2,500.00 NIL 2,500.00 4,500.00 Nelson History Theatre Society Kootenay Storytelling 47 282 (Barry Gray) Festival (Nelson) YES 4,999.00 500.00 5,499.00 12,000.00 Nelson Overture Concerts Society Nelson Overture Concerts (Denyse Kyte, Kathryn Shold and Society School Outreach 48 107 Jean Simpson) Program YES 2,500.00 NIL 2,500.00 4,135.00 Nelson Public Library (June Inspiration at your library : 49 149 Stockdale and Anne deGrace) enhancing creative learning YES 1,100.00 1,500.00 2,600.00 2,600.00 Rotary Club of Nelson Daybreak Colours of Nelson - a mural 50 216 (Amber Santos) project NO 3,999.00 1,000.00 4,999.00 19,300.00 St. Saviour's Anglican Church Men's Group (Greg Scott and Jim St. Saviour's Heritage Picture 51 109 Simpson) Preservation NO 1,050.00 NIL 1,050.00 3,552.84 EcoSociety Markets at West Kootenay EcoSociety (Dave Cottonwood, Baker St and 52 215 Reid and/or Kim Klassen) Marketfest YES 1,500.00 2,000.00 3,500.00 6,000.00 SUB TOTAL (Arts, Culture and Heritage Sector) 64,681.05 96,231.05

TOTAL (All Other Sectors) 262,753.77 564,646.27

2012 CBT-CIP FUNDS AVAILABLE 126,445.23 35% available to Arts, Culture and Heritage Sector 44,255.83 Balance available to all Other Sectors 82,189.40

#6(a) - 2012 CBT Community Initiative Program Page 59 of 59 Funding Recommendation