REGULAR AGENDA REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday,

REGULAR AGENDA REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday,
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Thursday, February 5, 2015
2:00 p.m.
REGULAR AGENDA
A.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
1. Regular Agenda – February 5, 2015
(Opportunity for Introduction of Late Items)
(Opportunity for Introduction of Late Items – In Camera Agenda)
RECOMMENDATION 1
That the Agenda of the February 5, 2015 Electoral Area Advisory Committee
meeting be approved as presented.
B.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES
1. Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 8, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 2
Page 1
That the minutes of the January 8, 2015 Electoral Area Advisory Committee Meeting
be adopted as circulated.
C.
DELEGATIONS
1. Vernon / North Okanagan Detachment – Policing Fourth Quarter Report
− Fourth Quarter 2014 Municipal Report
− Fourth Quarter 2014 Rural Report
− Fourth Quarter 2014 Report – Victims Assistance Program
RECOMMENDATION 3
Page 5
That the Fourth Quarter reports dated January 15, 2015 from the Vernon / North
Okanagan Detachment – Municipal and Rural Policing and the Fourth Quarter report
from the Victims Assistance Program be received for information.
2. Vernon / North Okanagan Safe Communities Unit
– Report dated January 26, 2015
– January Speed Watch Report
RECOMMENDATION 4
Page 24
That the report dated January 26, 2015 from the Vernon / North Okanagan
Detachment – Safe Communities Unit be received for information.
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Agenda – Regular
-2-
February 5, 2015
3. Larratt Aquatic Consulting Ltd.
LARRATT, Heather
– Cosens Bay Water Quality Monitoring
– (See Item E.2)
D.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
E.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Bylaw 2647-Soil Removal and Deposit
– Extract from the minutes of the Electoral Area Advisory Committee meeting held
on December 11, 2014
– Bylaw 2647
FOR DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Page 28
2. Cosens Bay Water Quality Monitoring
- Staff report dated January 7, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 5
Page 39
That the study titled Near-Shore Water Quality and Periphyton Production in the
Cosens Bay Cottage Development Area of Kalamalka Lake, 2014 be received for
information.
3. Rezoning Application
Ilott c/o Shortt (File No. 13-0049-F-RZ)
-
Staff report dated January 6, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 6
Page 86
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, Rezoning Bylaw No. 2586,
2013 which proposes to rezone the property legally described as Lot 1, Sec 25,
Twp 18, R8, W6M, KDYD, Plan KAP65384, and located at 1121 Enderby Mabel
Lake Road, Electoral Area “F” from the Non-Urban (N.U) zone to the Country
Residential (C.R) zone be referred to a Public Hearing.
4. Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
- Staff report dated January 7, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 7
Page 93
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, the City of Vernon be invited
to partner with the Regional District of North Okanagan in the development of a
Municipal Boundary Extension Protocol Agreement.
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Agenda – Regular
-3-
February 5, 2015
5. Proposed City of Vernon Block Annexation Referral
- Staff report dated January 23 2015
RECOMMENDATION 8
Page 102
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, that consideration of the proposed
City of Vernon Block Extension be deferred until a Municipal Boundary Extension
Protocol Agreement has been developed between the City of Vernon and the
Regional District of North Okanagan.
6. Sustainability Report
-
Staff report dated January 26, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 9
Page 152
That the Sustainability Report dated January 26, 2015 be received for information.
7. Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
- Staff report dated January 7, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 10
Page 155
That the Bylaw Enforcement 2014 Annual Report dated January 7, 2015 be
received for information.
8. Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
- Staff report dated January 15, 2015
RECOMMENDATION 11
Page 162
That the Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report dated January 15, 2015
be received for information.
9. Canadian Safe Boating Council
- Letter dated December 29, 2014
RECOMMENDATION 12
Page 172
That the letter and certificate received from the Canadian Safe Boating Council
dated December 29, 2014 be received for information.
10. Strategic Priorities Fund – Potential Projects
- Staff report dated July 24, 2014
FOR DISCUSSION
F.
BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS
Page 174
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Agenda – Regular
G.
-4-
February 5, 2015
REPORTS
1. Building Inspections Statistical Reports
− Reports dated December 2014
RECOMMENDATION 13
Page 182
That the December 2014 Building Inspections Statistical Reports be received for
information.
2. Building Inspection Revenue Report
− Report dated January 2015 (to be provided)
RECOMMENDATION 14
That the January 2015 Building Inspections Revenue Report be received for
information.
3. General Manager’s Report
H.
IN CAMERA
RECOMMENDATION 15
That, pursuant to Section 92 of the Community Charter, the regular meeting of the
Electoral Area Advisory Committee convene In Camera to deal with matters deemed
closed to the public in accordance with Section 90(1)(c)(e) and (k) of the Community
Charter.
I.
ADJOURNMENT
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item B.1
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
MINUTES of a REGULAR meeting of the ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE of the
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN held in the Boardroom at the Regional District
Office on Thursday, January 8, 2015.
Members: Director B. Fleming
Director M. Macnabb
Director R. Fairbairn
Director H. Cameron
Director H. Halvorson
Electoral Area “B”
Electoral Area “C”
Electoral Area “D”
Electoral Area “E”
Electoral Area “F”
Staff:
L. Mellott
R. Smailes
D. McTaggert
S. Banmen
A. Page
L. Frank
J. de Pfyffer
R. Baker
C. Elley
General Manager, Electoral Area Administration
General Manager, Planning and Building
General Manager, Engineering
General Manager, Finance
Sustainability Coordinator
Sustainability Coordinator
Small Utilities Manager
Community / Protective Services Manager
Clerk, Electoral Area Administration
Also
Present:
Alt. Director D. Hackett
Public
Electoral Area “D”
Chair
Vice-Chair
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m.
ELECTION OF ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIR and VICE-CHAIR
The General Manager, Electoral Area Administration called three times for nominations for the
office of Chair of the Electoral Area Advisory Committee.
Director Macnabb nominated Director Fleming. Director Fleming was declared elected, by
acclamation, as Chair of the Electoral Area Advisory Committee.
The General Manager, Electoral Area Administration called three times for nominations for the
office of Vice-Chair of the Electoral Area Advisory Committee.
Director Fairbairn nominated Director Macnabb. Director Macnabb was declared elected, by
acclamation, as Vice-Chair of the Electoral Area Advisory Committee.
Director Fleming assumed the Chair.
Page 1 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item B.1
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Minutes – Regular
-2-
January 8, 2015
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Regular Agenda – January 8, 2015
Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Macnabb
That the Agenda of the January 8, 2015 Electoral Area Advisory Committee meeting be
approved with the following addition:
− E.8 - JPW Road Maintenance Contract
CARRIED
ADOPTION OF MINUTES
Electoral Area Advisory Committee – December 11, 2014
Moved and seconded by Directors Cameron and Halvorson
That the minutes of the December 11, 2014 Electoral Area Advisory Committee Meeting be
adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Agricultural Land Commission Application
SMITH, R and L (File No. 13-0326-D-ALR)
Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Cameron
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, that the application of Reg and Lynne Smith
under Sections 17(3) and 21(2) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act to include land in the
Agricultural Land Reserve and to subdivide the property legally described as the SE 1/4 of
Section 14, Township 41, ODYD, Except Plan 28906 and located at 1092 Creighton Valley
Road, Electoral Area “D” be authorized for submission to the Agricultural Land Commission; and
further,
That the Agricultural Land Commission be requested to conduct a site visit.
CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS
Okanagan Basin Water Board (OBWB) 2015 Water Conservation and Quality
Improvement Grants
Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Cameron
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, that the following two applications be
endorsed for submission to the Okanagan Basin Water Board 2015 Water Conservation and
Quality Improvement Grant:
• Land Use and Water Quality Assessment of Swan Lake (Phase II)
• Water Quality Monitoring Cosens Bay, Year Two
CARRIED
Page 2 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item B.1
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Minutes – Regular
-3-
January 8, 2015
Electoral Area "F" Official Community Plan Review - Steering Committee Endorsement
Moved and seconded by Directors Halvorson and Cameron
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, that the Electoral Area “F” Official
Community Plan Review Steering Committee Membership be endorsed, as presented in the
report from the Planning Department dated December 11, 2014.
CARRIED
Shuswap River Bank Erosion Study
Moved and seconded by Directors Halvorson and Macnabb
That the River Bank Erosion Processes Along the Lower Shuswap River Report dated October
2014 be received for information.
CARRIED
Gunter Ellison Water Meter Upgrades
Moved and seconded by Directors Halvorson and Fairbairn
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, that water meters serving the Gunter Ellison
Water System be upgraded to be compatible with the new City of Enderby water meter reading
and billing system that came into effect on January 1, 2015; and further,
That water meters serving the Gunter Ellison Water System be upgraded at an estimated cost
of $4,500.00, funded from the Community Works Fund (Electoral Area “F”).
CARRIED
Southern Interior Local Government Association (SILGA) Call for Resolutions / Call for
Nominations
Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Fairbairn
That correspondence from the Southern Interior Local Government Association dated
December 16, 2014 be received for information.
CARRIED
Moved and seconded by Directors Fairbairn and Cameron
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, that Director Macnabb be nominated for the
position of Electoral Area Director Representative on the Southern Interior Local Government
Association (SILGA) Executive.
CARRIED
Play Book Q & A - Fire Service Minimum Training Standards
Ron Baker, Community Protective Services Manager provided a verbal update on Fire Service
Minimum Training Standards.
2015 Grants Project List
The Committee discussed information presented at the December 17, 2014 Committee of the
Whole Grants Workshop. This topic will be placed on the February 5, 2015 Electoral Area
Advisory Committee agenda for discussion regarding potential projects under the Strategic
Priorities Fund.
Page 3 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item B.1
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Minutes – Regular
-4-
January 8, 2015
JPW Road Maintenance Contract
Moved and seconded by Directors Halvorson and Cameron
That a letter be forwarded to MLA’s Foster and Kyllo expressing concerns regarding delay of
snow removal; and further,
That the letter propose sub-contractors be utilized during heavy snowfall events.
CARRIED
REPORTS
Building Inspections Statistical Reports
Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Halvorson
That the November 2014 Building Inspections Statistical Reports be received for information.
CARRIED
Building Inspection Revenue Report
Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Cameron
That the December 2014 Building Inspections Revenue Report be received for information.
CARRIED
General Manager’s Report
The General Manager, Electoral Area Administration provided an update on the following
matters:
–
–
–
–
Local Government Leadership Academy – January 19-21, 2015 (Attendance)
SILGA Representation (Vacant positions)
Discretionary Funds (meet with each Director to review 2015 budget)
2015 Projects and Priorities
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
CERTIFIED CORRECT
Chair
Bob Fleming
Deputy Corporate Officer
Paddy Juniper
Page 4 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
Quarterly Mayors Report
4th Quarter 2014 Oct - Dec
Vernon North Okanagan
Detachment
Committed to preserve the peace, uphold the law and provide quality service in partnership with our communities
1
Page 5 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
Superintendent R.G. Burgess
Officer in Charge
Vernon/North Okanagan Detachment
3402 - 30th Street
Vernon, B.C., V1T 5E5
Date: January 15th, 2015
Vernon/North Okanagan Detachment Policing Activity Report – 4th Quarter 2014
Re:
All crime statistics are featured at the end of this report. Statistics reflect monthly totals for October
through December, 2014 and comparisons of the previous year, 2013.
V/NOD recorded an 11.3% increase in criminal code cases this quarter, holding the year to date criminal
code increase to 10.8%. Property crime continued to trend downward this quarter, recording a 6.8%
increase; a significant reduction from the previous quarter. Property Crime, year to date, shows an
overall increase of 21.83%. Significant resource-draining serious crime incidents and high calls for
service demands continued to tax our human resources. Our ability to be consistent with proactive
enforcement activities remains somewhat diminished.
Three traffic fatalities were recorded in the Vernon/North Okanagan area this quarter. This brings the
total number of fatalities to 10 for the year to date. The 5 and 10 year average’s in the Southeast District
of BC is 10. Stop-check numbers are down slightly this quarter recording 31, down from 38 in 2013.
Traffic enforcement remains a strong initiative; we have seen increased traffic enforcement numbers in
most areas in 2014.
As a part of our communication strategy our efforts to ensure a collaborative working relationship with
partner agencies and stakeholders remains a top priority. Targeted Policing participates in a number of
regularly scheduled community meetings:
•
•
•
Interagency; monthly meeting held between RCMP, Parole, Adult and Youth Probation, and
Ministry of Children and Families to discuss current status, activities, monitoring and enforcement
as they relate to persons deemed a high risk to reoffend. Attendance was also made to a similar
meeting hosted by Salmon Arm, as offenders in Enderby area fall under supervision of Salmon
Arm Justice system.
Outreach; weekly meeting held between RCMP, Probation, Ministry of Housing and Social
Development, Interior Health, VJH, ACSS Team, Mental Health and Addictions and Mental
Health Forensic Services to discuss status and risk factors related to persons in our communities
that suffer from mental illness and are currently in the Justice System or have a likelihood to be in
the Justice System in the future.
Mentally Disordered Offenders; quarterly meeting held between RCMP, Crown Counsel,
Forensic Psychiatric Services, Probation, Vernon Jubilee Hospital and Interior Health to discuss
status and risk factors related to high risk offenders with a mental disorder.
This report reflects a representative sampling of our policing activities for the 4th quarter of 2014.
2
Page 6 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
GENERAL INVESTIGATION SECTION (GIS):
Serious Crimes Unit:
•
Child Sexual Assault(s) by Person in Authority - Three (3) Child Victims – Spallumcheen &
Vernon:
In November 2014 a Vernon teenaged youth attended the detachment to report historical sexual
abuse by their step relative. The suspect is a High Risk Offender known to be violent and
dangerous to police and lives in Spallumcheen. Vernon SCU assumed conduct of the
investigation, discovering that there were additional child victims. The suspect utilized coercion
and threats against the youth victims in order to prevent them reporting the incidents. Police
conducted surveillance and safely arrested the subject who has been charged with nine sexually
motivated offences and remains in custody. An RTCC has been submitted to Crown and
additional charges are pending. This matter is currently before the courts and a publication ban is
in place.
•
Impaired Causing Death – Vernon:
In October, 2014 the Vernon SCU assumed conduct of an investigation into a fatal MVI occurring
in Vernon. Investigation has determined that a motor-vehicle had been operated by a person
who had consumed more than the legal limit of alcohol. This vehicle ran a red light, striking a
passenger car, killing the driver and severely injuring a passenger. This investigation has
involved numerous police resources in addition to SCU, who have contributed to this
investigation: General Duty members, SED Traffic Services ICARS, Forensic Lab Services & the
Integrated Tech-Crimes Unit. Multiple judicial authorizations have been obtained and this
investigation is ongoing.
•
Mischief Endangering Life – ‘Drive By’ Shooting at Residential Apartment:
Complainant reported a shot fired into their apartment unit located in Vernon. A single round was
fired through the door into the occupied apartment by a suspect from a vehicle in the parking lot.
This matter is still under investigation by SCU.
•
Robbery of Financial Institution – Vernon Credit Union:
In December 2014 Vernon RCMP Members were dispatched to an armed robbery that had just
occurred at Interior Savings Credit Union. Staff reported to RCMP that a male suspect had
produced a firearm and, having obtained a quantity of money, was last seen leaving on foot. GD
arrived on scene with Police Service Dog handler. All additional and available RCMP police units
were set up to a perimeter; however the suspect was not located. Vernon SCU assumed conduct
of this matter which is still under investigation.
•
Mischief Endangering Life & Attempted Murder:
SCU is actively investigating the shooting that occurred in the City of Vernon in August 2014.
Significant unit resources have been committed to this investigation which is being investigated
utilizing Major Case Management Principles.
Domestic Violence Unit:
•
The V/NOD Domestic Violence Unit (DVU) continues to be very busy. Our DVU investigator
carries numerous files of her own in which she is the lead investigator and also provides an
assistance role on several other investigations where there is a high risk of escalated violence or
lethality. In October our DVU Investigator attended a multi-day conference to enhance her
expertise in conducting threat assessments.
3
Page 7 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
Targeted Policing:
Task Force (TF):
•
Project ENANNY; in late September Targeted Policing conducted a two day undercover operation
targeting a specific drug trafficking group controlled by a local PTEP Target. The operation
resulted in evidence of drug trafficking by the group and two trafficking cocaine and heroin
charges.
•
Targeted Policing continued investigation following completion of Project ENANNY and took
enforcement action against the drug trafficking group in early October. One male was arrested
while operating his vehicle and found to be in possession of cocaine and heroin resulting in
charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking. Another male was arrested while members
executed a search warrant at a residence in the 3500 block of 43 Avenue. The search located
cocaine, marihuana, ecstasy and cash resulting in possession for the purpose of trafficking
charges against the second male.
•
Project ENERD; in late November Targeted Policing conducted a four day undercover operation
targeting street level drug trafficking in Vernon. A total of 25 street level quantity drug purchases
of cocaine and methamphetamine were completed, resulting in 21 persons who will face charges
of drug trafficking.
•
Targeted Policing continued investigation of an identified drug trafficking group following
completion of Project ENERD. The group was identified to consist of several local drug traffickers
and two persons from the Lower Mainland controlling the operation. One Lower Mainland
suspect was an identified PTEP target and as such a Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit
team from the Lower Mainland attended to Vernon to assist with the investigation. In December
two search warrants were executed, one at a residence in the 3500 block of 24 Avenue and one
at a local hotel, resulting in both Lower Mainland targets being arrested. Cocaine, heroin, cash,
drug trafficking paraphernalia, a loaded .25 cal handgun and other weapons were seized resulting
in two males facing charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking and weapons charges.
Crime Reduction Unit (CRU):
At the conclusion of this reporting period there are 20 prolific offenders identified with nine of them
currently in custody. Of the 11 not in custody, five are residing outside Vernon/North Okanagan and one
is on 24 hour house arrest.
In November Crime Reduction welcomed Cst. Sue Kolibaba to the Downtown Enforcement Unit.
Investigations of Interest:
•
Crime Reduction continues to have the lead role on the investigation of several unsolved arsons
in the community, with three additional occurrences in this reporting period.
•
Crime Reduction investigated a Prolific Offender for a commercial break and enter that lead to
charges for that offence and additional theft charges. The Prolific Offender remains in custody.
•
Crime Reduction worked with General Duty on investigating a Prolific Offender for possession of
stolen property. The investigation led to an arrest for possession of a stolen license plate and
possession of cocaine and methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking. The Prolific Offender
remains in custody.
4
Page 8 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
•
Crime Reduction investigated a Prolific Offender for suspicious activity at the local casino. The
investigation led to an arrest for possession of stolen identification and other outstanding charges.
The Prolific Offender is currently on 24hr house arrest awaiting next court appearance.
Provincial Tactical Enforcement Priority (PTEP):
•
Targeted Policing continued participating in this policing priority of identifying, profiling, selecting
and targeting individuals and/or groups that are involved in criminal activity and due to their
association to gangs/organized crime pose a safety risk to the community.
•
There are currently four persons/groups identified in the Vernon North Okanagan area.
•
Enforcement action was taken on a PTEP target from the Lower Mainland who was operating a
drug trafficking group in Vernon. This action led to arrests, search warrants and two persons
facing drug trafficking and weapons charges.
RURAL GENERAL INVESTIGATION SECTION (GIS):
•
Marijuana Grow Operation: Provincial/Rural GIS assisted Armstrong uniformed members by
conducting surveillance on a marijuana grow operation and with the subsequent execution of the
search warrant, resulting in the arrest of three persons located inside the residence. Provincial
GIS assumed conduct of suspect interviews. Charges of Production of Marijuana are pending.
•
Shooting/Public Mischief: Provincial/Rural GIS investigated the shooting of a male at a rural
residence in Cherryville B.C. The investigation determined the male was victim of a self-inflicted
gunshot wound and that he and his associates had attempted to conceal evidence related to the
shooting and drug trafficking. The firearm involved as well as illicit drugs were recovered as the
result of a search warrant being executed at the residence. Drug, firearm and public mischief
charges have been approved against the male and a female. The trial is pending.
•
Provincial/Rural GIS assisted Armstrong uniformed members with the investigation of an
industrial accident which resulted in one fatality. Investigation determined that a transport truck
driver had died as the result of being crushed beneath cargo that slid off the trailer he was
unloading. Provincial/Rural GIS assumed conduct of initial scene management and interviews of
numerous witnesses. Armstrong uniformed members and Worksafe B.C. continue to investigate
this accident.
•
Provincial/Rural GIS assumed conduct of a child sudden death in the Grindrod area.
Investigation into the death of the three year old child continues with numerous interviews having
been conducted of the attending paramedics, physicians, nurses and other medical staff. The
parents and immediate family are cooperating with police and completion of the pathologist’s
report is anticipated in January 2015.
NORTH OKANAGAN SIGNIFICANT INVESTIGATIONS/INCIDENTS:
•
On October 17 members obtained a search warrant and searched a residence in Enderby. The
search did not locate the firearms as expected but did identify the occupants were dealing drugs
from the residence. The search resulted in the seizure of drugs and cash and arrests for
Trafficking.
5
Page 9 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
•
Halloween: additional resources were assigned to work in each community. The night did not
create any specific policing concerns.
•
The terrorist attack at the National War Memorial in Ottawa on October 22 prompted the creation
of an operational plan directed at providing an appropriate level of security for Remembrance Day
ceremonies. In response to the possibility of a threat against the public, military personnel and
police, officers attending the ceremonies in red serge wore their side arms while uniformed
members provided a security watch. The response from the public was encouraging as they
expressed their appreciation for the added police presence.
•
On November 12 Hwy 97 was closed for a period of approximately 20 hours as repairs to the
level crossing were being completed. The road closure blocked access to a portion of our policing
area. During the closure Chase RCMP assisted by covering emergency calls.
•
On November 13 a Spallumcheen resident, in a selfless act of kindness, provided a homeless
male with dinner and an evening at his home. Shortly after midnight as the homeless male was
leaving the home an altercation ensued between the two males. The homeowner suffered a
single stab wound to the abdomen and the homeless male fled the scene. The victim was
transported to hospital, underwent surgery and continues to recover. Several hours later the
homeless male was arrested walking near Armstrong. He remains in custody awaiting a court
appearance.
•
On November 17 on Hwy 97 near Falkland, a passenger van collided with the rear of a school
bus loaded with 14 teenagers. The school bus was travelling approximately 20 km/h after
dropping off some passengers when the van collided with the rear of the bus, pushing it forward
and into the ditch. One student who complained of minor neck pain was transported to hospital
and released later in the evening. A second bus and several parents attended the scene and
transported all bus passengers home. The driver of the van suffered a broken leg.
•
On November 17 an impaired driver drove off Sleepy Hollow Rd and collided with a tree. As result
of the accident the passenger in the truck suffered a broken leg. The driver provided breath
samples which revealed a blood alcohol level over the legal limit and was charged with impaired
operation causing bodily harm.
•
On December 3 officers responded to an industrial accident in Spallumcheen. A 50 year old male
truck driver from Kamloops was delivering a load of wooden beams. As he was removing the
straps from his load, a portion of the load shifted and fell on him. The victim was rushed to
hospital where he died from his injuries.
•
On December 28 a 16 year old Salmon Arm resident was involved in a fatal snowmobile accident
on Hunters Range. The youth had been riding with family and friends when he collided with a
snowbank and lost control, throwing him from his machine which rolled on top of him. The
youth’s father located him and initiated CPR. SAR was activated and a doctor was flown to the
scene. The youth was transported via helicopter to Vernon hospital.
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT:
•
Traffic enforcement remains an enforcement priority on our roadways. Vernon, Coldstream and
Vernon Rural total traffic enforcement (VT & TN) recorded a year to year increase of 9% over
2013.
6
Page 10 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
DETACHMENT
VIOLATION
TICKETS//WARNINGS
10
Armstrong
Spallumcheen
83
Enderby
33
Falkland
31
Lumby
65
Westside
21
DETACHMENT
VIOLATION
TICKETS
WARNINGS
Vernon
474
205
Coldstream
105
63
Vernon Rural
37
12
600
500
400
2011
300
2012
2013
200
2014
100
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
***This graph depicts the total traffic enforcement (Tickets & Warnings) results for Vernon, Coldstream & Vernon Rural areas***
FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION SECTION (FIS):
•
In the last 3 months Vernon FIS have averaged approximately 25 files a month. Calls have been
consistently steady and Vernon FIS has all 3 members in full rotation.
7
Page 11 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Results:
•
FIS received 59 calls for service in Vernon this quarter, a decrease from 93 the previous quarter.
FIS responded to 26 Calls in the North Rural, down from 33 calls.
OFFENCE
•
Vernon
Rural
Break and Enter
17
14
Theft Vehicle
10
5
Drugs
2
2
Theft
8
0
Mischief
2
0
Armed Robbery
2
0
Assault
2
1
Fatal/Sudden Death
1
1
Misc
12
2
Arson
4
0
During this quarter a total of 10 individuals were identified on 11 files through fingerprints or other
types of physical evidence.
POLICE DOG SERVICES (PDS):
•
Police Dog Services continue to provide a 20 hour per day on duty or on call coverage. The
Vernon Police Dog Service unit is again at full strength with 3 operational members. The on call
initiative, initially a shared service within the Okanagan Corridor, has now been altered, with each
PDS unit at Vernon, Kelowna and Penticton, providing their after hour availability for calls in their
respective areas. For the Vernon PDS unit this includes the policing jurisdictions of the integrated
Vernon/North Okanagan, Salmon Arm, Sicamous and Revelstoke Detachment areas.
RESERVISTS:
•
This past quarter two of our reservists continued to provide dedicated Traffic Enforcement within
the City of Vernon and Coldstream jurisdictions, as well as the Provincial jurisdiction as funding
permitted. A dedicated initiative with the District of Coldstream continues, in which funding has
been offered for an average of 4 hours of dedicated traffic enforcement per week, in predetermined areas of concern. Although areas have experienced changes in traffic flow which has
impacted on statistical data, there continues to be significant patterns of violators continuing in
most areas addressed by this initiative. Stats and hours continue to be tracked with reports
8
Page 12 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
provided to the District of Coldstream by the Operations Officer.
•
Our third Reservist, who is primarily involved in summer seasonal enforcement activities, also
provides liaison with our local SAR and PDS teams and during the winter is available to assist the
detachment with SAR activation incidents.
•
Reservists Traffic Enforcement:
Detachment
Vernon
Coldstream
Armstrong
Enderby
Falkland
Lumby
Spallumcheen**
Vernon Rural
Westside Road
Total
Patrols
12
12
3
1
3
0
2
1
4
38
V.T.
114
84
5
1
18
0
14
1
19
256
Warnings
46
58
7
2
6
0
4
0
7
130
SCHOOL LIAISON MEMBER:
•
The BC teachers strike created a late start to the school year and a very busy start up. School
District 22 Counsellors and VNOD School Liaison Officer collaborated on cyber safety
presentations dealing with Criminal Harassment (bullying) and Sexual Exploitation of Youth
provided to all the grade 6 and 7 students in the school district. This equated to about 3
presentations, 3 times a week, capturing approximately 750 kids that fall into (Online) high risk
age. To follow up the school presentations, we teamed up with North Okanagan Victim Services,
Canadian Mental Health Association and School District 22 and were fortunate to bring in
international speaker, Jesse Miller, on November 6th. This was a great way to engage parents
and bring them on board to encourage discussions at home in keeping our most vulnerable safe
online.
COMMUNITY EVENTS:
•
Officers from the Vernon North Okanagan Detachment dressed in red surge and spent a couple
of hours serving seniors Christmas lunch in both Vernon and Enderby. Four members, including
Cpl. Gerry Kovacs, Cpl. Ron Scholes, Cst. Nick Reimann, Cst. Kerri Parish and her son Mitch as
a little helper, attended Vernon’s Schubert Center this year.
•
In Enderby four Regular Members and one Auxiliary Member attend in red surge to serve
Christmas lunch to the seniors at the Enderby Seniors Center. Thanks to Cpl. Tania Finn, Cpl.
Mary Seniuk, Cpl. Joe Leeson, Cst. Steve Schenkeveld and A/Cst. Dale Fennell.
•
Sgt. Les Hobenshield has recently relocated to V/NOD and has begun coaching North Okanagan
ringette twice per week.
9
Page 13 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
•
Cst. Gary McLaughlin of South East Traffic Services and the Lumby RCMP kicked off the first
ever Emergency Services Fight Back Against Hunger campaign. They teamed up with BC
Ambulance, Lumby Fire Services and the Lumby Real Estate Association to fight hunger in that
community by collecting food to support the Lumby Food Bank.
•
Cpl. Yannick Lescarbeau is very busy as a coach with Kelowna Minor Football, manager for the
Kelowna Buckaroos - Youth Atom Development Hockey Club and manager for the Kelowna Girls
Hockey Youth Novice Div. Cpl. Lescarbeau is also involved with the Association for the Benefit of
Children with Disabilities Special Hockey Program.
MEMBER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Presentation was provided to South East District Traffic Services regarding possession of drugs
for the purpose of trafficking investigations;
One member attended an eight day course regarding the handling of confidential human
informants;
One member attended a five day search warrant drafting course;
Two members attended a five day intermediate surveillance course;
One member attended a file coordinators course;
One GIS member attended Digital Computer Field Triage (DCFT) training;
One member attended Introduction to wiretapping;
One member participated in a two day search warrant course.
HUMAN RESOURCES:
•
Recent arrivals include Cst. Marie Plamondon into the Armstrong Detachment office this past
quarter as well as the return of 3 members from maternity leave; 1 in Enderby and 2 in Vernon.
We expect Cst. BATTYE’s arrival in early January, assuming a position on the Watch in Vernon.
Exiting we have recently seen the departure of Cst. Giesbrecht and the official retirement of Cst.
Grenier in late October.
•
The integrated Vernon/North Okanagan Detachment has 101 established positions, of which only
93 are funded (8 City of Vernon positions not funded). As a result only 48 city positions can be
continually staffed with operational members on a balance throughout the year. Within the
integrated detachment we also staff 7 positions funded by the District of Coldstream, 3 by the
Township of Spallumcheen, 33 positions funded provincially and 2 additional positions funded
under Federal/Provincial sharing, in agreement with our First Nations communities. At this
moment we have 101 members on site, occupying all established positions. The positions which
are occupied beyond 93 are funded through slippage dollars created by medical and
administrative absences and this will require some additional adjustment as we enter into 2015;
changes occur weekly.
Funded Levels:
For the Quarter ending December 31st, 2014 our detachment billed at 48.11 members for the City of
Vernon and 5.81 for the District of Coldstream.
10
Page 14 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Statistics – City of Vernon
ACTIVITY TYPE
Total Files
Robbery
Assault (includes DV)
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2013
1181
2
32
N/A
11
11
8
65
3
67
29
45
8
8
48
Oct 2014
1271
6
34
10
3
19
9
20
76
2
99
37
46
10
9
42
Nov 2013 Nov 2014
1092
1072
3
1
28
34
N/A
10
2
3
16
11
12
4
21
12
53
20
1
2
60
67
26
45
45
30
17
15
4
10
51
44
Dec 2013
1031
2
22
N/A
1
10
5
17
29
1
65
13
35
22
10
60
Dec 2014
1072
2
35
12
4
10
5
15
17
66
27
31
15
6
48
Dec 2013
101
1
N/A
1
1
1
5
3
1
1
1
1
1
12
Dec 2014
131
2
2
2
3
3
8
1
2
1
16
4th Quarter Statistics – Vernon Rural
ACTIVITY TYPE
Total Files
Robbery
Assault (includes DV)
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2013
109
3
N/A
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
3
6
Oct 2014
115
1
1
1
6
2
2
1
2
8
Nov 2013 Nov 2014
100
142
1
2
N/A
1
1
4
5
1
3
3
4
7
3
1
3
12
10
11
Page 15 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Statistics – District of Coldstream
ACTIVITY TYPE
Total Files
Robbery
Assault (includes DV)
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2013
82
3
N/A
1
4
3
2
1
6
Oct 2014
122
2
1
1
1
7
2
5
1
2
1
2
Nov 2013 Nov 2014
78
64
2
N/A
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
8
4
Dec 2013
71
1
N/A
1
3
4
1
13
Dec 2014
82
3
1
1
2
3
1
10
4th Quarter Statistics – City of Armstrong
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
67
Total Files
Robbery
2
Assault (includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
1
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
1
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
1
Drug Offence
4
Liquor Offences
2
Impaired Driving
4
24 Hour Driving Suspension
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
71
Nov 2013
84
1
5
N/A
Nov 2014
67
Dec 2013
64
Dec 2014
65
2
1
1
3
N/A
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
3
12
Page 16 of 183
1
1
2
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Statistics – Spallumcheen
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
75
Total Files
Robbery
3
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
3
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
5
Drug Offence
1
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
5
24 Hour Driving Suspension
4
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
84
Nov 2013
65
Nov 2014
76
2
N/A
2
1
1
1
1
1
Dec 2013
70
2
N/A
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
Dec 2014
102
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
7
1
1
4
2
12
2
2
11
2
1
1
2
9
4th Quarter Statistics – City of Enderby
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
84
Total Files
Robbery
2
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
1
B&E Commercial
1
Theft of Vehicle
2
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
1
Theft Under $5000
2
Drug Offence
1
Liquor Offences
1
Impaired Driving
1
24 Hour Driving Suspension
4
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
88
Nov 2013
65
2
2
N/A
1
1
Nov 2014
89
1
Dec 2013
51
Dec 2014
79
1
N/A
2
2
1
1
1
5
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
4
2
4
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
2
5
13
Page 17 of 183
2
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Statistics – Enderby Rural
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
50
Total Files
Robbery
1
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
1
B&E Residence
1
B&E Commercial
1
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
1
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
6
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
64
Nov 2013
48
1
1
N/A
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
5
Nov 2014
63
1
1
8
1
1
2
3
1
3
5
7
Dec 2013
45
Dec 2014
62
1
N/A
1
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
5
1
8
4th Quarter Statistics – Village of Falkland
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
17
Total Files
Robbery
1
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
1
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
1
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
21
Nov 2013
20
Nov 2014
15
N/A
Dec 2013
9
Dec 2014
14
N/A
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
3
2
14
Page 18 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Statistics – Falkland Rural
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
43
Total Files
Robbery
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
1
B&E Residence
2
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
1
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
1
Theft Under $5000
1
Drug Offence
1
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
5
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
32
Nov 2013
42
1
1
1
Nov 2014
42
3
N/A
Dec 2013
51
Dec 2014
40
N/A
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
3
8
10
3
4th Quarter Statistics – Village of Lumby
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
39
Total Files
Robbery
1
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
1
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
1
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
2
Drug Offence
1
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
2
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
50
Nov 2013
39
Nov 2014
40
2
Dec 2013
33
1
N/A
N/A
Dec 2014
45
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
15
Page 19 of 183
1
2
1
2
6
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4th Quarter Statistics – Lumby Rural
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
51
Total Files
Robbery
1
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
2
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
1
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
1
Impaired Driving
2
24 Hour Driving Suspension
5
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
39
Nov 2013
60
1
1
N/A
Nov 2014
55
1
1
Dec 2013
53
N/A
Dec 2014
37
1
1
1
5
6
5
1
2
1
1
1
7
3
2
2
1
1
1
5
6
4th Quarter Statistics – OKIB
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
36
Total Files
Robbery
4
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
1
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
1
Theft of Vehicle
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
1
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
Impaired Driving
1
24 Hour Driving Suspension
1
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
35
Nov 2013
35
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
16
Page 20 of 183
Nov 2014
30
1
N/A
1
1
Dec 2013
32
1
N/A
Dec 2014
30
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
2
1
3
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
4 Quarter Statistics – Splatsin
ACTIVITY TYPE
Oct 2013
28
Total Files
Robbery
2
Assault (Includes DV)
N/A
Domestic Violence
Sex Offence
B&E Residence
B&E Commercial
Theft of Vehicle
1
Theft From Vehicle
Theft Over $5000
Theft Under $5000
Drug Offence
Liquor Offences
1
Impaired Driving
24 Hour Driving Suspension
4
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Oct 2014
28
Nov 2013
29
N/A
Nov 2014
27
1
1
Dec 2013
19
Dec 2014
18
1
N/A
1
3
2
1
2
17
Page 21 of 183
4
1
1
4
3
1
4
2
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
NORTH OKANAGAN RCMP VICTIMS ASSISTANCE
4th QUARTER ACTIVITY REPORT
October 1st to December 31st 2014
CASELOAD:
• Number of new files: 132
• Client type:
Female: 90
Male: 42
• Adult: 115
Child: 3
Youth: 11
Senior: 3
• Number of new clients from family violence: 26
• Current average monthly active caseload: 330
• Number of hours out on call: 89 hours
• Number of volunteer in-office service hours: 349 hours
• Number of volunteer stand-by on-call hours: 3151 hours
• Number of volunteers: 11
• Number of staff: 3
Full time: 2
Part time: 2
Casual:
HIGHEST NUMBER OF INCIDENT TYPES:
• Sexual Assault
• Sudden death
• Domestic Violence
• MVA
AREA OF COVERAGE:
• Vernon
• Coldstream
• Armstrong
• Spallumcheen
• Enderby
• Lumby
• Cherryville
• Falkland
CLIENT CONTACT/SUPPORT:
• Daily in office client support
• Court support
• After hour call-outs
Page 22 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.1
NORTH OKANAGAN RCMP VICTIMS ASSISTANCE
4th QUARTER ACTIVITY REPORT
October 1st to December 31st 2014
VOLUNTEER TRAINING/PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT:
• Program monthly training for volunteers & staff
• Volunteer one on one meetings
• Volunteer training session at Hospice, including a tour of Hospice facility
• Assistant Manager and Manager participated in the Lumby Food Drive
• Manager attended/helped facilitate Jesse Miller Community forum, and service provider presentations
on Social Media Education and Awareness
STAFF TRAINING & MEETINGS:
• Weekly staff meetings/daily program file reviews
• Manager attended ‘E’ Division Crime Prevention Services workshop and topics covered included, social
media, internet investigations and child pornography
• Manager completed Police Victim Services of BC (PVSBC) Respectful Conduct in the Workplace training
• Manager completed PVSBC Prevention of Workplace Violence training
• Manager and Assistant Manager completed (PVSBC) 2 day overview of Criminology in Canada workshop
COMMUNITY MEETINGS:
• Integrated Case Assessment Team (ICAT) meetings
• Violence Against Women in Relationships (VAWIR) committee meetings
• Suicide Prevention committee meetings
• Homicide/Suicide Bereavement groups planning meetings
• Child and Youth Advocacy Team (CYAC) meetings
OPERATIONAL MEETINGS:
• Detachment liaison meetings
• Detachment Unit/Section Heads meetings
• RDNO employee/liaison/staff meetings
• Program Manager and RDNO Administrator meetings
• Health and Safety meetings
• Quarterly Police Victim Services Region board meetings
Completed by: Anita EILANDER
Program Manager
Page 23 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.2
City of Vernon Protective Services
Regional Crime Prevention Programs Coordinator
Report to the Regional District North Okanagan
Board of Directors
Date: January 26th 2015
Summary
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coordinator attended SilverStar Mountain Ski Watch program for the 2014/15.
Attended Ministry of Highways/Transportation offices in Vernon met with Travis
Tormala, Approvals Technician regarding Block Watch signs / permits.
Coordinator met with ICBC area representative Christine Silver in Vernon,
regarding Speed Watch / Lock out auto crime / Bike Safety Rodeo programs
Coordinator attended Wellness Centre Lumby gave Seniors talk/advice
Attended JPW offices Armstrong and met with QA manager/ BW Signs.
Coordinator liaising with a possible 2 new Block Watch Captains for programs.
ICBC Speed reader board being used daily in the RDNO 5 Electoral areas
Coordinator gets daily crime updates from the RCMP occurrence logs.
Coordinator reads and responds to RCMP emails on GroupWise system.
Coordinator working on PowerPoint presentations in the SCU office.
Coordinator follows up on crime incidents with RCMP members.
Coordinator submits 3 monthly, 200 plus words, Crime/Safety articles to
newsletters in the RDNO electoral areas
Coordinator continues to perform ICBC Lockout Auto crime in the RDNO areas.
Continuing to promote the RCMP Block Watch program in the 5 Electoral Areas
which gives Coordinator communication with 462 households.
Regular emails sent and contact with Block Watch Captains and program
members with crime alerts, updates and Crime/Safety tips.
Coordinator continues to visit Electoral Areas on daily visits and talks to
resident’s community groups and businesses regarding safety / crime concerns.
Coordinator has worked 12 days in January.
Coordinator has taken 2 City of Vernon EDO days off in January.
Coordinator has taken 1 Statuary day off, New Year’s Day in January.
Coordinator has taken 5 Vacation days off in January.
Page 24 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.2
RDNO Area B (BX/Swan Lake) – Area C (BX Silver Star)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coordinator met with the 2 Captains of the new Block Watch programs in,
Pleasant Valley Road and Kalamalka Lakeview Drive regarding signage.
Coordinator attended Silver Star Mountain Resort on 2 occasions in January with
a City volunteer to perform the Ski Watch program for the 2014/2015 season.
Met with Chairperson of Hillview Elementary school PAC about road concerns
Attended Hillview Elementary School met with Principle to discuss programs
Attended BX School, met with Principle to discuss future programs.
Visited businesses and gave Robbery Prevention / Credit card Fraud advice.
Visited BX hiking recreational car parks regarding ICBC Lockout Auto crime.
Attended BX Dog Park, spoke to motorists regarding ICBC Lockout Auto crime.
Attended Keddlestone Road/ Wilson Jackson/Deer Park area and visited
numerous properties to increase the Block Watch membership in the area
Speed Watch program on 1 occasion on Pottery Rd, Hillview school zone.
Speed Watch program on 1 occasion on East Vernon Rd in January.
Speed Watch program on 1 occasion on BX / Silver Star Rd in school zone
Speed Watch program on 1 occasion on PV Rd, Vernon Christian school zone.
Maintaining regular contact with the 12 Block Watch programs in the area, which
gives Coordinator access to over 228 households / family members by the e-mail
system and Block Watch Captains set up.
Coordinator visits area 1 day a week, split into 2 morning/afternoon periods.
RDNO Area D (Lumby Rural) – RDNO Area E (Cherryville)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coordinator attended and spoke regarding Crime Prevention / Community Safety
advice to seniors at the Seniors Drop in and Wellness Centre in Lumby,
Attended Cherryville Community hall spoke with Parents/Tots group.
Met with Principle of Cherryville Elementary school to discuss future programs.
Coordinator attended Cherryville local businesses and advised on Robbery
Prevention / Credit card Fraud program to staff.
ICBC Speed Watch program 2 occasions on the Mabel Lake Road, Lumby in
school zone near JW Inglis elementary school.
Speed Watch program performed 1 occasion in January on Highway 6 Westbound,
near to Frank’s store in Cherryville.
Submitted Crime Prevention/Community Safety article for the Cherryvillan monthly
community newsletter.
Maintaining regular contact with the 1 Block Watch program in area, Whitevale
Road, Lumby which gives Coordinator access to 25 households / family members
Coordinator visits area 1 day a week, split into 2 morning/afternoon periods.
Page 25 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.2
RDNO Area F (Enderby Rural)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Met with Hunters Range Snowmobile Association to discuss local residents
concerns and complaints regarding member’s recent actions and behavior.
Visited Grandview Bench resident regarding noise pollution concerns.
Met with principle of Grindrod elementary school and discussed future programs.
Attended Grindrod Store and advised regarding Crime Prevention topics
Met with Block Watch Captain in Twin Lakes Rd/Gunther Ellison regarding signage
location within the community.
Met with Block Watch Captain in Grindrod to get updates regarding area issues.
Coordinator visited local businesses in Electoral Area F to give advice regarding
Crime Prevention topics and Community Safety issues.
Submitted Crime Prevention/Community Safety article to River Talk newsletter.
Submitted Crime Prevention/Community Safety article to Kingfisher newsletter.
Speed Watch performed on 1 occasion on Mabel Lake Rd Ashton Creek Enderby
Speed Watch program performed on 1 occasion in Grindrod during January,
monitoring traffic over bridge and through community, 50k zone.
Attended Deep Creek / Mallory Rd / Gardom Lake, Rural Enderby Block Watch
program and toured area with the Captain regarding increasing membership.
Visited Block Watch Captain in Grandview Bench regarding increasing
membership in the surrounding area and any community concerns.
Met with Block Watch Captain in Mara to discuss any community concerns.
Maintaining regular contact with the 7 Block Watch programs in area which gives
the Coordinator access to over 209 households / family members by the email
system and the Block Watch Captain set up.
Coordinator visits area 1 day a week, split into 2 morning/afternoon periods.
I submit my Coordinators January monthly report and my January ICBC Speed Watch
monthly report for your information and consideration,
Kind regards,
Roy Morgan.
Regional District of North Okanagan.
Crime Prevention & Community Safety Coordinator.
City of Vernon Protective Services
Page 26 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item C.2
ICBC SPEED WATCH MONTHLY REPORT for January 2015
RDNO Speed Watch PROGRAM COORDINATOR: Roy Morgan
PHONE: 250-550-7845 FAX: 250-260-5866 E-MAIL: [email protected]
Locations
(Intersection/ Corridor/
Highway)
# of Speed
Watch
Deployments
Total
Vehicles
Checked
Over 10
km/h
# of
deployments
with police
presence
# of
tickets
issued
(2 or 3 strikes)
Pleasant Valley Road
Vernon Christian school B
Pottery Road,
Hillview school B
Silver Star Rd, BX school C
1
63
0
1
120
0
1
272
0
East Vernon Road C
1
48
0
Mabel Lake Road, near JW
Inglis Elementary. Lumby D
Cherryville North Fork Road,
near Elementary school. E
Highway 6E, near Franks
store, Cherryville E
Highway 97N, Mara, near
Putula Recreation park. F
Mabel Lake Road, near Ashton
Creek store, Rural Enderby F
Grindrod, Highway 97S F
2
193
0
0
0
0
1
43
0
0
0
0
1
33
0
1
52
0
Mabel Lake Road, Kingfisher F
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
824
0
th
Grindrod 4
School zone F
TOTALS
Total visibility hours
Total admin hours
TOTAL HOURS
9
1.0
10
# of Warning Letters issued
# of Active Volunteers
# of Seat Belt Surveys
0
0
0
Comments: Locations chosen close to school zones and communities concerns regarding speed.
Page 27 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
Extract from the Minutes of a Meeting of the
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
Held on
Thursday, December 11, 2014
Bylaw 2647 - Soil Removal and Deposit Bylaw
Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Cameron
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, Soil Removal and Deposit Bylaw No.
2647, 2014 be amended as outlined in the staff report dated November 26, 2014; and
further,
That Soil Removal and Deposit Bylaw No. 2647, 2014 be given Second Reading, as
amended; and further,
That a Public Information Meeting be delegated to the Electoral Area Advisory
Committee to gather public input.
CARRIED
Moved and seconded by Directors Macnabb and Cameron
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors that soil removal and deposit
operations with valid Mine Permits be exempt from Section 3(c) of the Soil Removal and
Deposit Bylaw No. 2647.
CARRIED
Page 28 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
BYLAW No. 2647
A bylaw to regulate permits for the removal and deposit of soil material within Electoral Areas
“B” and “C” of the Regional District of North Okanagan.
WHEREAS Sections 723 and 797.1 of the Local Government Act, authorize the Board of
Directors of the Regional District of North Okanagan to regulate the removal of soil including
sand, gravel and rock, and the deposit of soil on any land within the Regional District, to make
different regulations for different areas, and to require permits;
AND WHEREAS the Board of Directors desires to regulate, and require permits for, both the
removal and deposit of soil within Electoral Areas “B” and “C” the Regional District of North
Okanagan;
NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan in an open meeting
assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
CITATION
1. This Bylaw may be cited as “Regional District of North Okanagan Soil Removal and
Deposit Bylaw No. 2647, 2014”.
BYLAW
1. ADMINISTRATION
This Bylaw applies to all land within Electoral Areas “B” and “C” of the Regional District
of North Okanagan.
2. DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this bylaw:
Administrator means the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) of the Regional District or
the officer delegated by the Board of Directors to act on the CAO's behalf.
Agencies mean Regional District of North Okanagan departments and advisory
committees, adjacent local governments and Senior Government Ministries and
Agencies.
ALR means Agriucltural Land Reserve.
Berm means an embankment or buffer built of Soil, with a minimum width of seven (7)
metres, for the purpose of reducing the transmission of noise and dust and providing
screening of the Soil Removal and Deposit, as specified within the terms of the Permit.
All Berms must be vegetated to provide an aesthetic separation between the Soil
Removal and Deposit and adjacent properties and nearby lots, parks, trails, green
spaces, roads and other uses.
Buffer Zone means a strip of land a minimum of seven (7) metres in width that is either
retained in a natural state or landscaped in accordance with the terms of the Permit to
Page 29 of 183
Bylaw No. 2647
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 2 of 10
provide a visual, aesthetic and sound barrier between the Permit area and adjacent and
nearby lots, parks, trails, green spaces, roads and other uses.
Deposit means the placement, storage, filling, spilling or releasing, directly or indirectly,
of soil on lands in the Regional District where the soil was not previously located.
Development Permit means a Permit issued under Section 920 of the Local
Government Act.
General Manager means the General Manager, Planning and Building of the Regional
District or staff delegated by the General Manager to act on his or her behalf.
Mine means a mine as defined in the Mines Act, as amended.
Mine Permit means a permit issued by the Minister pursuant to the Mines Act, as
amended.
Qualified Professional means a person who is registered or duly licensed as a
Professional Engineer or a Professional Geoscientist under the provisions of the
Engineers and Geoscientists Act.
Permit means a valid Permit for the removal or deposit of soil issued under this bylaw.
Permit Holder means the person who is the holder of a valid and subsisting Permit
issued under this bylaw.
Processing includes washing, screening, grading or crushing of Soil.
Professional Agrologist means a person registered as an agrologist under the
Agrologist Act, as amended.
Regional District means the Regional District of North Okanagan.
Remove includes the act of removing, excavating, or transporting soil from any lands
where it originally existed, including the movement of soil from one location to another
location within the same lot.
Soil means soil, sand, gravel, rock, silt, clay, peat, or any other substance of which land
is composed, or any combination of them, whether or not it is in or put in a stockpile or
storage facility, and does not include any compost or biosolids placed on land as a soil
amendment or conditioner.
Stockpile means any accumulation of soil which has been removed from its natural
position.
3. REGULATIONS
a) Applicability
All lands within Electoral Areas “B” and “C” in the Regional District are designated
Soil Removal and Deposit Permit Areas.
b) Requirement for Soil Removal and Deposit Permit
Page 30 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 3 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
i.
Subject to the other terms of this Bylaw, no person shall remove, deposit, or
cause to be removed or deposited any soil from or on any land in Electoral Areas
“B” and “C” unless the person:
a. has applied for and been issued a valid and subsisting Permit for such
removal or deposit; and,
b. carried out the removal or deposit in accordance with this bylaw and the
terms and conditions set out in the Permit.
c) Exemptions
i.
Notwithstanding Section 3.b, a Permit is not required where the removal or
deposit of soil:
a. is less than 350 m3 of soil in a calendar year;
b. is for the purpose of constructing or maintaining provincial roadways,
forest service roads, walkways or trails;
c. is on land owned by, or works undertaken by, the Regional District or its
member municipalities;
d. is on land managed under the Forest Act or regulated under the
Highways Act and for which a provincial soils permit has been obtained,
so long as the land continues to be used as managed forest or highways;
e. is related to and in accordance with a valid building permit;
f. is required as part of a solid waste processing and disposal operation,
including composting facilities, which has approval pursuant to applicable
federal, provincial and Regional District regulations and bylaws;
g. is required as part of the clean-up or remediation of contaminated soils as
directed and approved by the Ministry of Environment;
h. is required for the construction or maintenance of a private sewage
disposal system for which a sewage disposal permit pursuant to the
Health Act has been issued; or,
i. is undertaken as a permitted farm use on land located within the
Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), as specified within the Agricultural Land
Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation. (For certainty, soil
removal or deposit as or for non-farm uses require a Permit under this
bylaw.)
j. is undertaken under a valid active Mine Permit issued by the Ministry of
Energy and Mines prior to the adoption date of this Bylaw.
ii. The onus of demonstrating compliance with Section 3.c shall be at all times on
the person undertaking the removal or deposit of soil. The General Manager or
their delegate may request documentation to confirm that the conditions for
granting an exemption are satisfactorily addressed.
d) Permit Application
i.
A separate application for a separate Permit must be made for each parcel from
which soil is to be removed or onto which soil is to be deposited, as per Section
3.f.
ii. The Permit application must be signed by the applicant, and
a. if the applicant is not the owner, by all owners of the parcel, and
b. in the case of strata property:
Page 31 of 183
Bylaw No. 2647
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 4 of 10
i. by an authorized representative(s) of the strata corporation plus
the strata lot owner for the property where the soil is to be
removed or deposited; and
ii. by all strata lot owners if the soil is to be removed or deposited on
common property.
e) Permit Application Fees
An application for a Permit must be submitted with the appropriate fee as prescribed
by the Regional District of North Okanagan Development Application Procedures
and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008, as amended.
f) Permit Application Required Information
i.
Every application for a Permit shall be accompanied by detailed plans, data, and
specifications for the proposed site prepared by a Qualified Professional to a
scale of not more than 1:500, unless otherwise authorized by the General
Manager, showing the contour of the ground in its current state and shall contain
information regarding the proposed soil removal or deposit with respect to the
following matters:
a. all features including buildings, structures, tree cover, roads, bridges, and
natural watercourses;
b. land uses and designations, such as ALR, zoning, floodplain area,
environmentally sensitive area, and First Nations reserve land;
c. the proposed slopes which will be maintained upon completion of the soil
removal or deposit;
d. the proposed methods to control the erosion of the banks of the soil
removal or deposit;
e. the proposed methods of drainage control during the soil removal or
deposit;
f. the proposed methods to control noise and dust generated by the
proposed soil removal or deposit;
g. the proposed methods and locations of access to the site during the soil
removal or deposit;
h. the proposed grading and rehabilitation plan for the soil removal or
deposit site during and upon completion of the proposed soil removal and
deposit operation, copies of any remediation or site closure plans filed
with the Ministry of Energy and Mines and any Agricultural Land
Commission remediation requirements;
i. the proposed location of machinery, buildings, scales, and all other
proposed structures and improvements;
j. the proposed location of buffers and tree cover, and the location and
grade width of berms;
k. the proposed schedule for the removal or deposit of soil, indicating the
amounts to be either removed or deposited on a monthly basis;
l. the proposed routes to and from a soil removal or deposit area;
m. a traffic management plan, which would include but not be limited to a
description of the frequency of trucks, signage, placement of safety
control devices, and other traffic control that would minimize the
disturbance created;
n. copies of all other necessary approvals and permits from Federal and
Provincial authorities required by statute or regulation in connection with
the proposed soil removal or deposit;
Page 32 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 5 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
o. if the proposed soil deposit on or removal takes place on ALR land,
information on the past and proposed farming activity, the relationship of
the soil deposit or removal to existing or proposed farming activity on the
land, impact on the agricultural capability of the land, and a report,
prepared by a Professional Agrologist, identifying the positive benefit of
the proposed soil deposit or removal to agriculture; and,
p. any other information the Regional District deems necessary to review the
Permit application for the lands in question, as directed by the General
Manager.
ii. If a Mine, in addition to 3.f.i., the Permit application must include a copy of the
Mine Permit application or Mine Permit, if issued.
g) Permit Issuance
i.
Where
a. a complete application for a Permit under this bylaw has been submitted;
b. the proposed soil removal or deposit set out in the application conforms
with this bylaw, all other bylaws of the Regional District, and all other
applicable enactments;
c. the applicant for the Permit has paid to the Regional District the required
application fees and security; and,
d. Public notification has been undertaken and a public information meeting
has been held in accordance with Regional District of North Okanagan
Development Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No.
2315, 2008, and the Regional District Board has received a report of the
public information meeting from the applicant; and,
e. If requested by the Board of Directors, a public information meeting has
been held, or other public engagement methods have been completed
prior to consideration of issuance of a Permit that also require Mine
Permits, issued under the Mines Act and associated Regulations.
f. The application for a Permit under this bylaw has been referred to
Agencies for a 30 day period and all Agency comments are presented to
the Board of Directors prior to consideration of Permit issuance.
The Board of Directors may issue the Permit, issue the Permit with conditions or
refuse the Permit for non-compliance with the bylaw.
h) Permit Conditions
i.
All soil removal and deposit Permits issued under this bylaw are subject to the
following rules and regulations:
a. Permitted removal and deposit activities may only occur between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and 9:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. Sunday and statutory holidays, unless otherwise restricted by
the Permit.
b. No person may remove or deposit soil so as to do any of the following:
i.
pollute, obstruct, divert, damage, destroy, or introduce soil to any
body of water without the completion of a hydrological report by a
Registered Professional Hydrologist and the subsequent approval
Page 33 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 6 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
of the provincial Ministry of Environment, and if applicable, the
federal Fisheries and Oceans Canada;
ii. change local drainage to the detriment of a neighboring property;
iii. result in soil on the land or on adjacent land becoming unstable or
susceptible to erosion, slippage, landslide, slumping or settling;
iv. damage or destroy a building, structure, service or utility;
v. threaten the health, safety or welfare of the public;
vi. permit dust, dirt or noise to escape the property boundary that
may cause a private or public nuisance;
vii. in the case of deposit or removal of soil from ALR land, fail to
provide a positive benefit to agriculture;
viii. impair the agricultural capability of adjacent ALR lands; or,
ix. contravene a Regional District bylaw;
c. No person may remove soil or deposit in contravention of the Riparian
Area Regulations.
d. All descriptions, plans and specifications submitted by the applicant in
support of the Permit application and marked ‘FINAL’ by the Regional
District form part of and are incorporated into the Permit and the Permit
specifically limits soil removal or deposit in accordance with the
descriptions, plans and specifications accepted by the Regional District.
e. The holder of a Permit is responsible for the conditions of the Permit and
is responsible for any damage or harm to person or property caused
directly or indirectly by the work authorized by the Permit and saves
harmless the Regional District from all claims whatsoever in respect of
the work and Permit.
f.
A Buffer Zone shall be maintained at all times around the perimeter of
each lot subject to a Permit except to the extent required to maintain
vehicular access as indicated on the Permit. As a Permit Condition, a
Buffer Zone may be required to exceed seven (7) metres if adjacent to a
Residential, Small Holding (S.H.) or Country Residential (C.R.) Zoned lot.
g. If permitted by the Permit, Stockpiles of Soil will be maintained in such a
manner so that they do not adversely affect or damage adjacent
properties or encroach into Buffer Zones.
h. All vehicles and machinery used for soil removal and deposit shall be kept
outside of the Buffer Zone at all times.
i.
At the discretion of the Board of Directors, a Berm may be substituted for
a Buffer Zone to provide a visual, aesthetic and sound barrier between
the Permit Area and adjacent and nearby lots, parks, trails, green spaces,
roads and other uses.
ii. Furthermore, the applicant is required to receive approval from the Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure for any access to a Ministry road pursuant to
Section 5 of the Industrial Road Act and/or Section 48 of the Transportation Act
as a condition of Permit issuance.
iii. The issuance of a Permit does not constitute authority to conduct processing of
soil on the property if not appropriately zoned for such use.
Page 34 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 7 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
iv. No Permit issued pursuant to the terms of this bylaw may be transferred,
assigned or sold.
v. Before a Permit is issued, the applicant shall have first obtained all permits and
permissions required from the Regional District and any other authority having
jurisdiction and, without limiting such requirements, a Mine Permit if the Mines
Act applies to the Soil Removal and Deposit.
i)
Permit Duration
i.
The term of the Permit shall be one (1) year, or a greater term if required by the
Board of Directors; or,
ii. The expiration date of a Permit shall correspond with the expiration date of the
Mine Permit, issued under the Mines Act and associated Regulations, for the
proposed Soil Removal and Deposit.
j)
Permit Expiry
i.
Every Permit issued under this bylaw shall lapse and be without further force and
effect at the earlier of:
a. the soil removal or deposit authorized by the Permit is not commenced
within six months of the date of issuance of the Permit:
b. the soil removal or deposit authorized by the Permit discontinued for a
continuous period of twelve months or greater;
c. the soil removal or deposit authorized by the Permit is completed;
d. the subject property is transferred or otherwise disposed of; or
e. the expiry date identified within the Permit.
k) Security
i.
Soil removal or deposit operations that have a valid Mine Permit on the date of
the adoption of this Bylaw are exempt from Section 3.k for the properties that are
included within the Mine Permit. Section 3.k will have full effect on these soil and
deposition operations at such a time as the Mine Permit is deemed invalid or
inactive by the Ministry of Energy and Mines.
ii. For Soil Removal and Deposity that are defined as a Mine within the Mines Act
and prior to the issuance of a Permit, the amount of the security specified in
Section 3.k.iii , in the form of a irrevocable Letter of Credit in a form acceptable to
the Regional District, a certified cheque or cash, will be paid to the Regional
District.
iii. The amount of security to be provided to the Regional District by the applicant is
$5,000.00, plus $5,000.00 for each additional hectare or fraction thereof land to
be disturbed as authorized by the Permit, to a maximum of $100,000.
iv. The security shall be maintained in full force and effect throughout the Permit
period.
v. Subject to Sections 3.l and 3.m, the security required pursuant to this section
shall be returned to the permit holder provided that:
Page 35 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 8 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
a. the area authorized by the Permit has been reclaimed in accordance with
the plans submitted as part of the application; and,
b. a report by a Qualified Professional has been received by the Regional
District, confirming that the area authorized by the Permit has been
reclaimed in accordance with the plans, that the land is safe for any use
intended and that the terms of the Permit are completely satisfied.
vi. Within thirty days of receiving the report from the Qualified Professional pursuant
to Section 3.l, the Regional District must:
a. return the security to the Permit Holder; or
b. return a portion of the security to the Permit Holder, minus outstanding
soil removal deposit fees; or,
c. reject the report and give notice to the Permit Holder of the deficiencies in
the report or in the reclamation of the area authorized by the Permit.
vii. If the Permit Holder has not remedied any deficiencies referred to in Section
3.k.vi.c within sixty days of receipt of the notice, the Regional District may use the
security to perform the outstanding work.
viii. In the event that the Permit is revoked, suspended or cancelled by the Regional
District, the security shall be forfeited to the Regional District, in whole or in part,
and may be used at any time to remedy a noncompliance resulting from removal
or deposit operations or reclaim the property.
l)
Security Reporting
On completion of the work, and prior to expiration of a Permit, the Permit Holder shall
submit to the Regional District a report prepared by a Qualified Professional, at the
Permit Holder’s expense, certifying that upon completion of the removal or deposit
the work substantially complies with the terms of the Permit and the conditions
specified in the plans, specifications and reports prepared by the Qualified
Professional. This report shall also include a final determination of the volume of soil,
rock or topsoil removed or deposited calculated in cubic meters..
m) Quantity Reporting
i.
The Permit Holder shall, in the case of removal or deposit of soil for which a
Permit is issued:
a. maintain accurate and up-to-date records of all soil removed and
deposited and make these records available for inspection by the General
Manger on request; and,
b. submit to the General Manager an annual declaration by the 31st day of
January each year, certified by a Qualified Professional, detailing all
quantities of soil removed and deposited in the preceding calendar year
and signed by the Permit Holder indicating compliance with the provisions
of this bylaw and the Permit.
n) Permit Revocation and Reinstatement
i.
The General Manager, or their delegate, may issue a stop work order, with
immediate effect, acting reasonably, if soil removal or deposit activities have not
been undertaken in accordance with the terms and conditions of this bylaw or the
Permit.
Page 36 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 9 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
ii. The General Manager, at the direction of the Board of Directors, may, by delivery
of a 15-day written notice to a Permit Holder, revoke or suspend a Permit under
this bylaw where:
a. the Permit Holder has contravened this bylaw, or another bylaw of the
Regional District;
b. the Permit Holder has contravened a condition of the Permit authorizing
the Soil Removal or Deposit;
c. The Permit was issued by the Regional District on the basis of
descriptions, plans and specifications submitted by the Permit Holder in
support of the Permit application which were incorrect or misleading; or,
d. The Permit Holder failed or refused to comply with a stop work order
made pursuant to this bylaw.
iii. The Regional District may reinstate a Permit if:
a. the Board of Directors accepts the recommendations and conclusions
contained in a report from a Qualified Professional confirming compliance
with this bylaw or providing recommendations as to how the bylaw can be
complied with within a timely manner; or,
b. The Board of Directors is satisfied that the contravention has been
adequately addressed by the Permit Holder and all conditions of the
Permit have been met.
4. ENFORCEMENT
a) Enforcement
i.
The General Manager, Enforcement Officer, those persons retained by the
Regional District for inspection purposes, and Agents of the Regional District are
authorized individually or in any combination to enter at all reasonable times on
any parcel and into any building or structure to ascertain whether the provisions
of this bylaw are being observed.
ii. The General Manager, Enforcement Officer, or those persons retained by the
Regional District for inspection purposes, and Agents of the Regional District
shall comply with the site entry provisions of the Health, Safety and Reclamation
Code for Mines in British Columbia.
iii. For the purposes of ascertaining compliance with this bylaw the General
Manager may require a Permit holder to provide records of soil removal and
deposit and/or a specified report from a Qualified Professional.
b) Offenses
i.
A person commits an offence against this bylaw who:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
removes or deposits soil without a Permit where a Permit is required;
violates a provision of this bylaw;
fails to comply with a term or condition of a Permit;
fails to comply with an order or notice given under this bylaw; or,
refuses or hinders an inspection under this bylaw.
Page 37 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.1
Page 10 of 10
Bylaw No. 2647
c) Penalties
i.
Any person who violates any of the provisions of this bylaw, or fails to comply
with a Permit or order, or prevents or obstructs those authorized to enforce this
bylaw, commits an offence and on summary conviction may be liable to a penalty
of $10,000.00 per offence, plus the cost of prosecution, pursuant to the Offence
Act.
ii. Each day's continuance of an offence under this bylaw constitutes a new and
distinct offence.
SEVERABILITY
If any Section or portion of this bylaw is held to be invalid by a Court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalid Section or portion shall be severed and such invalidity shall not
affect the remainder of this bylaw.
Read a First Time
this
20th
day of
August, 2014
Read a Second Time, as amended
this
7th
day of
January , 2015
Read a Third Time
this
day of
, 2015
Approved by the Minister of Energy and Mines
(Local Government Act s. 723)
this
day of
, 2015
ADOPTED
this
day of
, 2015
Vice Chair
Corporate Officer
Page 38 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
REPORT
File No.: 3046.01.04
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Planning Department
DATE:
January 7, 2015
SUBJECT:
Cosens Bay Water Quality Monitoring
RECOMMENDATION:
That the study titled Near-Shore Water Quality and Periphyton Production in the Cosens Bay Cottage
Development Area of Kalamalka Lake, 2014 be received for information.
DISCUSSION:
At the February 19, 2014 regular meeting of the Board, a resolution was passed to apply for $9,700
from the Okanagan Basin Water Board (OBWB) Water Conservation and Quality Improvement Grants
for a Water Quality Monitoring program in Cosens Bay. The application for funding was approved by
OBWB and in May of 2014 the sampling program was initiated.
Within Cosens Bay there is a mixture of modern homes and older cottages stretching along three
kilometers of shoreline. Approximately 100 lots are perched along the shoreline with soils of variable
drainage, steepness and permeability. The goal of the water quality sampling program was to
establish if there was any influence or impact from septic systems in this area. The sampling program
contrasted water quality results and periphyton 1 growth in the fall to that of the summer (higher use /
occupancy) months. As noted in the executive summary of the report, and attached as Schedule A,
the 2014 data indicated that:
“the impact of cottage development on Cosens Bay water quality was minor and
not statistically significant. Total phosphorus 2 was significantly higher in summer
batched samples collected along the cottage area foreshore, but this effect was
probably true of the natural foreshore as well. Periphyton production is more
sensitive to environmental change than water chemistry and it did detect
increased periphyton production in the cottage area, particularly in the summer.
The impact of the current level of cottage development on the near-shore area
periphyton during the summer high-use period was measurable but not disruptive
of community structure.
No discrete influence from creeks or springs was detected in the 2014 water
quality samples from Cosens Bay. Because the water quality results from 2014
did not show significant differences between Cosens Bay foreshore and the
control foreshore of Kalamalka Lk Prov. Park where water quality differences
1
Periphyton communities- (algae attached to rocks near shore) are sensitive to subtle changes in nutrient
status. They are commonly used to identify changes in water quality that are difficult to detect using water
chemistry.
2
Phosphorus-major sources of phosphorus include human and animal wastes, soil erosion, detergents, septic
systems and runoff from farmland or lawns.
Page 39 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Report to EAAC- January 7, 2015
Page 2
should have been greatest, we can assume that the impact of the Cosens Bay
cottage area on Kalamalka Lake as a whole would be below statistical
significance and likely below detection limits. The same cannot be said for other
influences on Kalamalka Lake such as Cold stream Creek or Wood Lake inflows.
This study should not be used to imply that further cottage development or
increased use of existing buildings would be advisable".
The consultant has noted that a second year of sampling could provide the data necessary to
establish statistically significant results. The Electoral Area "B" Director has indicated interest in
pursing a second year of sampling in order to provide a stronger base line and opportunity for
comparison between sampling years. A grant request for a second year of sampling has been
included with the 2015 OBWB Water Conservation and Quality Improvement Grants. If the OBWB
funding request is not successful there is the possibility of funding the sampling program through the
Community Works Fund.
SUMMARY:
The results from the first year of Water Quality Monitoring at Cosens Bay have been analyzed and the
consultant, Larratt Aquatic Consulting Ltd. has concluded that "the impact of cottage development on
Cosens Bay water quality was minor and not statistically significant". The Electoral Area "B" Director
has indicated support for a second year of sampling and funding opportunities to support this are
currently being explored. If the OBWB grant request is not successful for sampling in 2015, funding
from the Community Works Fund can be sought.
Submitted by:
Endorsed by:
c-;~
Rob Sm 1 es, MCIP, RPP
General Manager, Planning and Building
'
~-proved forJiriclusion:
( l
I
/"'~rv
I David
Sewell
\Chief Administrative Officer
Page 40 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Near-Shore Water Quality and Periphyton Production in the Cosens Bay Cottage
Development Area of Kalamalka Lake, 2014.
Prepared for: Regional District of North Okanagan,
Sustainability and Planning
9848 Aberdeen Rd., Coldstream, BC V1B 2K9
1
Page 41 of 183
lARRATT
•
AQUATIC
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
2
Page 42 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Executive Summary
Based on the 2014 data, the impact of cottage development on Cosens Bay water quality was
minor and not statistically significant. Total phosphorus was significantly higher in summer
batched samples collected along the cottage area foreshore, but this effect was probably true of
natural foreshore as well. Periphyton production is more sensitive to environmental change than
water chemistry and it did detect increased periphyton production in the cottage area,
particularly in the summer. The impact of the current level of cottage development on the nearshore area periphyton during the summer high-use period was measurable but not disruptive of
community structure.
No discrete influence from creeks or springs was detected in the 2014 water quality samples from
Cosens Bay. Because the water quality results from 2014 did not show significant differences
between Cosens Bay foreshore and the control foreshore of Kalamalka Lk Prov. Park where water
quality differences should have been greatest, we can assume that the impact of the Cosens Bay
cottage area on Kalamalka Lake as a whole would be below statistical significance and likely
below detection limits. The same cannot be said for other influences on Kalamalka Lake such as
Coldstream Creek or Wood Lake inflows.
This study should not be used to imply that further cottage development or increased use of
existing buildings would be advisable.
3
Page 43 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7
1.1 Study Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Study Design ........................................................................................................................ 7
1.3 Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 9
2.0 Methods ................................................................................................................................ 10
2.1 Water Quality .................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Periphyton ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.1 Sampler Retrieval ....................................................................................................... 11
2.2.2 Processing of Periphyton Samples ............................................................................. 12
2.3 Analytical and Statistical Methods .................................................................................... 12
2.3.1 Determination of Substrate Position ......................................................................... 12
2.3.2 Variables and Statistical Analyses .............................................................................. 12
3.0 Results ................................................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Water Temperature .......................................................................................................... 15
3.2 Light on Substrates ............................................................................................................ 16
3.3 Water Quality .................................................................................................................... 17
3.3.1 pH ............................................................................................................................... 17
3.3.2 Electrochemistry Parameters: Conductance, Sulphate and Chloride ....................... 18
3.3.3 Chloride ...................................................................................................................... 19
3.3.4 Sulphate ..................................................................................................................... 19
3.3.5 Inorganic Nitrogen and Total Nitrogen ...................................................................... 19
3.3.6 Inorganic Phosphorus and Total Phosphorus ............................................................ 21
3.3.7 Turbidity ..................................................................................................................... 22
3.3.8 E. coli .......................................................................................................................... 24
3.3.9 Interactions between Water Quality Parameters ..................................................... 25
3.4 Periphyton Sampler Retrieval ........................................................................................... 26
3.5 Periphyton Growth ............................................................................................................ 27
3.6 Incidental Observations .................................................................................................... 35
4.0 Discussion.............................................................................................................................. 36
4.1 Water Quality .................................................................................................................... 36
4.2 Periphyton ......................................................................................................................... 38
5.0 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 39
5.1 Impact of the existing cottage development on water quality in Cosens Bay ................. 39
5.2 Other key influences on water quality in Cosens Bay ....................................................... 39
5.3 Impact of Cosens Bay on Kalamalka Lake water quality ................................................... 39
5.4 Most informative parameters ........................................................................................... 39
6.0 Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 40
4
Page 44 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Figures
Figure 1-1: Cosens Bay periphyton and water quality sample sites, 2014. Sites 1-6 were control
sites and sites 7-13 were cottage sites. Colored areas show composite water chemistry locations
in the cottage area. ............................................................................................................................ 8
Figure 2-1: Substrate samplers used in Cosens Bay Study, freshly deployed (left) and after 60 days
in Cosens Bay (right). ....................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 2-2: Boxplot Diagram ........................................................................................................ 14
Figure 2-3: Dendrogram Diagram .................................................................................................... 14
Figure 3-1: Water temperature at Site 1 over the course of the two sampling deployments, shown
as brown arrows. The grey shaded area shows the daily variation. .............................................. 15
Figure 3-2: Light logger data for the summer and fall deployments (1-6 = control area; 7-13 =
cottage area). ................................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 3-3: pH data comparing control sites and cottage sites ....................................................... 17
Figure 3-4: Conductivity at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014 ............................................................. 18
Figure 3-5: Chloride at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014. .................................................................. 19
Figure 3-6: Ammonia at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014. ................................................................ 20
Figure 3-7: Total nitrogen at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014 .......................................................... 20
Figure 3-8: Total phosphorus at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014 ..................................................... 21
Figure 3-9: T-P and T-DP at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014 ............................................................ 22
Figure 3-10: Clockwise from top left: artificial substrate in Kalamalka Lake during spring with clear
low turbidity water; artificial substrate in Kalamalka Lake during high turbidity (cloudy) marl
period in September; HOBO data logger coated in marl mineral crystal buildup versus clean HOBO
data logger ....................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 3-11: Turbidity at Cosens Bay by location and by sample, 2014 .......................................... 24
Figure 3-12: Correlation of chemical parameters dendrogram ...................................................... 25
Figure 3-13: Dendrogram of periphyton dry weight and volatile solids by substrate type, location
and season based on Euclidian distance.......................................................................................... 27
Figure 3-14: Dry weight of periphyton and marl that accrued on the samplers in 2014 ............... 28
Figure 3-15: Total volatile solids of periphyton and organic material that accrued on the stone tile
and styrofoam samplers in 2014 ..................................................................................................... 28
Figure 3-16: Periphyton abundance on stone and styrofoam substrates at Cosens Bay sample
sites, 2014 ........................................................................................................................................ 29
Figure 3-17:
Example of Fall 2014 incubated sampler from Cosens Bay ................................... 29
Figure 3-18: Proportions of periphyton algae groups in summer and fall 2014 by site in Cosens
Bay.................................................................................................................................................... 30
.......................................................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 3-19: Mean coefficients and their 95% confidence limits of standardized explanatory
variables of periphyton production in Cosens Bay, summer and fall 2014. Periphyton responses
included abundance and biovolume. .............................................................................................. 34
Figure 4-1: TDP in central Kalamalka Lake at BC MoE sample site, 1970 - 2013............................ 37
5
Page 45 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Tables
Table 2-2: Variables used in the statistical prediction of periphyton response in Cosens Bay
2014. ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 13
Table 3-1:
Ions Contributing to Electrochemistry Parameters .................................................. 18
Table 3-2: Artificial sampler deployment and retrieval in 2013 ................................................. 26
Table 3-3: Periphyton relative abundance and biovolume in Cosens Bay in the summer and fall
2014 ................................................................................................................................................. 31
Table 3-4: Periphyton relative abundance and biovolume in Cosens Bay in the summer and fall
2014 ................................................................................................................................................. 33
Table 3-5: Relative Variable Importance Values for explanatory variables found in Figure 3-19... 34
Disclaimer: This report is based on limited, cost-constrained research on a complex aquatic system.
Larratt Aquatic Consulting Ltd and its associates have striven for accuracy in data collection and
presentation. No liability is incurred by LAC or RDNO for accidental omissions or errors made in the
preparation of this report.
Suggested Citation: Larratt, H., and J. Self, 2014. Near-Shore Water Quality and Periphyton Production in
the Cosens Bay Cottage Development Area of Kalamalka Lake, 2014. Prepared for: Regional District of
North Okanagan.
6
Page 46 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
1.0
Introduction
1.1
Study Purpose
This study involved a water quality and periphyton sampling program in Cosens Bay to determine
if there is any influence or impact from septic systems in this area. There is a mixture of modern
homes and older cottages stretching along 3 km of shoreline. Approximately 100 dwellings are
perched on rocky shoreline and soil cover is generally thin. Sampling contrasted water quality
and periphyton growth in the fall to that of the summer months to see if the seasonal peak in
septic system use caused any detectable impacts on Cosens Bay.
The specific questions that this study set out to answer are:
1. Was there a difference between the Cosens Bay cottage area and adjacent Kalamalka
Lake Provincial Park shorelines in terms of water chemistry markers of septic influence or
in terms of periphyton growth, and were those differences , if any, more prevalent during
the high-use summer period?
2. Does the cottage development in Cosens Bay have an effect on the water quality of
Kalamalka Lake as a whole?
3. Were key influences on water quality detected in Cosens Bay other than the cottage
development?
4. What were the most useful parameter(s) of change and can an abbreviated low-cost
program suffice to monitor non-point source nutrient inputs to Kalamalka Lake in the
longer term and in other locales?
1.2
Study Design
LAC used the same sampling times as the existing Kalamalka Long-Term Monitoring Project which
runs monthly May to October. Chemistry samples went to Caro Labs, Kelowna and
algae/microflora samples were identified and enumerated by LAC. Collecting a sub-set of the
parameters already analyzed on Kalamalka Lake samples using the same methods, labs and dates
means that the Cosens Bay data can be compared against the main body of Kalamalka Lake data.
Water quality parameters that were collected include nutrients, turbidity, conductance, pH,
sulphate, chloride and E. coli. This list is compatible with the list currently used for Kalamalka
Lake samples.
A composite sample was collected because the focus of the sampling effort is to understand the
water quality of the sections of Cosens Bay as a whole versus the water quality from the discrete
sample points, and to keep analytical costs down. This involved batching 5 sub-samples from one
sample site into a single sample. LAC established and GPS’d 3 sites in the suspected impact area
and 1 in an undeveloped area of Kalamalka Lake Prov. Park as a reference control area. We took
advantage of the already completed SHIM (Sensitive Habitat Inventory Mapping) to help with site
selection. The total sample load was 4 samples per sampling trip. Sample trips were conducted in
July, September and October when the lake was still stratified, for a total of 12 samples. The
advantages of confining the sampling to these months include:
 Avoiding the confounding influences of whole-lake circulation
7
Page 47 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014


Avoiding the confounding influences of freshet (spring run-off)
The proposed months have long day-length and span two high-use inhabited months and
two low-use months
When effluents enter lakes, they mix rapidly and can be difficult to detect. Water quality samples
alone would only tell part of the story for Cosens Bay. Periphyton communities (algae attached to
rocks near shore) are sensitive to subtle changes in nutrient status. They are commonly used to
identify changes in water quality that are difficult to detect using water chemistry. We deployed
artificial substrates to avoid problems with differences in algae arising from differences in the
natural substrates they grow on.
The locations of the control and cottage water quality sample areas are represented as the
colored polygons and the artificial substrate sampler locations are marked by circles in Figure 1-1.
Figure 1-1: Cosens Bay periphyton and water quality sample sites, 2014. Sites 1-6 were control
sites and sites 7-13 were cottage sites. Colored areas show composite water chemistry locations in
the cottage area.
Among the household surveyed informally, there was a range of diligence in preventing impacts
to Cosens Bay. Some owners have intentionally replanted native shoreline trees/shrubs to
intercept nutrients, while others have lawn to the edge of concrete retaining walls. Similarly,
some properties have septic field at a reasonable set-back from riparian areas, while others are
serviced by an outhouse perched on the side of a steep hill with thin soil cover over bedrock.
8
Page 48 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
1.3
Definitions
The following terms are briefly defined as they are used in this report.
Term
Definition
Accrual rate
Algae
The rate function of cell settlement, actual growth and losses (grazing, sloughing)
Photosynthetic one-celled or multi-celled plants that are suspended in water
(phytoplankton) or attached to substrates (periphyton)
Autotrophic index is the proportion of an organic matrix which is viable algae, and is
calculated as (AFDM / chl-a) The inverse is known as AP or autotrophic potential
Organisms that dwell in or are associated with the sediments
The production within the benthos originating from both periphyton and benthic
invertebrates
Removal of metal from solution by organisms via adsorption, metabolism
Available for use or uptake by plants or animals
Bacteria-like algae with cyanochrome as the main photosynthetic pigment, often
associated with problem blooms that can produce toxins
Algae that have hard, silica-based "shells" frustules
Nutrient-rich, biologically productive water body, may produce excessive algae or
rooted aquatic plants (TP >0.03-0.05 ug/L)
The breakdown of thermal layering during autumn when the entire water column
mixes
Reduction of sunlight strength during transmission through water. It is even higher
when light passes through turbid water
Algae that can only function while suspended in a stationary water column
Autotrophic Index
Benthic
Benthic production
Bioaccumulation
Bioavailable
Cyanobacteria
Diatoms
Eutrophic
Fall Overturn
Light attenuation
Limnoplankton
Limiting nutrient
Marl
Microflora
Minimum flow
Myxotrophic
Nano plankton
Pico plankton
Peak biomass
Periphyton
Periphyton
production
Phytoplankton
Stratification
Varial Zone
Zooplankton
Precipitation of mainly calcium carbonate (CaCO3) in hard water lakes. Precipitation
of gypsum (CaSO4.2H2O), calcium chloride (CaCl2), phosphorus and bacteria may
also occur.
The sum of algae, bacteria, fungi, Actinomycetes, etc., in water or biofilms
3
The current operating regime that maintains a minimum flow of 142 m /s in MCR,
which does not refer to increased potential flows with the addition of the REV 5
turbine,
Organisms that can be photosynthetic or can absorb organic materials directly from
the environment as needed
Minute algae that are less than 5 microns in their largest dimension
Minute algae that are less than 2 microns in their largest dimension
The highest density, biovolume or chl-a attained in a set period on a substrate
Microflora that are attached to aquatic plants or solid substrates
Periphyton productivity measures include chl-a, biovolume, and abundance
Algae that float, drift or swim in water columns of reservoirs, lakes and slow-moving
rivers
Layering in lakes by thermal density in which the surface warm layer (epilimnion) is
separated from the deep cold layer (hypolimnion) by a discrete zone of greatest
temperature change (thermocline)
The zone between maximum and minimum water elevations over a specific period
Minute animals that graze algae, bacteria and detritus in water bodies
9
Page 49 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
2.0
Methods
2.1
Water Quality
Water quality samples were collected in a low-metals bottle Van Dorn sampler. Every sample
was a composite of five subsamples collected from one area at 50 cm depth in water that was 12 m deep (Figure 1-1). These subsamples were mixed in a triple-rinsed 4L container before decanting
into the sample bottles.
The sample bottles were provided by Caro Environmental Laboratories (Caro Labs) with the
appropriate preservatives pre-measured into the bottles. The filled sample bottles were placed
on chipped ice and delivered to Caro Labs in Kelowna, B.C. within 8 hours of collection. One
randomly chosen field duplicate was collected on the final field trip. Additional QA/QC protocols
were undertaken at Caro Labs. Samples were analysed according to current Standard Methods.
Samples were analyzed for:
NUTRIENTS: Nitrogen (Total, Nitrate + Nitrite, Ammonia) Phosphorus (Total and dissolved, low
detection)
GENERAL: Turbidity, Conductance, pH, Sulphate, Chloride
BACTERIOLOGICAL: E. coli
This list is compatible with the list currently used for Kalamalka Lake samples.
2.2
Periphyton
Samplers had both closed-cell styrofoam and honed stone tile as introduced substrates for
periphyton growth. A Tidbit light and temperature logger was attached to detect any variations of
light or water temperature between the samplers (Figure 2-1). The light loggers also recorded any
event where the sampler became dislodged. At the time of deployment, the elevation and
location of each sampler was recorded using a hand-held GPS.
The samplers were checked by L. Bevandick approximately every two weeks over the summer
deployment to ensure that they were positioned correctly, and to allow replacement should any
of the samplers become vandalized.
We deployed 6 samplers for July/August (60 day deployment) and 6 samplers for Sept/Oct (62
day deployment) along the foreshore of Cosens Bay cottage area and Kalamalka Lk Prov. Park
(control) to give us statistically workable data. We used both closed cell styrofoam and honed
stone tiles mounted in anchoring frames as the artificial substrate. These samplers were all
deployed at one meter depths in non-shaded areas, and were equipped with temperature/light
loggers.
A known surface area was sampled from the tiles and styrofoam at the end of each deployment.
Two samples were collected from the samplers. The styrofoam samples were cleared with
distilled water and sent to Caro Labs for volatile solids (ash-free dry weight (AFDW)) and dry
weight analyses. The dry weight includes inorganic silts, marl etc, while the volatile analysis
10
Page 50 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
includes only the organic algae/biofilm component. The second sample set from the tile was
analyzed by LAC for taxonomy and cells counts and biovolume. Two samplers were deployed in
each of the three water chemistry zones: 7 and 12 in zone 1, 11 and 13 in zone two, and 9 and 10
in zone 3 (Figure 1-1).
Figure 2-1: Substrate samplers used in Cosens Bay Study, freshly deployed (left) and after 60 days
in Cosens Bay (right).
2.2.1
Sampler Retrieval
Samplers remained in Cosens Bay for a total of 60-62 consecutive days for each season, and were
retrieved by boat. Styrofoam punches were randomly sampled from intact artificial substrate to
assess Ash-Free Dry Weight (total volatile solids) / total dry weight to give an estimate of the
carbon component (Stockner and Armstrong, 1971). The stone tiles and smaller punches of the
remaining styrofoam were collected with vials for taxa and biovolume analyses to give an
accurate estimate of live and dead standing crop (Wetzel and Likens, 1991). Substrate samples were
11
Page 51 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
placed in pre-labeled containers and refrigerated in the dark until further processing. Back-up
sample material was frozen in case a sample was damaged during taxonomic review.
2.2.2
Processing of Periphyton Samples
Two styrofoam punches were obtained from each artificial substrate. A larger 56.7 cm 2 punch
was chilled, the periphyton removed with a dental water jet tool and the samples were shipped
to Caro Labs in Kelowna, BC for analysis of dry weight and ash free dry weight. The remaining 6.6
cm2 punch was used for taxonomic identification that was completed by H. Larratt. Species cell
density and total biovolume were recorded for each sample. A photograph archive was compiled
from the samples. Detailed protocols on periphyton laboratory processing are available from
Larratt Aquatic.
2.3
Analytical and Statistical Methods
2.3.1
Determination of Substrate Position
Water and air temperature data obtained from the HOBO light/temperature loggers were used to
determine whether an artificial sampler was in the correct position and to give an indication of
periphyton accrual using the decline in measured light. Further, differences in the light received
by each logger could vary, since the angle of incidence at each sampler was not identical. The
average of the first three days in situ was used to determine the amount of light received by each
sampler. The light loggers functioned as substrates and were gradually covered in periphyton
over the 60 days in the lake. The first three days were used because this would give an estimate
of light reaching the sampler before the effects of periphyton growth could interfere with the
data.
2.3.2
Variables and Statistical Analyses
Non-detect values were converted to ½ detection level for use in this report. Nitrate, nitrite,
NO3+NO2, and E.coli were the only parameters with non-detects, those data sets were all mostly
or entirely non-detects as well. For this reason, water quality statistical analyses focused on the
parameters that did not have non-detect values.
Statistical tests of difference were frequently used to assess potential differences between the
control and cottage sites. The non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was preferred because water
quality data frequently violates the assumption of normal distribution used in other tests. The
Kruskal-Wallis test is a non-parametric equivalent of the students T-Test. The T-Test was still used
occasionally to quickly compare sets of data and guide further analysis.
Seven response variables for periphyton growth included: 1) abundance, 2) biovolume, 3) AFDW,
4) Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index and 5) Species Richness. These responses were modelled for
the full set of predictor variables that water chemistry and light intensity, to determine the
effects of the cottages on periphyton production. Data were combined down to a common level
to ensure each data point contained values for all parameters.
All descriptive statistics and statistical tests used the R statistical programming language (R
Development Core Team 2008) and Microsoft Excel. Model averaging was completed using the R
12
Page 52 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
package “MuMIn” (Barton 2014). In all analyses, we assumed that each sampler was independent
from every other sampler because growth on one sampler did not affect growth on another
sampler at a different site.
We used model-averaging to determine which sampled parameters most accurately predicted
periphyton production in Cosens Bay. Model averaging compares multiple explanatory variables
simultaneously and generates a series of numerical values describing the strength of a variable’s
explanatory power. The model averaged coefficient indicates whether the parameter positively
or negatively relates to periphyton growth. The 95% confidence interval around the average is
used to determine statistical significance. If the upper and lower confidence intervals were on the
same side of zero as the model average then the results were statistically significant. The
narrower the range between the confidence intervals, the stronger the explanatory power was. A
relative variable importance (RVI) value was also generated. This value was used to rank the
significance of various parameters. RVI values ranged from 0 (no explanatory power) to 1 (strong
explanatory power).
Table 2-2:
Variables used in the statistical prediction of periphyton response in Cosens Bay
2014. Environmental predictors used in 2014 modelling are shown in bold, while
the non-bold variables were considered but not necessarily included in the
modelling graphs because their AICc scores were low.
Physical
Variable
Average Daily Light Intensity (lux)
Site Type (cottage or natural)
o
Mean Temperature ( C)
Periphyton
response
Chemical
Water chemistry Cl, SO4, turbidity
Water chemistry:T-N, TDN, TKN
NH3, T-P, TDP, pH, conductivity
Definition
Average daily light intensity observed over the duration of deployment
This variable considered whether the sampler was installed along the foreshore in
the cottage area or in the natural control area in Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park
o
Average temperature over the duration of deployment ( C). This variable was
gives the temperature-related responses and helps identify seasonal effects
between the two deployments
These water chemistry parameters came from the 12 composite water chemistry
samples collected during this study – they had high AICc scores
These water chemistry parameters came from the 12 composite water chemistry
samples collected during this study – they had low AICc scores
Total volatile solids
Total volatile solids measures the amount of organic material that was on a
sampler after deployment
Dry Weight
Dry weight measures the amount of organic and inorganic (marl, silt) material
that was on a sampler after deployment
Taxonomic results (abundance,
biovolume, species richness)
Periphyton samples were reviewed for taxonomic responses including
2
3
2
abundance (cells/cm ), biovolume (microns /cm ), species richness (total
number of taxa identified in a sample), Simpson’s Index measure of diversity,
percentages of the major algae types, and distribution of the individual taxa
between cottage and control in the summer
To compare variables with values that ranged several orders of magnitude, we standardized the
data by subtracting the mean and dividing by two times the standard deviation for each
parameter. This process is known as centering and scaling.
13
Page 53 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Water quality data was compiled into a database that was compatible with the long-term
Kalamalka Lake database. Consistent with previous years, if a measurement was non-detectable,
it was entered into the database as ½ the lab reportable detection limit.
Boxplots of water quality parameters were generated using R to illustrate the variation between
season and location. A generalized boxplot is provided in Figure 2-2. The horizontal line in the
center of the box depicts the median, with the inter-quartile range (box) representing the 25th
and 75th percentiles, the whiskers extend to the highest value that is within 1.5 times the interquartile range, and outliers are represented by dots.
Figure 2-2:
Boxplot Diagram
Dendrograms were generated using R using Pearson’s correlation coefficient and/or Euclidian
distance. It clusters parameters by how closely they correlate to each other in a cluster analysis.
The level at which branches merge is related to their similarity. In the example below, 4 and 5 are
more similar to each other than the other data points.
Figure 2-3: Dendrogram Diagram
14
Page 54 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.0
Results
3.1
Water Temperature
As expected, water temperature followed a seasonal pattern. Temperatures were highest in July
and decreased gradually through the fall (Figure 3-1). The range of water temperatures each day
was greatest in the summer and tapered as fall approached. All loggers recorded virtually
identical water temperatures in both the control and cottage areas. A period of cold weather at
the end of July was recorded at all sites as a major drop in water temperature in Figure 3-1.
Figure 3-1: Water temperature at Site 1 over the course of the two sampling deployments,
shown as brown arrows. The grey shaded area shows the daily variation.
The mean temperature of the first deployment was 23.0±1.3 °C, and it dropped to 17.3±2.0 °C
during second deployment. Both of these ranges are well above the 15 °C threshold above which
microflora growth is rapid.
15
Page 55 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.2
Light on Substrates
As the light loggers sat in the lake, periphyton growth and marl deposition coated the
sensors. The large drop in the light received by the loggers between the first three and the
last three days of a deployment is graphed in Figure 3-2. Control sites 1 and 2 had a tall
cliff behind them that apparently reduced the light on the substrates, particularly in the
fall. Despite this, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of light
decrease between the loggers in the control and the cottage zones for the summer or fall
(T-tests p=0.65 and 0.22). Similarly, statistical evaluation did not find a significant correlation
between the light a given sampler received and the amount of periphyton that grew on it.
We would expect the amount of deposited marl to be similar at all sampler locations.
Mean Light Intensity Lux
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1
2
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
11
12
13
Site
Summer - 1st 3 days
Summer - Last 3 days
Mean Light Intensity Lux
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1
2
4
5
6
7
9
10
Site
Fall - 1st 3 days
Fall - Last 3 days
Figure 3-2: Light logger data for the summer and fall deployments (1-6 = control area; 7-13 =
cottage area).
16
Page 56 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.3
Water Quality
When reviewing the water chemistry results, it is important to remember that there were a total
of 12 composite near-shore samples collected in 2014. Sample collection occurred at the
beginning (Jul. 3), middle (Sep. 3) and end (Oct. 28) of the periphyton sampling period. The July
and September sample dates can be considered as part of the cottage high use summer period,
while the October sample occurred in the low use period prior to fall overturn.
Overall, the results from the Cosens Bay cottage and control area water quality samples were
comparable to the main body of Kalamalka Lake with the exception of the expected slightly
elevated nutrients, E. coli, turbidity and pH that are typical in shallow, productive near-shore
environments.
3.3.1
pH
Mean pH was 8.32 ± 0.11 (SD). One low sample from the cottage 1 area had a pH of only 7.98
and affected the data in Figure 3-3. pH averaged 8.38±0.02 in the control zone and 8.30±0.13 in
the cottage zones. This difference was not significant (Kruskal-Wallis Test, p=0.08).
Figure 3-3: pH data comparing control sites and cottage sites
All pH values met the objectives set for natural waters and were within the range recommended
for drinking water (6.5 – 8.5).
17
Page 57 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.3.2
Electrochemistry Parameters - Conductance
Specific conductance, total dissolved solids (TDS), alkalinity and hardness all measure the
concentrations of ionized constituents in water and for this reason, they frequently trend
together (Table 3-1). Cosens Bay conductivity averaged 398±4 µS/cm in the control area and 399±6
µS/cm in the cottages areas. This difference was not statistically significant (Kruskal-Wallis Test, p=0.85;
Figure 3-4). Like the pH results, the northernmost end of the cottage area called cottage 1 was
unique, and the unusual samples occurred on different dates (low pH on July 3; high conductivity
on Sept. 3).
Table 3-1:
Parameter
Alkalinity
Hardness
TDS
Conductivity
Ions Contributing to Electrochemistry Parameters
Equation or Principle Ions Measured
−
−2
−
−
−3
−2
Alkalinity = [HCO3 ]T + 2[CO3 ]T + [B(OH)4 ]T + [OH ]T + 2[PO4 ]T + [HPO4 ]T +
−
+
−
[SiO(OH)3 ]T − [H ]sws − [HSO4 ]
+2
+2
Mainly contributed by Ca Mg , and also Sr Fe Ba Mn
+2
+2
+2
3-2
Soluble salts that yield ions such as: Na Ca Mg HCO SO4 Cl- NO3- PO4+
+2
+2 +
+2
-2
3Mainly contributed by CaCO3; also (H Ca Mg K Na CI- S04 N0 HCO-, OH-
Figure 3-4: Conductivity at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014
18
Page 58 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.3.3
Chloride
The presence of chloride (Cl–) where it does not occur naturally indicates possible septic system
impact. Chloride values of 50 to 100 mg/L are common in septic tank effluent. Chloride was
elevated at all sites in September, indicating a lake-wide effect (Figure 3-5). No effect of the
cottage area was statistically discernible in the 2014 chloride data.
Figure 3-5: Chloride at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014.
3.3.4
Sulphate
Sulfate in lake water is primarily related to the types of minerals found in the watershed and is
high in Kalamalka Lake watershed, and contributes to its marl character. Sulphate ranged from
48 to 57 mg/L in the 2014 samples, with no discernable pattern by location in Cosens Bay.
3.3.5
Inorganic Nitrogen and Total Nitrogen
The common forms of inorganic nitrogen include nitrate, nitrite and ammonia. These are key
macronutrients that are repeatedly consumed, transformed and released in shoreline areas. A
1974 bioassay of phytoplankton in Kalamalka Lake suggests that nitrogen can co-limit algae
production with phosphorus (Buchanan and Soniassy 1974).
Throughout Kalamalka Lake, inorganic nitrogen is dominated by nitrate. Nitrate is rapidly
consumed in surface waters during spring algae blooms. Nitrate was non-detectable in all Cosens
Bay samples. Similar to Kalamalka Lake results from previous years, ammonia and nitrite were
usually non-detectable in 2014, as is expected in aerobic environments (Figure 3-6). Interestingly,
two samples had detectable ammonia in September at cottage areas 1 and 2, but there were not
enough samples to make this statistically significant. The large number of non-detectable samples
(NO3+NO2, were all 12/12 non-detects; ammonia was 10/12 non-detects) prevented meaningful correlations with
dissolved nitrogen.
19
Page 59 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Figure 3-6: Ammonia at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014.
Because TKN and TN concentrations were very similar, we know that most of the total nitrogen
occurred in organic forms such as algae proteins. Total nitrogen averaged 0.320±0.049 mg/L as N
in the control zone and 0.289±0.040 mg/L as N in the cottage zones. Total nitrogen was not
statistically different between the control and cottages in 2014 samples (Kruskal-Wallis Test, p=0.52;
Figure 3-7). An input of total nitrogen from cottage septic systems was not detected.
Since the control sites were the furthest south and the Cottage 3 composite sample was collected
furthest north and into the bay, it is interesting to note the apparent decrease in the ranges of
total nitrogen concentrations by sample location (Figure 3-7). This pattern did not occur in the
phosphorus results.
Figure 3-7: Total nitrogen at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014
Both total nitrogen and dissolved nitrogen concentrations were significantly higher in the
October samples than the summer samples at all sites (KW Test; p=0.001, 0.012 respectively), indicating a
seasonal trend.
20
Page 60 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.3.6
Inorganic Phosphorus and Total Phosphorus
Phosphorus is an important nutrient and it usually limits or controls lake productivity. Major
sources of phosphorus include human and animal wastes, soil erosion, detergents, septic systems
and runoff from farmland or lawns. Total phosphorus (T-P) represents the sum of dissolved and
particulate phosphorus in a water sample. In addition to biologically available SRP, total
phosphorus can include organic phosphates, P-bearing minerals and P adsorbed onto mixed
phases (e.g. clays, organic complexes, metal oxides and hydroxides) (Maher and Woo 1998).
With all dates combined, total phosphorus averaged 0.009±0.003 mg/L as P in the control zone
and 0.009±0.004 mg/L as P in the cottage zones. Total dissolved phosphorus was identical in both
the control and cottage zones and averaged 0.006±0.004 mg/L as P. The concentration of
phosphorus in the water was not statistically different between the control and cottages (KruskalWallis Test, p=1; Figure 3-8).
Figure 3-8: Total phosphorus at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014
When chemistry results were compared between the high use summer and fall seasons, there
were statistically significant reductions in TP and TDP from summer to fall at the cottages (KW
p=0.019 T-P; p=0.015 D-P), but not at the control (KW p=0.22 T-P; p=0.22 D-P). There was an observed
difference at the control as well, but it cannot be verified statistically due to the smaller number
of samples. The detected differences were: TP=2.7x higher; TDP=6.6x higher; TN=1.2x lower;
TDN=1.2x lower; in the summer than in the fall. These increased concentrations may seem large
but the range of concentrations in the data are all small (Figure 3-9).
The sharp decline in total and dissolved phosphorus concentrations at all sites in the fall was
statistically significant (Kruskal-Wallis Test, p= 0.006, 0.005 respectively). The difference between T-P and TDP
was small, indicating that most of the phosphorus occurred in dissolved forms.
21
Page 61 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
When each sample was plotted separately in Figure 3-9, a slight increase in T-P at cottage1 area
was apparent, but it cannot be tested statistically using only 2014 Cosens Bay data.
Figure 3-9: T-P and T-DP at Cosens Bay sample sites, 2014
3.3.7
Turbidity
Turbidity measures how much sediment, organic detritus and organisms suspended in the water
decreases its clarity. In Cosens Bay, turbidity collected in 2014 was consistent with previous year’s
data for Kalamalka Lake, and ranged from 0.5 to 1.1 NTU, despite the near-shore sampling
locations that are prone to wave–suspended particulates. Turbidity was highest in the early
September samples because of the summer marl deposition (Figure 3-10). Turbidity was not
significantly different between the cottage and the control sites (Kruskal-Wallis Test, p=0.71; Figure 3-11).
22
Page 62 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Figure 3-10: Clockwise from top left: artificial substrate in Kalamalka Lake during spring
with clear low turbidity water; artificial substrate in Kalamalka Lake during high turbidity
(cloudy) marl period in September; HOBO data logger coated in marl mineral crystal buildup
versus clean HOBO data logger
Increased turbidity in the September samples (Figure 3-11) was caused by the annual marl
precipitation which occurs in late July/early August every year (Larratt et al, 2014).
Turbidity measured in this study met BC guidelines protective of aquatic life. A turbidity spike
would have to exceed background by 2 NTU for a duration of 30 days to exceed the turbidity
guideline (BC MoE 2012). In a moderate turbidity system like Kalamalka Lake, these guidelines can be
exceeded during a marl event (Figure 10).
23
Page 63 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
Figure 3-11: Turbidity at Cosens Bay by location and by sample, 2014
3.3.8
E. coli
Escherichia coli (E. coli) bacteria normally live in the lower intestines of warm-blooded animals.
Their presence in water can indicate fecal contamination. There were six samples with detectable
E. coli and they were distributed evenly at all sites and not concentrated in the cottage areas. The
range of detected E. coli was non-detectable to 3 CFU/100 mL, with the high value occurring at
cottage area 3. E. coli appeared to correlate with turbidity (R=0.988).
24
Page 64 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.3.9
Interactions between Water Quality Parameters
The collinearity of water quality parameters can be shown visually in a dendrogram (Figure 3-12).
This dendrogram is based on the Pearson’s correlation coefficient and it clusters parameters by
how closely they correlate to each other.
Turbidity, chloride and sulfate group together in part as a result of the summer marl
precipitation. Regional groundwater can be a major source of alkalinity, calcium, magnesium,
sodium, potassium, silicon and chloride and may also contribute to their correlation.
Total nitrogen-TKN and TP-TDP formed the next most correlated groups. Nitrogen did not
correlate to phosphorus, suggesting independent sources or consumption mechanics.
Interestingly, conductivity and ammonia results suggested a correlation between these
parameters. As previously explained, the samples that had higher nutrient concentrations
occurred in both the cottage and control sample areas. The remaining parameters did not
correlate significantly.
Figure 3-12: Correlation of chemical parameters dendrogram
25
Page 65 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.4
Periphyton Sampler Retrieval
Periphyton samplers were deployed to detect subtle changes in water chemistry that may not be
detected in water chemistry sampling.
11 out of 12 summer substrates were retrieved after the summer incubation in Cosens Bay. Only
one was moved far from its position or stolen. 11 out of 11 fall substrates were successfully
retrieved at the end of October.
Table 3-2:
Summer (July 3– September 3)
Season
Reach
Periphyton Samplers
Site #
Natural
Cottage
Summer Total
Fall (Sept. 3- October 28)
Artificial sampler deployment and retrieval in 2014
Natural
Cottage
Fall Total
2014 Totals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
12
1
2
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
11
Retrieval notes
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler was found on its side at retrieval
No, sampler could not be located
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes. Only one stone tile out of 2 remained
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
12
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
Yes, sampler intact
11
23
26
Page 66 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
3.5
Periphyton Growth
Periphyton consists of two broad groups of micro-organisms, photosynthetic algae and bacteria,
and heterotrophic (non-photosynthetic) bacteria and fungi. Algal periphyton production can only
occur while substrates are submerged and exposed to light, while the bacterial biofilm
component also grows in the dark (Lear et al. 2009). Bacteria and fungi (moulds, yeasts) are
pioneering organisms that can dominate the periphyton initially and again after the periphyton
mat (biofilm) is well established (Fernandes and Esteves 2003). Drift pushed along the shore by currents
helps supply cells to populate new or disturbed substrates.
Both styrofoam and stone tile substrates were deployed in Cosens Bay to ensure that a suitable
artificial substrate was employed. Figure 3-13 clusters sites by substrate type, site type, and date
on the parameters of dry weight and total volatile solids to compare periphyton growth. The
difference between stone and styrofoam was greater than either summer vs fall or cottages vs
control.
Figure 3-13: Dendrogram of periphyton dry weight and volatile solids by substrate type,
location and season based on Euclidian distance.
As expected based on water temperature, there was more periphyton growth in the summer
than in the fall (Figure 3-14, 3-15). The summer had higher P and lower N suggesting that P may be
more stimulatory. Both N and P are expected to co-limit Kalamalka Lake phytoplankton (BC MoE
1974).
Dry weight was higher at the cottage sites than the control in the summer and fall deployments
(KW-Tests, p=0.028 and p=0.018)(Figure 3-14). Dry weight averaged 0.76±0.39 g at the control and 1.48±0.46
g at the cottages on the stone tiles during the summer. In the fall, dry weight averaged 0.22±0.08
g at the control and 0.42±0.12 g at the cottages on the styrofoam plates, while it averaged
0.019±0.09 g at the control and 0.285±0.10 g at the cottages on the stone tiles. The similarity of
the AFDW/DW results on both substrate types in the fall suggest that periphyton and marl
accrual was not affected by the type of introduced substrate. Also, the same species pool
27
Page 67 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
developed on these substrates so that species richness was not significantly different. However,
there was higher abundance on the styrofoam with most algae types were more numerous on it
than the stone tile (Figure 3-16).
Figure 3-14: Dry weight of periphyton and marl that accrued on the samplers in 2014
Total volatile solids averaged 0.11±0.06 g at the control and increased to average 0.19±0.05 g at
the cottages on the stone tiles during the summer deployment. This difference was large enough
to be almost statistically significant (KW-Test, p=0.076; Figure 3-15). A similar pattern occurred during the
fall deployment where volatile solids averaged 0.029±0.017 mg/L at the control and 0.037±0.012
mg/L at the cottages on the stone tiles. This difference was not statistically significant ( KW-Test,
p=0.41).
Figure 3-15: Total volatile solids of periphyton and organic material that accrued on the
stone tile and styrofoam samplers in 2014
28
Page 68 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February
5, 2015
-Item E.2
Cosens
Bay Study,
2014
There were no significant differences in periphyton abundance or biovolume between the
cottage and control sites during the summer deployment (KW Tests p=0.85, p=0.72). However,
abundance on the styrofoam plates was higher at the control in the fall averaging 2.7x10 6±1.3
x106 cells/cm² compared to 1.2x106±4.8 x105 cells/cm² at the cottages (KW-Test, p=0.045; Figure 3-16, 317). Both abundance and biovolume were significantly higher at the cottage site in the summer
compared to the fall (Abundance Summer: 2.76x106±6.57x105 cells/mL Fall: 1.22x106±4.75x105 cells/mL, KW Test
8
7
8
7
p=0.01; Biovolume Summer: 1.99x10 ±2.34x10 um³ Fall: 1.08x10 ±5.47x10 um³ KW Test p=0.016).
Figure 3-16: Periphyton abundance on stone and styrofoam substrates at Cosens Bay
sample sites, 2014
It is also interesting to note that the styrofoam substrate grew more periphyton that the stone
tile did in most sample pairs. Although it was not tested, stone tile is usually more analogous to
cobbles than styrofoam – the latter may provide organic molecules that accelerates initial
colonization by periphyton bacteria.
Figure 3-17:
Example of Fall 2014 incubated sampler from Cosens Bay
29
Page 69 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Algal periphyton can be subdivided into diatoms, green algae, cyanobacteria, flagellates
and golden algae. There was no significant difference in the distribution of the algae
groups among the Cosens Bay samples either by location or by season. Community
structure was very similar between the cottages and the controls (Figure 3-18). Figure 3-18
shows that the small-celled cyanobacteria may be numerous, but they account for far
less biovolume than the diatoms and filamentous green algae species. These graphs
also show greater abundance in the summer than in the fall, as is widely the case.
Figure 3-18: Proportions of periphyton algae groups in summer and fall 2014 by
site in Cosens Bay
Table 3-3 provides the most numerically important algae species by abundance and by
biovolume. Again, it shows numeric dominance by cyanobacteria but dominance of the
biovolume by diatoms and green algae. These lists were remarkably consistent between
seasons and between sites.
30
Page 70 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Table 3-3-A: Periphyton relative abundance and biovolume in Cosens Bay in the
summer and fall 2014
SUMMER
2014
Relative abundance dominant species
Relative
Abundance (%)
Planktolyngbya limnetica
Navicula spp.
Synechocystis sp.
Anabaena sp.
Achnanthidium minutissima
Oscillatoria sp.
Nano-flagellates
Mougeotia sp.
Nitzschia sp.
Other flagellates
80.1
4.3
4.1
2.3
2.2
1.9
1.1
0.9
0.5
0.5
FALL
Relative biovolume - dominant
species
Navicula spp.
Rhopalodia gibba
Mougeotia sp.
Synedra ulna
Cymbella cistula
Spirogyra sp.
Nitzschia sp.
Synedra acus
Synedra ulna var radians
Cymbella turgida
Relative
Biovolume
(%)
29.4
20.4
18.8
8.9
3.4
3.4
2.5
2.2
1.9
1.1
2014
Relative abundance dominant species
Relative
Abundance (%)
Planktolyngbya limnetica
Synechocystis sp.
Navicula spp.
Oscillatoria sp.
Achnanthidium minutissima
Mougeotia sp.
Synedra ulna var radians
Anabaena sp.
Pseudanabaena sp.
Nitzschia sp.
80.5
6.5
2.3
2.1
1.5
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
Relative biovolume - dominant
species
Mougeotia sp.
Rhopalodia gibba
Navicula spp.
Synedra ulna
Synedra ulna var radians
Cymbella cistula
Synedra acus
Closterium sp.
Nitzschia sp.
Spirogyra sp.
31
Page 71 of 183
Relative
Biovolume
(%)
19.5
18.1
15.9
14.7
6.0
3.4
3.3
2.5
2.4
2.0
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Table 3-3-B: Periphyton relative abundance and biovolume in Cosens Bay at the
control and cottage sites 2014
Control
Relative abundance - dominant
species
Planktolyngbya limnetica
Synechocystis sp.
Oscillatoria sp.
Navicula spp.
Achnanthidium minutissima
Anabaena sp.
Mougeotia sp.
nano/pico flagellates
Synedra ulna var radians
Nitzschia sp.
Cottages
Relative abundance - dominant
species
Planktolyngbya limnetica
Synechocystis sp.
Navicula spp.
Achnanthidium minutissima
Oscillatoria sp.
Anabaena sp.
Mougeotia sp.
nano/pico flagellates
Nitzschia sp.
Pseudanabaena sp.
2014
Relative
Abundance
(%)
79.9
5.6
2.8%
2.4%
2.0%
1.9%
0.8%
0.7%
0.5%
0.5%
Relative biovolume - dominant
species
Rhopalodia gibba
Navicula spp.
Mougeotia sp.
Synedra ulna
Synedra ulna var radians
Cymbella cistula
Closterium sp.
Nitzschia sp.
Spirogyra sp.
Synedra acus
Relative
Biovolume
(%)
24%
20%
16%
11%
4%
4%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2014
Relative
Abundance
(%)
80.7%
5.1%
4.1%
1.7%
1.1%
1.1%
1.0%
0.7%
0.6%
0.4%
Relative biovolume - dominant
species
Navicula spp.
Mougeotia sp.
Rhopalodia gibba
Synedra ulna
Synedra ulna var radians
Synedra acus
Cymbella cistula
Spirogyra sp.
Nitzschia sp.
Frustulia rhomboides
Relative
Biovolume
(%)
25%
22%
15%
12%
4%
3%
3%
3%
2%
1%
Species diversity indices did not show a difference in species richness between the
cottage and control sites in either season. An average of 17 – 21 species was identified
in every Cosens Bay sample. Similarly, the Shannon-Weaver diversity index showed no
significant difference between these site types (Table 3-4). Although it was not statistically
significant, species diversity tended to be slightly lower at the cottage sites than at the
control sites. Periphyton community structure was also consistent between summer
and fall.
32
Page 72 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Table 3-4: Diversity measures in Cosens Bay samples
Diversity measure
Site type Aug mean Oct mean
Species.Richness.Index
Control
19±3.56
Shannon.Weaver.Index
Control
Species.Richness.Index
Cottages
Shannon.Weaver.Index
Cottages 0.84±0.31 1.17 ±0.45
p-value
20±3.11
1.09±0.25 0.82±0.29
18±4.12
17±2.83
0.338
0.117
0.335
0.109
While there was little change in the distribution of the entire periphyton communities
on the Cosens Bay samplers, individual taxa did show unique changes. Periphyton taxa
that were statistically different between the control and cottage sites are listed in Table
3-5.
Table 3-5: Periphyton relative abundance and biovolume in Cosens Bay in the
summer and fall 2014
Fall
Summer
Season
Taxa
Significant change
Cyclotella ocellata
Navicula sp.
Epithemia sp.
Achnanthidium minutissima
more abundant at the cottage samplers , p=0.01
more abundant at the cottage samplers, p=0.05
was more abundant at the cottage samplers, p=0.05
less abundant at the cottage samplers, p=0.02
Synechocystis sp.
less abundant at the cottage samplers, p=0.05
Epithemia sp. was
less abundant at the cottages during the fall, p=0.07*
more abundant at the cottages during the fall, p=0.07*
Cocconeis placentula
* not quite statistically significant
All of these are diatoms except the cyanobacteria Synechocystis, and all of them are
common and wide-spread in a range of ecological conditions. Of these, Epithemia has
been implicated as a marker for P addition, Achnanthes minutissima, and Cocconeis
placentula for N addition and Navicula/Nitzschia diatoms plus filamentous green algae
for N + P combined (Abbot, 2012; Fairchild et all 1985; Jacobya et al. 1991; McCormick et al. 1996; Palmer
1969). These taxa may form a nutrient enhancement index for Kalamalka Lake but more
than one year of data would be required to confirm that this is a perennial trend and
not just an artifact of 2014 periphyton growth.
Figure 3-19 presents model average estimates for the strongest descriptive variables of
periphyton growth as abundance and biovolume with 95% confidence intervals. To
predict periphyton growth, the data points were combined to a site/season level in
order to have a value for each parameter at each point. All sampling parameters were
run through the model and the six strongest results were plotted. Light intensity was
included to demonstrate that incident light caused by sampler placement on the
substrate did not play a significant role in periphyton growth. TN and TP were also
33
Page 73 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
included as non-significant results. Positive averaged coefficients indicate that the
parameter relates to positive periphyton growth while negative values relate to
negative periphyton growth. Parameters with a 95% confidence interval that cross 0 are
not statistically significant.
Figure 3-19: Mean coefficients and their 95% confidence limits of standardized
explanatory variables of periphyton production in Cosens Bay, summer and fall
2014. Periphyton responses included abundance and biovolume.
Table 3-6: Relative Variable Importance Values for explanatory variables found in
Figure 3-19
Explanatory
Variable
Total Volatile Solids
Chloride
Sulfate
Temperature
Dry Weight
Turbidity
Light Intensity
RVI
Abundance Biovolume
0.07
0.57
0.21
0.17
0.48
0.15
0.24
0.10
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0
0
Figure 3-19 and Table 3-6 indicate that total volatile solids, and to a lesser extent, dry
weight positively predicted algae abundance and biovolume, probably because these
parameters all measure the amount of periphyton present at sampler retrieval.
Temperature positively related to periphyton growth because warmer water increases
34
Page 74 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
periphyton activity. Turbidity was negatively related to periphyton growth because it
reduces available light. Chloride and sulphate were also negatively related to periphyton
and positively related to marl. Nutrient concentrations did not predict periphyton
growth in the model averaging statistics. However, P was more correlated to periphyton
growth metrics than N in the 2014 results. TP correlated to periphyton because TP
decreased from summer to fall and periphyton was higher in the summer than the fall.
Table 3-7 compares nutrient and periphyton productivity parameters by time. A positive
correlation indicates that from summer to fall, these parameters increased/decreased together.
Total phosphorus results provided the strongest correlations with productivity metrics.
Table 3.7 Correlation table for nutrients and productivity Cosens Bay 2014
TP
TP
TDP
TN
Abundance
Biovolume
TVS
DW
3.6
TDP
TN
Abundance Biovolume TVS
DW
1
0.907883
1
-0.79655
-0.65996
1
0.89416
0.871235
-0.55193
1
0.929725
0.898936
-0.67597
0.9377
1
0.946271
0.879429
-0.87507
0.854329
0.906269
1
0.902457
0.826277
-0.91746
0.756709
0.831405
0.978591
1
Incidental Observations
LAC field staff checked the discharging pipe identified and GPS’d by R.
Schellenberg. They walked backwards from the pipe and found it received a small
creek. This creek was mapped by LAC using contours and is presented in Figure 1-1. The
creek was piped to permit development of cottage sites at some point in the
past. Water foaming and algae growth on the discharge pipe occurred because the
creek has organics and it contains sufficient nutrients to support attached algae.
The pipes attached to the underside of docks were all intakes equipped with foot
valves. These intakes are very shallow (usually 2-4 m depth) and therefore subject to
any contaminants the surface water may carry. Hopefully this encourages the cottage
owners to be careful when re-fuelling their boats. They should also be concerned about
pathogens introduced by Canada geese, gulls, dogs and greywater, because warm
surface water provides little protection other than dilution plus some ultra-violet
disinfection from sunlight.
No invasive aquatic species (AIS) such as Didymosphenia geminata (rock snot, invasive
algae) or invasive mussels were identified from the artificial substrate samplers. This is
encouraging since boating is prevalent in the cottage areas and boats are the most
common vector for AIS transport.
35
Page 75 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
4.0
Discussion
Eutrophication remains one of the foremost impacts of industrialization and population
expansion on aquatic ecosystems worldwide (Nelson et al. 2013). Septic systems and
agriculture are the most important contributors of phosphorus to Ellison, Wood,
Kalamalka and Osoyoos Lakes (BC MoE N.D.) Although at present the Kalamalka Lake would
be classified as oligotrophic, because of its special aesthetic nature, it deserves an extra
margin of safety to protect it from deterioration (BC MoE N.D.). This study involved a water
quality and periphyton sampling program in Cosens Bay to determine if there is any
detectable impact from cottage septic systems in this area.
4.1
Water Quality
Water quality parameters of interest in areas serviced largely by septic systems were
monitored at Cosens Bay cottage area and the adjacent control site at Kalamalka Lake
Provincial Park shorelines in 2014. These samples detected minor differences that, for
the most part, were not statistically significant. There were no statistically significant
differences in chemistry parameters between cottage and control sites in summer (July
and September combined or separately) or in fall (Oct) samples. Given that there were
only two summer control points and one fall control point, these statistical results are
not strong.
E. coli were distributed evenly at all sites and not concentrated in the cottage areas.
Instead these bacteria correlated with turbidity and suggest that sediment resuspension may return viable bacteria to the water column. These results did not
indicate fecal contamination from cottage septic systems.
Mean total nitrogen was actually higher in the control site samples compared to the
cottages, and dissolved nitrate/nitrite/ammonia concentrations were seldom above
detection limits in either site. These findings indicate that the effect of septic effluents
on nitrogen was too low to detect using water chemistry. Similarly, there was virtually
no difference in total and dissolved phosphorus concentrations between the control and
cottage areas.
When the data are broken up by site type, TP and TDP were significantly higher and TN
and TDN were possibly lower at the cottages during the summer compared to the fall.
The same seasonal effect occurred at the control site but analyses from the latter were
hampered by smaller sample size. Thus conclusive effects of the cottage development
were not detected in analyses of either key nutrient.
T-P averaged about 0.006 mg/L in the 2014 Cosens Bay foreshore samples. To put this
in context, BC MoE phosphorus data showed that until the end of 1977, total
phosphorus values were less than about 0.005 mg/L at spring overturn in Kalamalka
Lake but rose to about 0.008 mg/L by the 1980’s (Figure 4.1). More recently, phosphorus
concentrations declined to 0.003 - 0.004 mg/L T-P, probably in response to sewer efforts
on Wood and Kalamalka lakes, and differing freshet conditions. We would expect
phosphorus concentrations to be higher in the near-shore areas through influences
including increased biological activity and re-suspension/re-solubilizing of marl
36
Page 76 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
sediments. Elevation of foreshore nutrient concentrations compared to open water is
common in lakes (Wetzel and Likens 1991; Buchanan and Soniassy 1974). To our knowledge, there are
no other foreshore water quality studies on Kalamalka Lake to compare with the Cosens
Bay results.
Phosphorus inputs from the Cosens Bay area are unlikely to exert a detectable influence,
especially relative to Wood and Coldstream Creek inputs.
Figure 4-1: TDP in central Kalamalka Lake at BC MoE sample site, 1970 - 2013
Other findings from the 2014 water quality sampling showed that many chemistry
parameters correlated with one another, but not the nitrogen species with the
phosphorus species as could be expected if septic influence was severe.
The effects of the lake-wide marl precipitation in summer 2014 were detected and
include increased turbidity, and correlated changes in sulphate, chloride and
phosphorus concentrations. In the near-shore area, periphyton photosynthesis
accelerates marl deposition by using carbon dioxide (CO2), which raised pH and
converted alkalinity to the carbonate (CO32-) form. Marl co-precipitates phosphorus but
not nitrogen, thus it helps control algae growth in marl lakes such as Kalamalka and it
would contribute to the lack of correlation between the N’s and P’s in the Cosens Bay
samples. Marl does not provide permanent phosphorus storage. It can be liberated as
marl seasonally dissolves and would make this P locally available to the periphyton mat.
Marl may also induce calcium chloride precipitation (CaCl2) and it also can form around
suspended diatoms and bacteria, which causes this organic material to settle out as part
of the marl. Deposited marl increased the dry weight of the accumulated Cosens Bay
periphyton, and the volatile (organic) solids. Septic systems contribute chloride, but
groundwater can also be a natural source of chloride, making a septic contribution
harder to detect. The chloride concentrations in Cosens Bay samples averaged
7.52±0.64 mg/L at the control and 7.57±0.63 mg/L at the cottages, while open water
samples from the North Arm averaged 7.38±0.16 mg/L from July – October 2014. These
are very similar and do not suggest Cl loading unique to Cosens Bay.
37
Page 77 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Although the potential existed for water quality influence from Cosens Creek or the
piped creek, influences from these small creeks were not detected in the 2014 water
chemistry analyses. Similarly, there are numerous accounts of underwater springs along
the Kalamalka Lake shoreline but no discrete influences from these springs were
detected in the batched samples.
Because the water quality results from 2014 did not show significant differences
between Cosens Bay foreshore and the control foreshore of Kalamalka Lk Prov. Park
where water quality differences should have been greatest, we can assume that the
impact of the Cosens Bay cottage area on Kalamalka Lake as a whole would be below
statistical significance and likely below detection limits.
4.2
Periphyton
Periphyton are especially useful as biological indicators of nutrient sources into lakes.
Localized nutrient inputs such as streams or septic fields can cause identifiable changes
in periphyton attached to nearby substrates (Stevenson and Stoermer 1982). The periphyton
communities of the Cosens Bay cottage area and the control area had similar species
compositions, indicating that the two areas were legitimately comparable. Completely
dissimilar periphyton communities would not allow statistical comparison. It also means
that any detected impacts at the cottage area were not disruptive of typical community
structure in the 2014 results.
Because there were no strong correlations between light intensity and periphyton
development, this potential cause of uneven periphyton growth was eliminated from
the data analyses.
There were many correlations between periphyton growth metrics and water chemistry
during the summer or the fall deployment, the most important of which include
abundance, biovolume and volatile solids with total and dissolved phosphorus. Thus,
sites with higher total phosphorus correlated to sites with higher productivity. If these
correlations occur in other years, we may infer that increasing P concentrations caused
increased periphyton growth. These correlations should only be considered in light of
the small sample size, and the fact that suspended algae will add to the total nutrient
concentration. The correlations between growth metrics and dissolved nutrients were
not as strong for this reason, and were not statistically significant. The nutrient(s)
controlling periphyton growth can be verified using enrichment trials.
There were definitive and statistically significant differences in periphyton growth
between the cottage area and the control area that were also distinct between the
summer and fall deployments. Productivity metrics including total volatile solids and dry
weight showed elevated periphyton growth in the summer and only in the cottage area.
Similar results were obtained in other productivity metrics. Significant differences
between the summer high use period and the fall low use period at the cottages
included increased periphyton abundance and increased biovolume. A similar seasonal
38
Page 78 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
effect may have occurred at the control sites, but it was weaker and there were fewer
samples, making statistical significance harder to achieve.
Because the overall community response to nutrient addition may be dependent upon
the increased growth of a small number of species, an understanding of such indicator
species can be critical (Fairchild et al. 1985). The distribution of several species/genera was
significantly different between the cottage and control areas during the summer
(Navicula, Cyclotella, Epithemia; KW Tests p<=0.05). These diatoms may form a nutrient
enhancement index because they have been implicated as marker taxa for high nutrient
concentrations in other studies.
Dry weight was higher in both the summer and fall on the cottage area samplers and
may indicate that the numerous docks are slowing the longshore currents, encouraging
marl/fines/sediment deposition.
5.0
Conclusions
This study was successful from a scientific perspective.
5.1
Impact of the existing cottage development on water quality in
Cosens Bay
No statistically significant impacts of the cottage development were detected in the
water quality samples collected during 2014.
At this point, the detected impact of the current level of cottage development on the
near-shore periphyton during the summer high-use period is measurable but not
disruptive of community structure. However, this does not mean that further
development or increased use of the cottage area would be advisable.
5.2
Other key influences on water quality in Cosens Bay
No influence from creeks or springs was detected in the 2014 water quality samples
from Cosens Bay. Increased marl sediment deposition may be occurring around docks.
5.3
Impact of Cosens Bay on Kalamalka Lake water quality
The impact of the Cosens Bay cottage area on Kalamalka Lake as a whole would be
below statistical significance and likely below detection limits. The same cannot be said
for other influences on Kalamalka Lake such as Coldstream Creek and Wood Lake inputs.
5.4
Most informative parameters
The most useful parameter(s) of change that could be retained in an abbreviated lowcost program designed to monitor non-point source nutrient inputs to Kalamalka Lake in
the longer term and in other locales include: N’s P’s Cl for water quality and volatile
solids (AFDW/DW) for periphyton production on stone tile. The alternative would be to
repeat the full program at regular intervals such as every five years.
39
Page 79 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
6.0
Recommendations
In the proposal for this project, we suggested that one year of this program would
provide the data RDNO seeks and repeating this program should not be necessary until
changes (if any) occurred in the projected nutrient load to Cosens Bay. Having been
through the project successfully in 2014, the results would gain statistical strength
should the study be repeated for an additional year. We would recommend repeating
the 2014 program in 2015 with the following minor changes:
1. Add a water quality sample date in August and run a replicate sample
2. Add calcium to the analyses set for 2015, and pay Caro for Ca from the 2014 data
3. Cut and protect periphyton samples in the field to prevent damage in transit and
the loss of usable sample surfaces
4. Use statistical tests to compare Cosens Bay water quality results to the
Kalamalka Lk data base (with permission) for context and explanations of lakewide trends as opposed to localized trends in Cosens Bay.
5. Use only the best artificial substrate (stone tile) moving forward.
The effort saved by using one substrate can be used to add a small project in which
nutrient enrichment dishes mounted with stone tiles would be compared to the regular
tiles to see if periphyton growth is saturated or nutrient limited.
Long-shore currents can be monitored using drogues to determine the effects of the
docks on long-shore currents and this may help explain the elevated deposition rates
noted in 2014 data.
This Cosens Bay study could be repeated at regular intervals to watch for long-term
change. A program interval such as every 5 years or following new development or
redevelopment would be appropriate.
Mrs. H. Larratt
Aquatic Biologist, H.B.Sc., R.P. Bio
Mr. Jamie Self
Aquatic Biologist, H.B.Sc., BIT
40
Page 80 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Literature Cited
Abbot, Tirzah, 2012. Fresh water diatoms as bioindicators of pollution. 25th Annual Keck
Symposium:
2012
Amherst
College,
Amherst,
MA
http://keckgeology.org/files/25thSymVol_Abbott.pdf
BC MoE N.D. Accessed Dec 15 2014.
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/objectives/okphosphorus/okphosphorus.html#summary
BC MoE 2012. www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/turbidity/turbidity.html‎
Buchanan, R.J. and R.N. Soniassy 1974. Bioassay experiments on the phytoplankton in the water
of the Kalamalka-Wood lakes basin. Water Investigations Branch, BC Water Resources
Services. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/studies/bioassay.pdf
Fairchild, G.W., R.L. Lowe and W.B. Richardson, 1985. Algal periphyton growth on nutrientdiffusing substrates: An in situ bioassay. Ecology. 66(2), 1985, pp 465 – 472.
Fernandes, V.O., and Esteves, F.A. 2003. The use of indices for evaluating the periphytic
community in two kinds of substrate in Imboassica Lagoon, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Brazilian Journal of Biology 63(2).
Nelson E.C., D. M. Bennett, and B. J. Cardinale, 2013. Consistency and sensitivity of stream
periphyton community structural and functional responses to nutrient enrichment.
Ecological Applications 23:159–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/12-0295.1
Jacobya, J.M., D. D. Bouchard and C. R. Patmont, 2009. Response of Periphyton to Nutrient
Enrichment in Lake Chelan, WA Lake and Reservoir Management Volume 7, Issue 1,
1991 pages 33-43.
Larratt, H., T. Brett, N. Swain and J. Self, 2014. Kalamalka Lake Water Quality Study of
Microflora, Water Chemistry & Thermal Profiles 2013. Prepared for Greater Vernon Water
and District of Lake Country.
Lear, G., Turner, S.J., and Lewis, G.D. 2009. Effect of light regimes on the utilization of an
exogenous carbon source by freshwater biofilm bacterial communities Aquatic Ecology
43:207–220. Doi:10.1007/s10452-008-9193-8.
Maher, W. and L. Woo, 1998. Procedures for the storage and digestion of natural waters for the
determination of filterable reactive phosphorus, total filterable phosphorus and total
phosphorus. Anal. Chim. Acta, 375, 5–47.
41
Page 81 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
McCormick, P.V., P.S. Rawlik, K. Lurding, E.P. Smith and F.H. Sklar, 1996. Periphyton-water
quality relationships along a nutrient gradient in the northern Florida Everglades. J. N.
Am. Benthol. Soc. 1996 pp 433-339.
Palmer, C.M. 1969. A composite rating of algae tolerating organic pollution. Journal of Phycology:
5: 78-82.
Stevenson, R.J. and E.F. Stoermer, 1982. Abundance patterns of diatoms on Cladophora in Lake
Huron with respect to a point-source of wastewater treatment plant effluent. Journal of
the Great Lakes Research 8: 184-195.
Stockner, J.G. 1991. Autotrophic picoplankton in freshwater ecosystems: the view from the
summit. International Review Ges. Hydrobiology 76:483-492.
Stockner, J.G. and F.A.J. Armstrong, 1971. M Periphyton of the experimental lakes area of north
western Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Brd. Can. 28:215-229.
Wetzel, R. G., and Likens, G.E. 1991. Limnological Analyses, Springer Science+Business Media,
Inc. New York, New York, USA.
42
Page 82 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
Appendices
Taxonomic data spreadsheets are available from LAC upon the request of RDNO.
Appendix 1: Water Quality and Lab Periphyton Data
43
Page 83 of 183
Units
RDL
Page 84 of 183
44
Cottage Area 1 Cottage Area 2 Cottage Area 3 Control area Cottage Area 1 Cottage Area 2 Cottage Area 3 Control area Cottage Area 1 Cottage Area 2 Cottage Area 3 Control area
July 3 2014
September 3 2014
October 30 2014
Chloride
mg/L
0.1
6.99
7.08
7.05
7.03
8.47
8.3
8.43
8.24
7.29
7.3
7.29
7.28
Nitrogen, Nitrate as N
mg/L
0.01
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
Nitrogen, Nitrite as N
mg/L
0.01
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
Sulfate
mg/L
1
49.1
49
49.2
49.1
54.2
54.3
54.9
54.5
54
53.9
53.9
53.9
Nitrogen, Ammonia as N, Total mg/L
0.02
<0.020
<0.020
<0.020
<0.020
0.02
0.021
<0.020
<0.020
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl
mg/L
0.05
0.32
0.31
0.27
0.29
0.22
0.28
0.23
0.3
0.32
0.32
0.32
0.38
Phosphorus, Total as P
mg/L
0.002
0.008
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.015
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.005
0.004
0.004
0.005
Phosphorus, Total Dissolved mg/L
0.002
0.007
0.009
0.01
0.005
0.009
0.009
0.009
0.01
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.002
Turbidity
NTU
0.1
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
1
1
1.1
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.6
pH
pH units 0.01
7.98
8.25
8.35
8.38
8.28
8.33
8.36
8.36
8.34
8.37
8.4
8.4
Conductivity (EC)
uS/cm
2
397
399
400
402
415
397
397
398
399
399
394
394
Nitrogen, Nitrate+Nitrite as N mg/L
0.01
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
<0.010
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
Nitrogen, Total
mg/L
0.05
0.321
0.309
0.271
0.288
0.217
0.283
0.233
0.296
0.318
0.322
0.324
0.377
E. coli
CFU/100mL 1
1
1
1
<1
<1
<1
3
1
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
Analyte
Appendix 1 Water Quality and Periphyton Data
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
CB stone tile 1
CB stone tile 2
CB stone tile 4
CB stone tile 5
CB stone tile 6
CB stone tile 7
CB stone tile 9
CB stone tile 10
CB stone tile 11
CB plexi 12
CB stone tile 13
CB styro 1
CB styro 2
CB styro 4
CB styro 5
CB styro 6
CB styro 7
CB styro 9
CB styro 10
CB styro 11
CB styro 12
CB styro 13
Cosens Bay
Page 85 of 183
45
29-Aug-14
30-Oct-14
Dry Weight Total Volatile Dry Weight Total Volatile
total g dry volatile g dry total g dry volatile g dry
0.001
0.001
0.964
0.164
0.132
0.014
0.201
0.039
0.314
0.054
1.04
0.118
0.27
0.037
0.502
0.076
0.078
0.014
1.08
0.167
0.16
0.024
1.55
0.202
0.244
0.033
1.05
0.128
0.339
0.054
2.16
0.236
0.446
0.05
1.56
0.228
0.207
0.03
1.63
0.226
0.307
0.036
1.06
0.143
0.166
0.021
1.63
0.292
0.266
0.041
0.766
0.155
0.249
0.046
0.283
0.043
0.211
0.03
0.084
0.014
0.945
0.148
0.232
0.032
0.409
0.049
0.592
0.098
0.497
0.05
0.296
0.042
0.467
0.057
0.263
0.025
Cosens Bay Study, 2014
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.2
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
REPORT
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
File No.: 13-0049-F-RZ
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Planning Department
DATE:
January 6, 2015
SUBJECT:
Rezoning Bylaw 2586, 2013 [Ilott c/o Shortt]
RECOMMENDATION:
That Rezoning Bylaw No. 2586, 2013 which proposes to rezone the property legally described as Lot
1, Sec 25, Twp 18, R8, W6M, KDYD, Plan KAP65384, and located at 1121 Enderby Mabel Lake
Road, Electoral Area “F” from the Non-Urban (N.U) zone to the Country Residential (C.R) zone be
referred to a Public Hearing.
BACKGROUND:
The subject application proposes to rezone the property located at 1121 Enderby Mabel Lake Road
from the Non-Urban (N.U) zone to the Country Residential (C.R) zone. If successful in rezoning the
property, the applicant proposes to submit an application to subdivide the property into a total of three
(3) lots.
At the Regular Meeting of May 15, 2013, the Board of Directors gave First and Second Readings to
the associated Rezoning Bylaw No. 2586, 2013 and resolved that Bylaw 2586 not be forwarded to a
Public Hearing until the applicant has submitted a report prepared by a Professional Engineer, or a
groundwater geologist, or by a hydrogeologist verifying that water of sufficient quantity and quality is
available year round to service the proposed lots and that the extraction of water from the proposed
water supplies will not deplete the water supply of neighbouring wells.
DISCUSSION:
In follow-up to the Board’s direction, the applicant submitted a report from Kala Geosciences Ltd.
dated June 25, 2014. The report is signed by a hydrogeologist and verifies that by drilling wells on the
proposed parcels, water of sufficient quantity would be available year round to service the proposed
lots and that the extraction of water from the proposed water supplies would not deplete the water
supply of neighbouring wells.
On June 26, 2014, the Planning Department requested further information from the hydrogeologist
with regard to water quality. On December 5, 2014 Kala Geosciences Ltd. indicated that details
regarding groundwater quality cannot be provided until wells have been constructed onsite or until
data is made available with regard to quality of the water supplied by wells in the surrounding area. In
the absence of this information, Kala expects that groundwater in the subject area will be at a
minimum moderately mineralized and moderately hard and recommends that any new well be tested
for potability parameters prior to use.
Page 86 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
Rezoning Bylaw 2586, 2013 [llott c/o Shortt]
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- January 6, 2015
Page2
On December 18, 2014 Kala further confirmed that the proposed groundwater source can be treated
to meet the Canadian Drinking Water Standards using a conventional treatment system, should
treatment be required.
Based upon the above information, the Planning Department recommends that Bylaw No. 2586, 2013
be forwarded to a Public Hearing. It is noted that the wells proposed to service the proposed lots
would be required to be tested for capacity and potability parameters in accordance with the
requirements of the Regional District Subdivision Servicing Bylaw.
SUMMARY:
The subject application proposes to rezone the property located at 1121 Enderby Mabel Lake Road
from the Non-Urban (N.U) zone to the Country Residential (C.R) zone. If successful in rezoning the
property, the applicant proposes to submit an application to subdivide the property into a total of three
(3) lots. At the Regular Meeting of May 15, 2013, the Board of Directors gave First and Second
Readings to the associated Re·zoning Bylaw No. 2586, 2013 and resolved that Bylaw 2586 not be
forwarded to a Public Hearing until the applicant has submitted a water supply report.
In follow-up to the Board's direction, the applicant has submitted confirmation from a professional
hydrogeologist stating that the proposed lots have the potential to be serviced in accordance with the
standards of the Regional District Subdivision Servicing Bylaw with regard to water quantity and
quality. Based on the above, the Planning Department recommends that Bylaw No. 2586 be
forwarded to a Public Hearing.
Submitted by:
Caren Walker
Planning Technologist
Endorsed by:
Page 87 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
ELECTORAL AREA "F"
File:
Applicant:
Location:
REZONING APPLICATION
SUBJECT PROPERTY MAP
13-0049-F-RZ
James Ilott c/o Jason R. Shortt
1121 Enderby Mabel Lake Road
N1/2 OF SW1/4
Subject Property
I1
~
N 16570
lot
Page 88 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF LOT 1,
SEC 25, TP 18, RB, W6M, KDYD, PlAN KAP65384.
SCALE 1: 2000 ( ALL DISTANCES IN MITRES )
277.0
LOT1
2.76 ha
662 perimeter, 89 frontage
'<t
m
I()
.....
LOT2
2.71 ha
n8 perimeter, 80 frontage
0
Slj~D
L'
"'
l .l ·,I
A
I
(0
'
r<)
Ol
~
%
~
~
·o
1,..,)
I
<'
~
~
I <::>
LOT3
2.01 ha
vW~~
~:;;
~
~
~
Q-'f~
:.<!Q~
11.4
l================::;t FAX: 545-2741
srit~iftltmi
,;tfftifJemc.
2801-J2nd street, Vernon, B.C.
APR 16, 2012
RLE No. 26866
THIS PLAN IS PR£PAR£0 FOR THE USE OF:
/LOTT
Phone 545-0511
Page 89 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
'
'
'
Proposed driveway - LOT 1
6rn 0 +2Jil
:~wclm 0 dltchllne
42m 0 +t3J:
00
Proposed driVeway - LOT 2
5m 0 +2"
'wa1e
0 dllttlllne
:::p]
95 o
10
20
42m 0 +12"
em
JC
40
50
Proposed driveway - LOT 3
JO
~·~-;
•o
so
60
70
Be
go
100
110
Page 90 of 183
LOT1
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
BYLAW No. 2586
A bylaw to rezone lands and amend the Zoning Map attached to the Regional
District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to change a zone
designation
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 903 [Zoning bylaws] of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C.,
1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, the Board of the
Regional District of North Okanagan may, by Bylaw, divide the whole or part of the Regional
District into zones, name each zone, establish boundaries for the zones and regulate uses
within those zones;
AND WHEREAS the Board has created zones, named each zone, established boundaries for
these zones and regulated uses within those zones by Bylaw No. 1888, being the “Regional
District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003” and amendments thereto;
AND WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 895 [Development approval procedures] of the Local
Government Act, the Board must, by bylaw, define procedures under which an owner of land
may apply for an amendment to a Zoning Bylaw and must consider every application for an
amendment to the bylaw;
AND WHEREAS the Board has enacted the “Regional District of North Okanagan Development
Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008 and amendments
thereto” to establish procedures to amend an Official Community Plan, a Zoning Bylaw, or a
Rural Land Use Bylaw, or to issue a Permit:
AND WHEREAS the Board has received an application to rezone property;
NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting
assembled, enacts as follows:
GENERAL
1.
This Bylaw may be cited as “Rezoning Bylaw No. 2586, 2013”.
2.
The property legally described as Lot 1, Sec 25, Twp 18, R8, W6M, KDYD, Plan
KAP65384 and located at 1121 Enderby Mabel Lake Road, Electoral Area “F” is hereby
rezoned from the Non-Urban Zone [N.U] to the Country Residential Zone [C.R].
3.
That the Zoning Map, being Schedule “A” to Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 be amended
accordingly.
Read a First and Second Time
this
Advertised on
Public Hearing held pursuant to the provisions of
Section 890 of the Local Government Act
day of
May, 2013
this
this
day of
day of
, 2015
, 2015
this
day of
, 2015
Page 91 of 183
15th
Bylaw No.2586, 2013
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.3
Page 2
Read a Third Time
this
day of
, 2015
Approved by Minister of Transportation and
Infrastructure
(Transportation Act s. 52(3))
this
day of
, 2015
ADOPTED
this
day of
, 2015
Chair
Corporate Officer
Page 92 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
REPORT
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
File No.: 3045.10.10
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Planning Department
DATE:
January 7, 2015
SUBJECT:
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
RECOMMENDATION:
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors, the City of Vernon be invited to partner with the
Regional District of North Okanagan in the development of a Municipal Boundary Extension Protocol
Agreement.
DISCUSSION:
Urban Systems completed Phase I of the Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study on February 2,
2012 and was requested to undertake Phase II of the Project, which examined the cumulative
financial, social, environmental, land use and service delivery impacts of annexations on Electoral
Areas. The Final Phase II Report, endorsed by the Board of Directors on March 19, 2014, resulted in
recommended actions that the Electoral Area Advisory Committee (EAAC) could consider for Phase
III of the project.
The Board of Directors passed the following resolution on March 19, 2014:
“That staff be directed to develop the Terms of Reference and explore funding opportunities
for the Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III, based upon the recommendation to
develop a boundary adjustment protocol agreement or memorandum of understanding.”
A protocol agreement, in conjunction with other tools identified during Phase II, would benefit the
greater community by formalizing annexation consideration criteria, encourage long range planning
within fringe areas, incorporate broader community objectives and inform decisions that balance the
principles of regional sustainability and local policy direction. As well, greater certainty and a
streamlined process may be brought to the consideration of boundary extension applications and
Local Government Act Section 13 extraterritorial service extension requests.
The development of a protocol agreement is an opportunity to continue to build stronger regional
relationships and coordinated models of decision-making.
BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
The Regional District of North Okanagan Electoral Areas “B” and “C” have experienced significant
annexation application activity over the last 20 years. Annexation activity has also occurred within
Electoral Area “D” over the last 20 years. Concerns have been expressed by the Electoral Area
Directors regarding the impact that the loss of these annexed lands is having on the financial
Page 93 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 2
sustainability of unincorporated area service provision, the identify and fabric of these communities,
the loss of productive agricultural lands, shifts in political representation and loss of control of land use
decisions, especially regarding suburban sprawl within fringe areas.
On May 12, 2010, EAAC was asked to select three priority 2010 planning projects. The Board of
Directors, on June 2, 2010, passed a resolution that supported undertaking an Electoral Area
Annexation Impact Study to determine the impacts of incremental annexation as a top priority
planning project for 2010.
Urban Systems was selected to conduct Phase I of the project and presented the final Electoral Area
Annexation Impact Study: Phase I Report at the February 2, 2012 EAAC meeting. Phase II was
initiated in June 2012 and, based upon the outcomes of Phase I, has provided a detailed evaluation of
the cumulative effects of annexation on unincorporated areas in the Regional District.
The Electoral Area Impact Study Phase II Final Report, endorsed by the Board of Directors on March
19, 2014, recommended the development of a series of analysis and decision support tools to be
considered as part of Phase III, including:
• Fringe Area Planning – A policy and process to improve land use coordination between
neighbouring jurisdictions by referring Official Community Plan amendments, re-zonings, and
development permits on the municipal/electoral area boundary to the neighbouring jurisdiction.
• Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Implementation Agreement – An inter-jurisdictional or
inter-government agency commitment to RGS implementation.
• Municipal Boundary Extension Protocol/Memorandum of Understanding – An agreement
between the Regional District and participating municipalities to improve the annexation
process by defining roles, process, and information exchange and communication between all
signatories.
• Vulnerability Index – a potential implementation tool designed to assess the resiliency and
sustainability of Electoral Area and Local Area services delivered by the Regional District
during the review of annexation application. It could be used to evaluate the cumulative level
of impact a service may face in regards to future annexations.
• Annexation Decision Support Tool – A decision support tool can be used by the Regional
District to assess annexation application referrals.
PHASE III OPTIONS:
Several options have been identified for consideration as a result of Phase II of the project. Many of
these options can be undertaken as part of Phase III, although the majority of these options will
require the involvement of one or more municipal partners. The options that have been identified
within this report are not mutually exclusive and can be pursued concurrently or as complementary
tools that support agreements. The following criteria for each option should be considered:
• Scope (Regional, Electoral Areas “B” and “C” and City of Vernon?);
• Focus (Regional Sub-regional, Swan Lake Corridor, Silver Star Road?);
• Steering Committee (GVAC, RGMAC, EAAC?);
• Negotiation framework (informal, professional facilitator, arbitration, Ministry mediated, etc?) ;
• Agreed upon participants (including municipal partners, MCSCD, MoTI, ALC?); and,
• Agreed upon complementary annexation application evaluation tools and process.
Page 94 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 3
Option 1: Municipal Boundary Adjustment Protocol Agreement
The development of a protocol agreement between municipalities and Electoral Areas was
recommended as the focus of Phase III of the Study. This is a partnership initiative that will require the
involvement of one or more municipal partners, the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural
Development (MCSCD) and, potentially, the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) and/or Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI). An agreement between the Regional District and
participating municipalities would improve the annexation process by defining roles, process, and
information exchange and communication between all signatories.
Phase II recommended a sub-regional approach to the development of a municipal boundary
adjustment protocol agreement focusing on the areas of greatest concern. It has been recommended
that the MCSCD, City of Vernon, and Electoral Areas “B” and “C” enter into an agreement regarding a
consistent and collaborative approach to annexation application consideration.
The EAAC could consider expanding the scope of the protocol agreement to include the entire
Regional District, with all member municipalities and Electoral Areas are participants. There are a
number of different approaches to protocol development which are contingent on the scope,
participants and desired outcome. Components of the protocol may include:
Communication
• Sharing of information - both content and schedule
• Broader public engagement and communication with the affected communities
Finance
• Consideration of MCSCD service impact policies
• Consideration of cumulative impacts of ongoing annexations
• Infrastructure and servicing implications for the Regional District
Land Use
• Fringe area planning
• Agricultural Land Reserve considerations
• RGS-Rural Protection Boundary
Decision making process on annexation applications
• How will decisions be made
• What factors and criteria will be considered
• How will municipalities include RDNO, ALC and MCSCD in the process
• How will public input be solicited and how will community concerns be addressed
• Are there areas in RDNO that require closer scrutiny of an application
Non-annexation areas
• Is it possible to identify areas that the parties agree are not appropriate for future
consideration of annexation
• ALR as a potential annexation constraint layer
Planning for boundary expansion
• Is there agreement among parties regarding ultimate boundaries or specific neighbourhoods
or communities where annexation is appropriate in the medium to long term planning horizon
Page 95 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 4
Required amendments to current policies
• Are there amendments or updates to current municipal or Regional District policy which
need to be implemented to align with a new protocol
Potential supporting tools
• Fringe Area Management Plan (Option 3)
• Amendments to corporate Annexation policies (i.e. LU047)
• Amendments to Official Community Plans
• Formalized Annexation Application Decision-making Tools (Option 4(a))
Advantages:
• Negotiated formal protocol agreement would provide a opportunity for collaboration between
the Regional District, City of Vernon, MCSCD and ALC to interpret Regional Growth Strategy
Urban Containment and Rural Protection polices related to annexation;
• Provides certainty and transparency regarding process, criteria and outcome for the
annexation applicant, the public, Regional District, municipalities, ALC and MCSCD;
• With the involvement of MCSCD within the agreement process, supported annexations may
move through the process more quickly than the 2-4 year period currently experienced by the
City of Vernon;
• Could reduce staff time requirements to process, refer and respond to annexation applications;
• Could provide the basis for coordinated and complementary City of Vernon and Regional
District policy revisions that support the agreement;
• Could include tools for resolving annexation application disagreements where they arise; and,
• Could reduce conflict between the participating jurisdictions.
Disadvantages:
• A protocol agreement is not a local government tool within Provincial legislation and will be
effective only with a continued commitment to cooperate by all parties for the greater good;
• The agreement will require all parties to collaborate on annexation criteria, process and policy
considerations, which may require compromises by all parties involved; and,
• Agreements can be challenging to achieve and may require a great deal of staff time and
financial resources.
A boundary extension protocol agreement that is signed by key member municipalities and the
Regional District would bring clear expectation, transparency and certainty to the annexation process
for all participating parties, municipalities, the Regional District, property owners and the broader
public. The resulting negotiated protocol would improve communication and the overall relationship
between participating parties regarding boundary extension issues.
Option 2: Fringe Area Management Implementation Agreement
Implementation agreements are important RGS implementation tools designed to promote
coordinated local and provincial actions. Implementation Agreements can deal with a wide range of
matters, including annexation and fringe area land use issues. These agreements are the primary
formal means for regional districts, member municipalities and the provincial government to commit to
actions that advance implementation of the RGS.
The content of these agreements vary by regional district. For example, in Metro Vancouver a primary
focus is transit infrastructure investments and supportive land use patterns. On central Vancouver
Island, agreements focus on achieving urban containment and limiting water and sewer infrastructure
Page 96 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 5
extensions into rural lands. Implementation agreements, as key RGS implementation tools, are
governed under Section 868 of the Local Government Act.
The considerations and components of a fringe area management implementation agreement would
be similar to a municipal boundary adjustment protocol agreement.
Advantages:
• An Implementation Agreement is a Local Government Act tool for RGS implementation and
has greater effect and enforceability than a Municipal Boundary Adjustment Protocol
Agreement; and,
• Has the same advantages as a Municipal Boundary Adjustment Protocol Agreement.
Disadvantages:
• Very difficult to negotiate and requires the commitment of all signatory parties, including
MCSCD and ALC, within the process due to the legislative enforceability of the agreement;
and,
• Lengthy process that requires unknown senior staff time commitment and financial resources;
A Fringe Area Management Implementation Agreement that is signed by key member municipalities,
the Regional District and MCSCD and ALC would bring clear expectations, transparency and certainty
to the annexation process for all participating parties, property owners and the broader public. The
establishment of an effective implementation agreement would require extensive negotiation between
all parties and the willingness of MCSCD to be a signatory.
Option 3: Joint Fringe Area Planning
Fringe Area Planning is a potential strategy to improve land use coordination between neighbouring
jurisdictions and can be used as an implementation mechanism of boundary extension agreements. It
would be especially applicable in this situation as one of the concerns raised by the stakeholders was
the lack of land use coordination during and after the annexation process. Electoral Area Directors
have identified concerns regarding urban and rural sprawl occurring on the boundaries of established
municipalities.
Similar to some of the drivers for this study, the Thompson-Nicola Regional District undertook an
update to their 1982 fringe area policy as part of the 2012 RGS Review due to concerns regarding
communication, timing of referrals, and the interest in a more rigorous analysis when municipal
boundary extensions were contemplated or undertaken.
The creation and implementation of a Fringe Area Policy would improve and formalize some of the
current areas of collaboration that are already occurring between municipalities and the regional
district. Any fringe area policy would build on the agreements and support provided in the RGS by its
signatories.
Advantages:
• Can be used as an implementation tool of the Regional Growth Strategy to refine interpretation
of regional land use designations, servicing mechanisms and relationship to annexation; and,
• Can be used to implement boundary extension agreements by translating criteria, policy and
consideration into a land use planning document.
Page 97 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 6
Disadvantages:
• Effective only if associated with a formal or informal agreement;
• Requires coordinated planning across jurisdictional boundaries, including agreement on
transitional land uses; and,
• Lengthy process that requires unknown senior staff time commitment and financial resources.
Option 4(a): Annexation Application Decision-Making Tool(s) - Partnerships
Annexation application decision-making tools could be created, based upon the outcome of Phase II
and guided by any agreements that have been put into place, that would provide a consistent
annexation application decision-making framework, supported by Regional District policy and, if
applicable, municipal boundary extension agreements. It is anticipated that tool development will be
contingent on which other options are pursued within Phase III.
Advantages:
• Can be used to implement boundary extension agreements by translating criteria and policy
into a formal decision-making tool used by all parties.
Disadvantages:
• Effective only if associated with a formal or informal agreement.
Option 4(b): Annexation Application Decision-Making Tool(s) – RDNO
If there is a lack of interest by municipal partners to collaborate on any of the partnership options, it is
proposed that the tools were developed in two parts. The first part is to provide a summary of factual
information regarding annexation proposals. The second part of the tool is an evaluation of impacts
and risk of an annexation on the objectives and services of the Regional District, including the use of
a vulnerability index. The tool will create a database of the cumulative impacts of annexation activity
used in the evaluation of impacts of an annexation application. The issues identified by the Electoral
Area Annexation Impact Study would not be addressed or resolved through this option.
Advantages:
• More effective and comprehensive Regional District response to annexation application
referrals.
Disadvantages:
• Would retain the status quo.
PHASE III CONSIDERATIONS:
Multiple options can be included within the Phase III Terms of Reference and pursued concurrently as
components of an agreement between the Regional District, member municipalities and various
Ministries.
Options 1, 2, 3 and 4(a) require the participation of key member municipalities, especially the City of
Vernon, to proceed. In the absence of the participation of key member municipalities, EAAC would
only be able to proceed with Option 4(b): Annexation Application Decision-Making Tools. The City of
Vernon, as a key participant in any of the partnership options, should be approached to determine
interest prior to developing a Phase III Terms of Reference.
Page 98 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 7
FINANCIAL/BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS:
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III will focus on negotiated agreement between
municipalities and the Electoral Areas, if there is sufficient interest, at a regional or sub-regional
(Greater Vernon) scale. As well, the continued development of the tools identified within Phase II will
require both staff and financial resources to undertake.
After discussions with Urban Systems and the review of potential options for consideration, the
financial requirements for Phase III are projected to be between $30,000 and $40,000, which is
consistent with earlier Phase III budgetary estimates. This budgetary projection is based upon
consultant experience within other negotiated agreements and is contingent on the length and
complexity of the negotiations.
FUNDING OPTIONS:
Few grant funding opportunities are available for the Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study. The
EAAC should consider using these funding options in combination.
1. Development Services (030) Reserves
Currently, the Development Services (030) operating reserves are sufficient to fund Phase III of the
Project, contingent on municipal partnership opportunities and the resulting scope. Relying solely on
this funding option will result in the reduction of the operating reserves and may preclude initiating any
other priority planning projects requiring the use of consultants that are not represented within the
budget. It is recommended that the 030 reserves are used to fund the Project, in part, if other funding
options are unable to fully resource the Project.
2. Municipal Contributions:
If there are municipal partnership opportunities for Phase III, including protocol agreements,
implementation agreements or joint fringe area planning, municipal contributions to the project could
be requested.
3. Restructure Planning Grant Program
The MCSCD, Municipal Structure Branch, can provide Restructure Planning Grants through the
Restructure Assistance Program to assist communities wishing to study the implications of municipal
incorporation or restructure and to undertake the associated public consultation process. The
maximum grant that would be available for this Project would be $40,000. Based upon past
conversations with Ministry staff, it is anticipated that funds for the Restructure Assistance Program
have been fully allocated until, at the earliest, 2020. The Project also may not fit the grant criteria due
to the municipal restructure focus of the Program.
4. Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development
EAAC could recommend that the Regional District petition the MCSCD directly for funding assistance
for this Project, especially with the interest that the Study’s findings have generated within the Ministry
and local and regional governments. The Ministry, as a potential partner within Phase III, may provide
expertise, additional information and/or assistance with the development of a municipal boundary
adjustment protocol agreement.
Page 99 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 7, 2015
Page 8
5. Other Regional District Contributions
Prior to undertaking Phase II, the Board of Directors requested that other regional districts consider a
contribution to Phase II of the Study. The following regional districts assisted with funding for Phase II
of the project:
• Fraser Valley Regional District
• Regional District of East Kootenay
• Metro Vancouver
• Thompson-Nicola Regional District
• Regional District of Bulkley-Nechako
• Peace River Regional District
EAAC could consider requesting further financial assistance by regional districts that are interested in
the outcomes of Phase III of the Study.
PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS:
The management of the project, as well as assistance during negotiations and annexation evaluation
tool development, will be undertaken by Regional District staff. If this project is initiated in 2015 as a
priority, Planning staff resources will need to be reallocated from other projects and initiatives already
in the work plan.
SUMMARY:
The Electoral Area Advisory Committee has resolved to proceed with Phase III of the Electoral Area
Annexation Impact Study. Many of the options under consideration require the participation of key
member municipalities to proceed. The scope, approach and desired outcome of Phase III will be
defined by the participating Electoral Areas and municipalities.
Urban Systems recommended that Phase III of the Electoral Area Annexation Study focus on the
development of a municipal boundary extension protocol agreement between the Regional District
and the City of Vernon, where the greatest boundary extension challenges were observed. The City of
Vernon, as a key municipal participant in any partnership approach, must be included within the
development of a protocol agreement, implementation agreement or fringe area plan.
To provide clarity to the boundary extension, the Regional District and City of Vernon could consider
jointly developing a Municipal Boundary Expansion Protocol Agreement that will provide greater
transparency, further strengthening relationships, formalizing criteria and considerations when
reviewing boundary extension proposals and coordinating boundary extension policies across
jurisdictions.
A protocol agreement and the other tools identified in Phase II would benefit the broader community
by further strengthening regional relationships, formalizing criteria and considerations when reviewing
applications within fringe areas, coordinating annexation and fringe management policies across
jurisdictions and balancing the various aspects of sustainability through a long-range planning
perspective, including the direction provided by the Regional Growth Strategy.
It is recommended that the City of Vernon be approached to partner with the Regional District of North
Okanagan in the development of a Municipal Boundary Extension Protocol Agreement.
Page 100 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.4
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase Ill
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- January 7, 2015
Page 9
Submitted by:
Endorsed by:
ApP-roved for In
/--..
I
Rob Smailes, MCIP, RPP
General Manager, Planning and Building
DavidS~ ell
Chief Administ ative Officer
Page 101 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
REPORT
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
File No.: 14-0361-B-REF
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Planning Department
DATE:
January 23, 2015
SUBJECT:
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
RECOMMENDATION:
That consideration of the proposed City of Vernon Block Extension be deferred until a Municipal
Boundary Extension Protocol Agreement has been developed between the City of Vernon and the
Regional District of North Okanagan.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Vernon Council, on August 11, 2014, passed the following resolution:
"That Council forward the report dated July 21, 2014 and titled Proposed Block Boundary
Extension to the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan for its review and
consideration of exploring the proposed block boundary extension of all properties directly
adjacent to both the City's road and sanitary infrastructure”
The City of Vernon proposes a moratorium on single lot or small block annexations through policy
revisions within their recently adopted OCP. As represented within the attached City of Vernon report,
dated July 21, 2014, the City of Vernon proposes a single 77 property block boundary extension for
consideration of support and endorsement by the Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
The Regional District of North Okanagan Electoral Areas “B” and “C” have experienced significant
annexation application activity over the last 20 years. Concerns have been expressed by the Electoral
Area Directors regarding the impact that the loss of these annexed lands is having on the financial
sustainability of unincorporated area service provision, the identify and fabric of these communities,
the loss of productive agricultural lands, shifts in political representation and loss of control of land use
decisions, especially regarding suburban sprawl within fringe areas.
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study:
On May 12, 2010, Electoral Area Advisory Committee was asked to select three priority 2010 planning
projects. The Board of Directors, on June 2, 2010, passed a resolution that supported undertaking an
Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study to determine the impacts of incremental annexation as a top
priority planning project for 2010.
Page 102 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 2
Urban Systems was selected to conduct Phase I of the project and presented the final Study: Phase I
Report at the February 2, 2012 EAAC meeting. Phase II was initiated in June 2012 and based upon
the outcomes of Phase I, has provided a detailed evaluation of the cumulative effects of annexation
on unincorporated areas in the Regional District.
Phase II recommended the development of a series of analysis and decision support tools to be
considered as part of Phase III, including:
 Fringe Area Planning – A policy and process to improve land use coordination between
neighbouring jurisdictions by referring OCP amendments, rezonings, and development permits on
the municipal/electoral area boundary to the neighbouring jurisdiction.
 Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Implementation Agreement – A formal inter-jurisdictional or
inter-government agency commitment to RGS implementation.
 Municipal Boundary Extension Protocol/Memorandum of Understanding – An agreement
between the Regional District and participating municipalities to improve the annexation process
by defining roles, process, and information exchange and communication between all signatories.
 Vulnerability Index – A potential implementation tool designed to assess the resiliency and
sustainability of Electoral Area and Local Area services delivered by the Regional District during
the review of annexation applications. It could be used to evaluate the cumulative level of impact a
service may face in regards to future annexations.
 Annexation Decision Support Tool – A decision support tool can be used by the Regional
District to assess annexation application referrals.
Boundary Extension Protocol Agreement:
The Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase II provides a series of recommendations to
resolve some of the issues that had been identified by Urban Systems, including a lack of
coordination on annexation applications between the City of Vernon, Regional District, Ministry of
Community, Sport and Cultural Development and the Agricultural Land Commission. The key
recommendation, during the presentation of Phase II findings to the Committee of the Whole on
March 5, 2014, was the development of a municipal boundary extension protocol agreement between
the Regional District and City of Vernon, with participation of several Provincial Ministries.
The Board of Directors passed the following resolution on March 19, 2014:
“That staff be directed to develop the Terms of Reference and explore funding opportunities
for the Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study: Phase III, based upon the recommendation to
develop a boundary adjustment protocol agreement or memorandum of understanding.”
The Regional District, during exploration of the components and approaches that may be considered
for Phase III, determined that the participation of the City of Vernon during the development of the
Terms of Reference and development of any agreement on boundary extension was essential. A
protocol agreement, in conjunction with other tools identified during Phase II, would benefit the greater
community by formalizing annexation consideration criteria, encourage long range planning within
fringe areas, incorporate broader community objectives and inform decisions that balance the
principles of regional sustainability and local policy direction.
Staff are bringing forward several Phase III options for consideration by the Board of Directors,
including an official request to the City of Vernon to participate in the development of a boundary
extension protocol agreement.
Page 103 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 3
A protocol agreement is anticipated to address:
 Consistent criteria and processes for evaluating the impact of annexation application on both the
Electoral Area and City;
 Annexation application consistency with the Regional Growth Strategy, Official Community Plans
and associated policies;
 Electoral Area and City service and financial impacts;
 Land use concerns and issues, including the ALR; and,
 Potential mitigation measures to reduce the resulting financial burden of annexations on Electoral
Area residents.
The development of a protocol agreement is an opportunity to continue to build stronger regional
relationships, develop coordinated models of decision-making and move toward a more collaborative
and interest based dialogue regarding Electoral Area and City issues and potential solutions.
Past Annexation Applications:
The Regional District of North Okanagan Electoral Areas “B” and “C” have experienced significant
annexation application activity over the last 10 years. Between 2004 and 2014, the City of Vernon
was successful in annexing over 2,000 hectares (~5,000 acres) of land, which has resulted in over a
13% reduction in Electoral Areas “B” and “C” private lands over that period. A large proportion of
those annexed lands are within the ALR. Appendix ‘A’ includes a map of successful annexations
since 2004.
Appendix ‘B’ provides a summary overview of seventeen (17) annexation applications that were
referred to the Regional District for review since 2004. The majority of these annexation applications
were development oriented, including the 2013 “Broderick” and “Edblad” applications. Five
applications were initiated for sewer connection to replace aging on-site septic facilities. In most
cases, the annexation applications were for one or a few properties. Regardless of the Regional
District’s comments and Board of Directors’ resolutions of non-support, the majority of municipal
boundary extension requests have been approved.
Community Charter, Section 13 Requests:
Since 2012, the Regional District has been referred three (3) Community Charter Section 13 requests
for consent from the City of Vernon to extend municipal sewer service to Electoral Area properties in
advance of an annexation request to the Province. Prior to 2012, Section 13 requests for sewer
service connection were not associated with annexation application referrals.
The first Section 13 sewer extension request associated with an annexation application was located at
5718 Barker Road and was received by the Regional District in 2012. Council included a condition on
the annexation application that submission to the Province would be contingent on Regional District
support. At the Regular Meeting of January 2, 2013, the Board did not support the annexation but
provided Section 13 consent for connection to sewer for health and safety reasons. City of Vernon
Council removed the requirement for Regional District support on September 23, 2013 and submitted
the annexation application to the Province. The City proceeded to extend sewer service to 5718
Barker Road in advance of annexation.
Page 104 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 4
RELEVANT POLICY:
Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development:
The process for municipal boundary expansion is outlined in Section 20 of the Local Government Act.
These legislative requirements are supplemented by the Ministry’s Municipal Boundary Extension
Process Guide and Municipal Boundary Extension Policies Guide, both revised in 2010.
The Province’s approach to municipal boundary extension is based on four principles:
1) the municipality takes a lead role in explaining the proposal, consulting with affected jurisdictions
and citizens, and then providing information to the Ministry;
2) the Ministry reviews the proposal and submits it for the approval of Cabinet through an Order in
Council;
3) citizens within the municipality and those within the proposed extension area have an opportunity
in the process to object or consent1; and,
4) inter-jurisdictional collaboration provides a framework for addressing issues2.
The process, as described in the Ministry’s Guides, follows five steps:
1) municipal consideration;
2) submission to the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development;
3) Ministry consideration;
4) statutory advertising;
5) Ministry approval and municipal implementation of the boundary extension.
As part of Step 1: Proposal Development and Referral3, “once the proposal is complete, the
municipality must refer the proposal…for comment”. These parties include the Regional District and
the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC), if the property(s) is within the ALR. Through the referral
process, the municipality should identify and resolve concerns with a proposed municipal boundary
extension before the municipality submits the proposal.
Within Appendix 5 – Regional District Consultation4, the Guide states that “as a best practice,
municipalities and regional districts should work together to jointly establish processes for reviewing
proposals for boundary extensions.” This best practice is reflected within the Electoral Area
Annexation Impact Study: Phase II recommendations and Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP policies.
Currently, a municipal boundary extension process agreement has not been developed between the
Regional District and the City that would provide a framework to guide the review process for this
block boundary extension proposal.
City of Vernon Policies:
The City of Vernon has a policy that does not allow for the extension of services outside of municipal
boundaries. The City of Vernon does permit Community Charter, Section 13 extraterritorial sewer
service provision to properties, in advance of annexation where an application has been made, if the
Regional District consents.
1
MCSCD, Municipal Boundary Extension Process Guide (2010) – Appendix 4: Public Consultation and Appendix 7: Electoral Approval
Municipal Boundary Extension Process Guide (2010) – Appendix 5:Regional District Consultation
3
Municipal Boundary Expansion Process Guide (2010), p.1.
4
Municipal Boundary Expansion Process Guide (2010), p.12
2
Page 105 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 5
The City of Vernon Annexation Policy (attached to this report) states “Applications will be reviewed in
context with the Official Community Plan 2008”. The City of Vernon OCP (2008) acknowledges that a
‘property by property’ annexation ‘approach is time consuming for all parties, and tends to reflect
individual property interests as opposed to the city’s long term plans for planning, development and
infrastructure phasing’.
Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 2500, 2011:
The RGS is an integrated regional planning document with 21 goals and 140 strategies that must be
taken into consideration collectively when reviewing proposals of (sub)regional significance. Within
the RGS, the following ‘regionally significant’ definition has been provided to guide the Board of
Directors:
“The tests for regional significance will vary according to each issue but generally pragmatic
measures should be used, such as due consideration of sub‐regional or regional impacts on
infrastructure, transportation, land use, local and regional policies and cumulative effects of
broad replication.”
The majority of the proposed block boundary extension properties are within the Rural Protection Area
designation and within the ALR. The RGS, adopted on September 21, 2011, includes reference to
annexations in relation to land use. Policy UC-1.2 includes the provision that local and regional
government will respect the Rural Protection Boundary and Rural Protection Area when reviewing
annexation proposals. Although the RGS does not support water and sewer service provision to
properties within the Rural Protection Area that would facilitate urban levels (<1.0 ha) of development,
the RGS does support municipal sewer service extension into the Rural Protection Area to address
health or environmental concerns through Policy UC-2.4, which states that:
“The communities of the North Okanagan agree to work as partners and individually to discourage
the provision of, or expansion of, community water and/or sewer service to the Rural Protection
Area unless supported for health or environmental reasons or servicing current levels of
development and only where such services do not result in additional development that will require
further rural expansion of water and/or sewer infrastructure.”
Policy UC-2.4 does not reference specific approaches, including annexation, in providing those
services and is silent on the mechanisms or arrangements for sewer service extension. With
reference only to Policy UC-2.4, the block annexation proposal appears not to be inconsistent,
although consistency with the RGS must be considered in relation with the 21 regional goals,
especially under the following policy areas:
 Governance and Service Delivery
 Rural Protection
 Urban Containment
 Agriculture and Food Systems
A much more detailed analysis would be required to determine RGS conformance and the regional
significance of this proposal. If the Board of Directors considers support for this block boundary
expansion, it is recommended that the RGS Support Team, consisting of senior planners representing
all North Okanagan jurisdictions, review and provide recommendations regarding RGS consistency
and regionally significance of this proposal, especially in relation to “sub-regional impacts” and
“cumulative effects of broad replication”.
Page 106 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 6
Electoral Areas “B” and “C” Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 2626, 2014:
Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP Bylaw No. 2626, 2014, which was adopted on September 3, 2014,
includes Policy 4.4.1 that states “the Regional District will work in partnership with the Ministry of
Community, Sport and Cultural Development, Agricultural Land Commission and municipalities
adjacent to the Electoral Areas “B” and “C” on the development of a municipal boundary adjustment
protocol agreement that creates certainty for all parties when reviewing annexation applications.”
A protocol agreement has not been developed between the City of Vernon and Regional District that
would guide decisions regarding annexation applications. OCP Policy 4.4.2 establishes criteria that
must be met for Regional District support for an annexation application, including:
a) The application is undertaken within the process suggested through either an agreed upon
municipal boundary extension protocol agreement or the 2010 Municipal Boundary Extension
Guide (Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development); and,
b) The application fulfills a defined and legitimate community need for additional developable land,
supported by detailed analysis; and,
c) The application does not include land within, or adjacent to, the Agricultural Land Reserve; and,
d) The application is for a large area boundary extension (greater than 50 properties), which will
require greater analysis and public consultation than smaller annexation proposals; and,
e) Extensive public consultation is undertaken with the residents of Electoral Area “B” and “C”; and,
f) The application has unanimous agreement by all landowners included within the boundary
adjustment area; and,
g) The referring municipality includes an analysis of cumulative impacts of municipal boundary
extensions, over a ten year period from the date of the annexation application, on both City and
Electoral Area service provision; and,
h) The referring municipality has considered all concerns that have been identified by the Regional
District, Electoral Area Directors and residents of Electoral Areas “B” and “C” regarding the
annexation application.
The policies of the Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP are supportive of the outcome of community
sewer service to properties within the Rural Protection Boundary to address environmental and health
issues, but are not supportive of the mechanism of annexation of properties into a municipality for the
purpose of providing community sewer.
Regional District Policy LU047:
Municipal Annexation Policy No. LU047, attached to this report, established that the Regional District
would generally support annexation applications that were consistent with the following criteria:
 Sufficient public consultation opportunities were provided to affected residents;
 Consistent with the Official Community Plan;
 Analysis of Electoral Area service impacts;
 Block annexations that are consistent with established social neighbourhoods; and/or,
 Follow logical servicing boundaries established by a servicing study or are within an ‘Urban
Containment Boundary’ as defined by the OCP.5
General Annexation Policy 1 states “The Regional District generally will only consider an annexation
request that follows a larger block of land or several properties and will generally not consider an
annexation request that includes an individual property or a small block of properties.”
5
NOTE: Policy LUC047 has not been updated since the adoption of the RGS and Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP Bylaw No. 2626, 2014.
Page 107 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 7
ANALYSIS:
City of Vernon Council, within the August 11, 2014 resolution, requested that the block boundary
extension report be forwarded “to the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan for its review
and consideration of exploring the proposed block boundary extension of all properties directly
adjacent to both the City's road and sanitary infrastructure”.
As described in the City of Vernon report dated July 21, 2014, the City proposes a process to extend
the municipal boundary to encompass 77 properties that are within Electoral Areas “B” and “C” with
the criteria of proximity to both City road and sewer infrastructure. Within the City report, other criteria
were not referenced beyond asset management considerations for property selection.
The Role of the Regional District:
The report’s proposed boundary extension proposal did not reference a Regional District role beyond
endorsement of the approach. Within the report, the boundary extension process was not presented
as a collaborative or partnership initiative, beyond simple endorsement and support, as represented in
the excerpt below:
Requesting RDNO approval on the proposed block approach would likely expedite the entire
process as well as demonstrate that the City is committed to a cooperative relationship… As such,
it is recommended that this report be forward to the RDNO Board with the request to consider and
endorse this approach.
City of Vernon Report (p. P21, Section B.3.)
As a result, and based upon the City of Vernon report, the Regional District would not have a role
during the further refinement of the process, selection criteria, consultation approaches, review of
affected properties or Electoral Area impact considerations beyond the referral of a completed
annexation application. Early consultation with the ALC regarding this process has also not been
identified within the City of Vernon report, although approximately 85% of the proposed boundary
extension area is within the ALR.
The City of Vernon OCP includes Policy 24.3, which states that support of the Regional District is
necessary for boundary extensions and includes a moratorium on single or small block annexation
applications. While the OCP can be amended by current or future Councils, a protocol agreement
would provide more certainty if all parties signatory to it have to agree to changes.
As well, Council has the authority to remove any conditions included within boundary extension
resolutions, including the requirement for Board of Directors support. This was demonstrated during
Council consideration of the “Klein” annexation application in 2013. The Regional District does not
have any legislated role in the annexation process under Section 20 of the Local Government Act and
without an agreement, does not have found a role in future expansion of the boundaries of the City of
Vernon, including the block boundary extension proposal.
Proposal Context:
After review of the City’s block annexation proposal, which identified 77 affected properties, 76
properties were confirmed, although the properties located at 5241 and 5277 Silver Star Road were
annexed into the City of Vernon on May 23, 2014 and have been excluded from this analysis. As well,
two annexation applications (“Klein” and “Broderick”), representing three properties, are already under
review by the Province. The properties that have been identified include:
Page 108 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 8





4 ALR properties and 2 non-ALR Country Residential properties adjacent to the eastern boundary
of the City of Vernon;
1 non-ALR Country Residential property adjacent to the east boundary of the Foothills
Neighbourhood Plan Area;
42 ALR properties, 3 Non-ALR Country Residential properties and 19 Residential Properties
adjacent to Silver Star Road;
2 ALR properties adjacent to Goose Lake Road, in Electoral Area “B”; and,
1 non-ALR Non-Urban property in the Commonage, adjacent to the Predator Ridge
Neighbourhood Plan Area.
The following table provides an overview of the properties that are included within the proposed block
annexation.
Table 1: Summary of Proposed Block Annexation Properties
Electoral Area # Parcels Designation # Parcels Parcel Size # Parcels Vacant (No Dwelling) Total Assessment "B" 13 "C" 61 ALR 48 <1 ha 31 6 $34,370,394 Residential 19 1 ha ‐ 2ha 20 Non ALR Non ALR Country Residential Non‐Urban 28 1 > 2 ha Total 23 74 A summary of the proposed block annexation properties has been provided in Appendix ‘C’. A map
of the proposed block annexation proposal has been included in Appendix ‘D’.
RDNO Policy Criteria;
The Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP Policy 4.4.2 identified criteria that provide guidance when the
Regional District is reviewing boundary extension applications, in the absence of a boundary
extension protocol agreement. This block boundary extension does not fulfill the following required
criteria:
1. The application fulfills a defined and legitimate community need for additional developable land,
supported by detailed analysis:
The block annexation proposal does not reference community need and focuses on proximity to both
City road and sewer infrastructure. Although the proposal does provide reference to OCP policy that
minimize the development potential of rural and agricultural lands, increased development pressure
may result with access to community sewer.
2. The application does not include land within, or adjacent to, the Agricultural Land Reserve;
Page 109 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 9
The application includes 48 properties that are within the ALR. Six of these ALR properties do not
have residential dwellings. Two ALR parcels are the subject of a separate annexation application that
proposes urban levels of development in the future.
Regional District Policy LU047 includes annexation policies that are specific to the City of Vernon,
including Policy 7 which states “that the Regional District will generally only support block annexations
that are consistent with established social neighborhoods.”
The RGS does support municipal sanitary service extension into the Rural Protection Area for health
and environmental reasons or if the service extension does not result in further densification, although
these regional policies do not reference specific mechanisms, including annexation, for providing
those services. The identification of those mechanisms would be subject to local (OCP) interpretation
of regional (RGS) policy. As well, land use proposals that may have potentially ‘regionally significant’
cross-jurisdictional impacts should be evaluated based upon the entire RGS policy framework and
RGS Support Team recommendations.
Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP policies are supportive of the outcome of providing community sewer
service to rural properties that are experiencing septic challenges, but are not supportive of the
mechanism of annexation of properties into the City of Vernon for the purpose of providing community
sewer.
Phase II of the Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study did identify the establishment of a protocol
agreement between the City and the Regional District as a mechanism to provide certainty for both
parties when reviewing annexation applications. This is reflected within Electoral Areas “B” and “C”
OCP policy, which moves away from a positional approach to a more collaborative approach that
focuses on addressing the many issues that may result from an annexation proposal.
A negotiated boundary extension protocol agreement provides the Regional District and City of
Vernon the opportunity to create a stronger and more productive relationship on the subject of
annexation through the development of common criteria and processes, as well as establishing an
interest based approach to the evaluation of proposals.
Some of areas that an agreement may explore include:
 Cross-boundary cumulative impacts of annexation activity:
 Consistent criteria, methods and approaches to the evaluation of annexation approaches; and,
 Potential mitigation measures to reduce the resulting financial burden of annexations on Electoral
Area residents.
As presented, the City of Vernon block boundary extension proposal is not supported by Regional
District Policy LU047 or Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP policies.
City of Vernon Official Community Plan Considerations:
An OCP is the guiding planning document for a community. The objectives and policies established in
an OCP guide Council decisions on a wide range of issues and outlines the future direction of the
community, as well as policies and actions to achieve the community vision. The objectives and
policies of the City of Vernon OCP guide growth management, planning and land use decisions,
including municipal boundary extension.
The City of Vernon OCP includes the following policy directions within Section 24: Boundary
Extensions:
Page 110 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 10





The RGS Rural Protection Boundary is recognized (Policy 24.2);
RDNO support is required for the proposed block annexation to alleviate septic failure, when
adjacent to the City boundary and infrastructure (Policy 24.3)6;
The City will no longer accept individual or small block annexation applications (Policy 24.3);
The City will work with the Regional District on the possibility of a Swan Lake Corridor boundary
extension application (Policy 24.4)7; and,
The City will not support the extension of City services outside of municipal boundaries (Policy
24.6)8.
Although the OCP proposes no additional individual or small block annexations, the OCP annexation
policies can be amended by current or future Councils, which may or may not require an amendment
to the Regional Context Statement, depending on the nature of the amendment. The Local
Government Act, Section 20 does not include a role for Regional Districts during Provincial
consideration of municipal boundary expansions requests.
Health and Safety Considerations:
City of Vernon OCP Policy 24.3 states that “with the support of RDNO, (the City would) support a
block boundary extension process where connection to the City sewer system can replace failing
septic systems and where the property is immediately adjacent to City infrastructure”. Although the
rational for the block annexation proposal is asset-management based, there is reference to recent
annexation applications being driven by septic failure.
The RGS includes policy that supports municipal sewer service extension into the Rural Protection
Area to address identified health or environmental issues. The City of Vernon OCP Policy 24.3
references connection to the City sewer system to replace failing septic systems through a block
boundary extension process, contingent on Regional District support.
Alleviating septic disposal concerns was not identified as selection criteria within the City of Vernon
report and was not represented within the proposal; although the letter dated August 18, 2014
indicated that the City has been receiving increased numbers of annexation applications to address
failing on-site septic disposal systems as a rational. Of 17 annexations applications that the Regional
District was referred, applicants in 5 submissions stated that sewer connection was the rational, and
only 2 identified septic failure.
After evaluation of the properties identified within the block boundary extension proposal, 47 parcels
have an area greater than 0.5 ha, which is sufficient to accommodate replacement septic systems, if
required. Six of the ALR parcels do not have dwellings associated with them. Many of the 27 smaller
(<0.5 ha) parcels are located within older Residential subdivisions that may have challenges
accommodating replacement septic systems, although only a portion of these historic residential
subdivisions adjacent to Silver Star Road have been included within this block annexation proposal.
6
OCP Policy 24.3: With the support of RDNO, support a block boundary extension process where connection to the City sewer system
can replace failing septic systems and where the property is immediately adjacent to City infrastructure and contiguous to the
City boundary. Pursuant to the RGS (Goal UC-2.4), such lands are not to receive additional development potential, and will be included in
Development District 3, the Hillside Residential and Agricultural District and rezoned to an agricultural zoning district. Do not accept
individual or small block boundary extension applications.”
7
OCP Policy 24.4: Work with the RDNO and Electoral Areas “B” and “C” on the possibility of a boundary extension to include the Swan
Lake Corridor to accommodate the extension of servicing required to realize significant commercial development.
8
OCP Policy 24.6: Do not support the extension of City services outside the municipal boundaries.
Page 111 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 11
Interior Health Authority (IHA) was consulted regarding any health and safety issues associated with
on-site septic disposal on the properties identified within the City’s report. A Health Order is still in
place for the 5.11 ha ALR property at 6467 Goose Lake Road, which was the subject of an
annexation application in the past and is included within the inventory of lands affected by the
proposal. IHA is of the opinion that larger (>0.5 ha) Silver Star Road properties are not a major
concern because these properties can accommodate replacement septic systems and have better
receiving soils than the surrounding areas. IHA did identify historic residential subdivisions as a
priority for community sewer connection, including the McClure Road Subdivision which is not
included with the City’s block boundary extension proposal. Community sewer was not considered
necessary to meet the septic disposal needs of larger (>0.5 ha) properties along the Silver Star Road.
Older residential subdivisions, including McClure Road and Barker Road Subdivisions, would not be
considered based upon the City’s proposal, although a community sewer solution may be necessary
in the future.
ALR Considerations:
The Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study concluded that there may be greater pressure to exclude
land from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) after annexation into a municipal jurisdiction. Property
in the ALR is protected by provincial legislation irrespective of municipal boundaries, although the
pressure to develop with access to municipal services was acknowledged by the Agricultural Land
Commission. ALR lands have been annexed into the City of Vernon over the last 10 years, including
properties in the Commonage, southern Swan Lake and BX/Foothills areas.
The City’s proposal has identified 48 ALR properties, with a total area of 112 ha or 85% of the total
proposal area. The ALR parcels identified within the proposed block annexation block annexation
include six (6) properties that are either vacant or include only agricultural buildings.
The Canadian Land Inventory (CLI) agricultural capability classification system groups land into seven
classes according to the land’s potential and limitations for agricultural use depending on soil and
climate characteristics. The majority of subject ALR properties are Class 3 lands capable of producing
a fairly wide range of crops under good management practices. Soil subclasses associated with these
lands are potential stoniness and topography.
The City of Vernon OCP includes Policy 24.3 which will designate all annexed Rural Protection Area
lands as Development District 3 and rezoned to an agricultural zoning district. According to the City of
Vernon Zoning Bylaw, the A1 Zone (Agriculture within the ALR) has a minimum lot size of 12.0 ha and
the permitted uses are consistent with the uses included in the Agricultural Land Reserve Use,
Subdivision and Procedure Regulation.
As identified within the Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study, the opinion of the ALC regarding the
annexation of ALR lands is an important consideration when reviewing this referral. Regional District
review of any annexation proposal or process that includes ALR lands should be informed by ALC
comments and concerns. Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee comments should also be
considered when reviewing any municipal boundary extension proposal that involves ALR lands.
The “Broderick” annexation application, which is currently under consideration by the Province and
included within the proposed block annexation, includes ALR properties that were proposed to be
included within the Foothills Neighbourhood Plan Area. The “Broderick” application and ALC response
are attached to this report. Similar correspondence, attached to this report, was provided by the ALC
Page 112 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 12
regarding the successful 2009 annexation application that included 1907 15 Street, 1102 Pottery
Road and 1904 Pottery Road.
Phases I and II of the Annexation Impact Study identified a lack of coordination between the City of
Vernon, Regional District, the ALC and the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development
when reviewing and evaluating annexation applications. Phase II conclusions recommended the
negotiation of a boundary adjustment protocol agreement between the City of Vernon, Regional
District, the Ministry and the ALC to ensure that there was greater coordination and a more
comprehensive assessment of annexation applications.
Community Need:
The City of Vernon Housing Needs Assessment9 has identified 9,168 approved residential units and
an available pre-zoned residential land supply within City boundaries that can accommodate
residential development, at 200 units a year, for over 45 years.
The Housing Needs Assessment does not include within the analysis infill development potential in
established neighbourhoods or residential infill development potential planned for the City Centre. The
conclusion of Electoral Area Annexation Impact Study was “The housing situation is unique in Vernon
compared to other communities of the same size, due to the fact that the available land for residential
development far exceeds the anticipated demand. Land constraint is not an issue in Vernon.”
The Assessment has concluded that community the need for additional developable residential lands
will not be necessary in the long term, even with the construction of 400 residential units per year.
Within the proposal, properties have been identified by the City of Vernon process that are adjacent to
the Predator Ridge or Foothills Neighbourhood Plan Areas and, in the future, may be identified for
urban development as an extension of those Neighbourhood Areas.
Community Identity:
A ‘community anchor’ is an community institution that provides a focal point that helps a community
reinforce its distinctive sense of identity, helps residents express and represent the things they value,
and provides a common place or space that the community can call it’s own. Community anchors are
most successful where there is a long history of trust and respect underpinned by a track record of
service delivery.
Rural community anchors10 play a vital role by:
 providing services based on community need, as well contributing to the social capital and identity
of the community they service;
 bringing together people, community groups or organizations to get things done in the community;
 providing a focus of knowledge of their community, representing the views of the local population;
 drawing together local voluntary and community-based organizations to increase their capacity to
deliver services; and,
 using their large size, influence and reputation to the advantage of the communities they
represent.
9
Prepared by CitySpaces Consulting for the City of Vernon, August 2013. Accessed on January 7, 2015 at:
http://www.vernon.ca/documents/talkocpdocs/130830_Vernon_HousingNeedsAssessment_REDUCED.pdf
10
Richard Usher (2009) “Rural community anchors”, in Anchors of Tomorrow, Community Alliance, London, UK.
Page 113 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 13
The City’s proposal includes BX Elementary School, Grace Bible Church and Church of Vernon
Congregation, which would remove many of the ‘community anchors’ within the BX/Silver Star. The
proposal also isolates both BX-Swan Lake Fire Hall and BX Park along Silver Star Road, which are
major community anchors. The inclusion of most properties along Silver Star Road within the block
boundary extension would bisect Electoral Area “C”.
The Proposal includes only some properties within residential neighbourhoods, including the Star
Road subdivision and the Barker Road subdivision, which is not consistent with Policy LU047. This
policy has been identified for review with the completion of the Annexation Impact Study: Phase II and
adoption of the Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP.
Financial Considerations:
After a preliminary review of the financial impact of the proposal on the BX/Swan Lake Fire Service, it
was determined that the identified properties contributed $6,063 annually. Community institutions,
including places of worship, educational facilities and civic institutions are, as referenced within
Division 6, Section 220 of the Community Charter, exempt from property taxation. As well, Class 9
(Agricultural) properties are exempt from property taxation on improvements. The BX/Swan Lake Fire
Service only places a levy on improvements. With the Community Charter exemptions and Class 9
(Agricultural) designation, the ALR properties, BX Elementary School, Grace Bible Church and
Church of Vernon Congregation do not contribute to the BX/Swan Lake Fire Service.
Table 2 provides a summary of BX/Swan Lake Fire Protection Service contributions from the
properties affected by the City of Vernon proposal.
Table 2: Summary of Proposal Impact on the BX/Swan Lake Fire Protection Service
BX Swan Lake Fire Service Contribution Class 1 $6,372,300 $5,609,100 32
0.9515 $6,063.24 Class 6 $2,609,000 $445,000 1
2.3312 $0.0011 Class 8 $890,000 $403,000 2
0.9515 $0.00 Class 9 $13,985,000 $7,110,994.00
39
0.9515 $0.00 TOTALS $23,856,300 $13,568,094 74 $6,063 The Electoral Area and City financial and service implications of the proposal would need to be
evaluated within the context of cumulative impacts, over a 10 year period, of all annexations that have
been completed.12 As well, the potential future annexation of the Swan Lake Commercial Corridor
should be included in an Electoral Area service impact assessment of the City’s proposal.
Assessment Class Improvement Value Land Value # Properties Mill Rate (per $1,000) A municipal boundary extension protocol agreement would establish consistent financial and service
assessment approaches across jurisdictional boundaries, providing for a direct comparison of
potential servicing impacts of the proposal on both City and Electoral Area services.
11
12
Class 6- Educational Facilities are exempt from Property Tax
Electoral Area “B” and “C” Official Community Plan, Policy 4.4.2.g.
Page 114 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 14
Conclusion:
The City of Vernon has proposed a block boundary extension that includes Electoral Areas “B” and
“C” properties that were identified by proximity to both City road and sewer infrastructure. The result is
a concentration of potential annexation properties directly adjacent to Silver Star Road, with a few
properties scattered throughout Electoral Areas “B” and “C” along the eastern boundary of the City
and one in the Commonage.
Regional District annexation policies and the Electoral Areas “B” and “C” OCP does not support this
proposed boundary extension proposal, as presented. The proposal’s growth management, land use,
service provision or financial impacts on Electoral Areas “B” and “C” are unknown and would require
detailed analysis that takes into consideration the cumulative impacts of annexation activity over a 10
year period, as well as potential annexation activity in the future (i.e. Swan Lake Corridor). A more
detailed analysis would be required to assist the Board of Directors in reviewing the City’s proposal,
including evaluating consistency with the RGS and determining potential Electoral Area community,
land use, service provision and financial impacts.
To provide further clarity to the municipal boundary extension proposal, the Regional District and City
of Vernon could consider jointly developing a Municipal Boundary Expansion Protocol Agreement that
would present an opportunity to transcend positional stances on the subject of annexation through the
development of a respectful, collaborative and interest based approach to boundary extension
proposals.
Such an agreement would provide greater transparency, further strengthening relationships,
formalizing criteria and community impact considerations when reviewing boundary extension
proposals and coordinating boundary extension policies across jurisdictions.
SUMMARY:
The City of Vernon, on August 18, 2014, requested that the Regional District consider exploring a
proposed 77 property block boundary extension with the criteria of proximity to both City road and
sewer infrastructure. The identified properties are within Electoral Area “B” and “C”.
It is the opinion of Regional District staff that consideration of Regional District support for the City of
Vernon block boundary extension approach, as proposed, is premature without an agreement
between the City of Vernon and Regional District of North Okanagan on how to proceed with such
proposals.
A Municipal Boundary Extension Protocol Agreement between the City of Vernon and Regional
District would benefit the greater community by formalizing annexation consideration criteria,
encourage long range planning within fringe areas, incorporate broader community objectives and
inform boundary extension decisions that balance the principles of regional sustainability and local
policy direction. The development of a protocol agreement is an opportunity to move away from
positions on annexation towards strengthening regional relationships through coordinated interest
based models of land use decision-making of the betterment of the broader community.
It is recommended that decision regarding the City of Vernon block boundary extension proposal be
deferred until the development of a Municipal Boundary Expansion Protocol Agreement.
Page 115 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Page 15
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee - January 23, 2015
Submitted by:
Reviewed by:
13avid--sew
Chief Administrative Officer
Rob Smailes, MCIP, RPP
General Manager, Planning and Building
Page 116 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Page 16
Appendix ‘A’: A Map of City of Vernon Annexations (2004-2014)
Page 117 of 183
Year of Application 2005 2006 2007 2008 Applicant Name _ John Zubeck, Ray Shields & Scott Gordon Karl August Marty Gilbert (Heritage View Estates) 2008 2009 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 Cliff Wenger & Alan Wilson Avanti Investment Inc. Ley Christensen Lawrence Montgomery; Joanne James Dwight Cousins; Paul Cousins Martin & Frances Vegt; James and Susan Gledhill Page 118 of 183
Michael Kozlowski 2 1 7025 Herbert Road & 7110 Bates Road 5241 & 5277 Silver Star Road 1 5902 Pleasant Valley Road 1 1 6162 Pleasant Valley Road 4403 Mutrie Road 3 1 1907 15th St., 1094 & 1102 Pottery Rd 811‐39th Avenue 1 2 5770 Pleasant Valley Road 975 25th Avenue 15 10 # of Properties BX/Silver Star Road Hitchcock Road Area Property Address No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No "B" "C" "B" "C" "B" "C" "C" "C" "B" "B" "C" Yes (some parcels) Yes (Since excluded) Electoral Area ALR Appendix ‘B’: Select City of Vernon Annexation Applications (2004-2014)
Approved Development ‐ including the requirement for an 'Infill Pre‐Plan" to be undertaken in conjunction with rezoning. Approved Approved Approved A rational for the annexation application was not provided. Residential development (5277) and sewer connection to replace aging septic system (5241) Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved A rational for the annexation application was not provided. The property included in the redevelopment plan for the former Anderson Ranch lands. Connection to sewer (Council denied request for connection in advance of annexation) Medium density residential development (12 units/acre) Including the property into the redevelopment plans for the City reservoir properties. Urban Development, contingent of ALR exclusion Approved Approved Inclusion within the Foothills Neighbourhood Plan Area, in advance of future development (City of Vernon Report, Nov. 2, 2007) Development of Vernon Castle Foundation housing (urban scale) Annexation Status Rational Provided in Applicant’s Annexation Application ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
2013 2014 Qamar Hayat 2012 Bryan Klein Bjorn Edblad 2011 Berk & Trish Shaw; Joanne Rempel; Vernon Congregation of the Church of God 2013 2011 Tim & Maureen Caswell; Michelle Crawford Craig Broderick Year of Application Applicant Name Page 119 of 183
6467 Goose Lake Road "Butcher Boys" Block 6231 Silver Star Rd 5718 Barker Road 5930 & 5932 Star Road; 5921 Silver Star Road 4815 Silver Star Road Property Address 1 10 2 1 2 1 # of Properties Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Yes No Yes. No No No ALR "B" "B" "C" "C" "C" "B" Electoral Area Submitted to Province Submitted to Province Refused by Council The primary purpose in applying for annexation on behalf of six of the ten properties is to develop an adult‐oriented bare land strata residential subdivision. Sewer connection to replace failed septic field (property under IHA Health Order) Approved Approved (1 property) Approved Annexation Status The primary purpose in applying for annexation of these two ALR parcels is for inclusion within the Foothills Neighbourhood Plan. City‐initiated ‐ Connected to city sewer since 1998. City policy is not to service lands outside of the City. 5921 Silver Star Road was excluded from application. Failing septic field ‐ Regional District provided Section 13 consent for sewer service extension. City of Vernon rescinded the condition of Regional District support for annexation application on Sept. 23, 2013 and submitted the application to the Province. Sewer connection Rational for Annexation Application Page 18
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
C C Silver Star Road 6311 Silver Star Road 1.19 0.81 0.39 0.14 0.27 0.44 0.24 0.25 0.45 0.32 0.09 C C C C C C C C C C 4.05 4.05 3.09 1.99 Parcel Size (ha) C C C 7135 Herbert Road 6235 Silver Star Road 6223 Silver Star Road 6195 Silver Star Road 6151 Silver Star Road 6131 Silver Star Road 6125 Silver Star Road 6109 Silver Star Road 6095 Silver Star Road 6079 Silver Star Road 6061 Silver Star Road 6025 Silver Star Road 6009 Silver Star Road EA Address Page 120 of 183
R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. Zoning RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RGS Designation No No No No No No No No 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP Yes No 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 7:6T‐3:5T No No No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No CLI Soil Vacant Capability Yes Yes Yes Yes No ALR No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No Septic Issues (IHA) $115,000 $149,000 $185,000 $56,400 $322,000 $197,000 $286,000 $195,000 $90,900 $178,000 $219,000 $450,000 $143,200 $0 $198,000 $132,000 $180,000 $200,000 $155,000 $162,000 $198,000 $159,000 $147,000 $182,000 $246,000 $200,000 $475,000 $19,040 $8,091 $235,000 No No No No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes (2014) ‐ with the Province Yes (2014) ‐ with the Province No Previous Annexation Application Page 19
BC Assessment Improvement Land Value Value Appendix ‘C’: City of Vernon Block Annexation Proposal Property Profile
Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
Adjacent to the Foothills Neighbourhood Planning Area Adjacent to the Foothills Neighbourhood Planning Area Notes ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Page 121 of 183
5687 Silver Star Road 5679 Silver Star Road 5561 Silver Star Road Silver Star Road 5583 Silver Star Road 5579 Silver Star Road 5577 Silver Star Road 5718 Barker Road 5741 Silver Star Road 5733 Barker Road 5759 Silver Star Road 5985 Silver Star Road 5981 Silver Star Road 5921 Silver Star Road 5865 East Vernon Road 5849 Silver Star Road 5775 Silver Star Road 0.46 0.92 2.43 1.94 C C C C 1.54 1.41 1.32 1.56 1.71 0.11 1.88 C C C C C C C 0.16 0.9 C C 0.09 C 1.94 0.09 C C 0.11 C C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. R1 R1 R1 C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. R2 R2 R2 RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 3TP 3TP 3TP Yes No No No 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes No 3TP 3TP 3TP No No No Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
No No Yes No No No No No No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No $268,000 $117,000 $195,000 $0 $692,000 $395,000 $323,000 $189,000 $195,000 $174,000 $7,900 $197,000 $2,609,000 $452,000 $198,000 $167,000 $140,000 $283,000 $82,100 $274,000 $281,000 $265,000 $302,000 $270,000 $144,000 $139,000 $125,000 $5,615 $35,698 $445,000 $270,000 $138,000 $132,000 $139,000 No No Tree Fruit Orchard ‐
Residential Dwelling on 5775 Silver Star Road BX Elementry School Church No No No No No No No Grace Bible Church Yes (2012) ‐ with the Province No No No No No No Yes (2011) Page 20
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Page 122 of 183
5992 Duncan Road 6254 Silver Star Road 6252 Silver Star Road 6226 Silver Star Road 6200 Silver Star Road 6144 Silver Star Road Silver Star Road 5948 Silver Star Road 5959 Duncan Road 0.25 4.54 6.25 2.35 1.21 3.97 C C C C C C 0.19 4.05 C C 4.05 2.72 C C 2.28 C Silver Star Road 2.17 C 2.00 0.23 C C 2.00 C 5482 Silver Star Road 5551 Silver Star Road 5545 Silver Star Road 5531 & 5541 Silver Star Road 5492 Silver Star Road C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP Yes Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
No No No Yes No No No No No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No $110,000 $503,600 $167,000 $0 $295,000 $259,000 $153,000 $187,000 $240,000 $0 $552,000 $331,000 $494,900 $161,000 $352,300 $149,000 $16,176 $259,000 $2,378 $518,000 $466,000 $164,000 $13,650 $35,260 $5,779 $429,000 $304,000 $367,900 $161,000 $6,551 Page 21
No No No No No Yes Yes No No No No No No No No The property adjacent, to the west, was not included in the block annexation, although has applied in the past Owner of 5440 Silver Star Road, which was annexed into the City for urban development purposes. Adjacent to the Foothills Neighbourhood Planning Area Two homes on single property ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Page 123 of 183
5367 Silver Star Road 5563 L & A Road 5540 L & A Road 5445 Silver Star Road 5425 Silver Star Road 5373 Silver Star Road 5371 Silver Star Road 5627 L & A Road 5787 L & A Road 5870 Silver Star Road 5858 Silver Star Road 5991 Dedecker Road 5997 Dedecker Road 5730 Silverstar Road 0.63 0.32 0.47 C C C 1.26 1.58 3.63 1.79 B B B B 2.02 2.29 B B 1.86 3.23 C C 3.09 0.81 C C 1.01 C C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP Yes Yes Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP 3TP Yes Yes 3TP No 3TP 3TP Yes No 3TP Yes Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
No No No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No No No No $91,500 $212,000 $875,900 $157,000 $320,000 $139,000 $24,000 $2,388,000 $124,000 $174,000 $225,000 $281,000 $290,000 $219,000 $280,000 $8,564 $38,410 $8,004 $262,000 $326,000 $110,061 $14,135 $12,776 $191,000 $181,000 $205,000 $246,000 $205,000 Page 22
No No No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No No Adjacent to both a R1 neighborhood and the Growth Area in EA "B" (to the west) Adjacent to BX Park and the BX Fire Hall to the north Adjacent to R1 Neighbourhood to the west (not part of block annexation) Adjacent to R1 Neighbourhood to the west (not part of block annexation) ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Page 124 of 183
0.12 0.16 0.47 0.13 B B C C 5277 Silver Star Road 5241 Silver Star Road B 6.69 B 270 Howards Road 4.13 C 10.3 5.11 1.91 C B 0.51 C 2.88 0.10 B C 1.52 B 6467 Goose Lake Road 1071 Pottery Road 1053 Pottery Road 1011 Pottery Road 6707 Goose Lake Road 850 39 Ave 5217 Silver Star Road 5197 Silver Star Road 5177 Silver Star Road 5135 Silver Star Road 4311 Mutrie Road 4307 Mutrie Road N.U. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. C.R. R1 R1 R1 R1 RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA RPA GA GA GA GA 2D 2:3T‐8:6R Yes Yes No 7:3T‐3:6R 2D Yes Yes 2D 2X 2X 2X 3TP 3TP 3TP 3TP Yes Yes No No No No No No Proposed City of Vernon Block Boundary Extension Referral
Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – January 23, 2015
No No No No No No Yes No No No No No No $476,000 $215,000 Yes (Health Order) No $184,600 $262,300 $338,000 $348,000 $23,800 $153,000 $166,000 $170,000 $158,000 $139,000 $184,000 No No No No No No No No No No No $453,000 $31,834 $30,206 $6,946 $320,000 $205,000 $11,920 $146,000 $212,000 $152,000 $134,000 $128,000 $278,000 No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No Annexed into the City ‐ 2014 Annexed into the City ‐ 2014 Page 23
Adjacent to CoV residential community Adjacent to Predator Ridge Neighborhood Plan Area Adjacent to CoV residential community In Growth Area Farm buildings only ‐ three orphaned C.R. zoned properties In Growth Area In R1 neighborhood and the Growth area in EA "B" In R1 neighborhood and the Growth area in EA "B" In R1 neighborhood and the Growth area in EA "B" In R1 neighborhood and the Growth area in EA "B" ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Appendix ‘D’: A Map of City of Vernon Block Annexation Proposal
Block Annexation Proposal
City of Vernon Boundary (2014}
Future Growth Area
Growth Area
Agricultural Land Reserve
Lakes
Page 125 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
THE CORPORATIO N OF THE CITY OF VERNO N
Our Files : 0482-01/3370-01
3400- 30T H STREET
VERNON, BRITISH COLUMB IA
TELEPH ONE (250) 545-136 1
VlT SE6
FAX (250) 545-4046
O FFICE OF THE MAYOR
August 18, 2014
Regional District of North Okanagan
9848 Aberdeen Road
Goldstream, BC V1 B 2K9
Dear Board Members:
Re:
Proposed Block Bound ary Extension
Increasingly, the City of Vernon is receiving applications for boundary extension from
property owners with failing septic systems that are immediately adjacent to the City's
sewer infrastructure. The current process to deal with these applications is lengthy,
consumes significant staff resources , can be frustrating to the property owner and tends
to undermine the relationship between our respective jurisdictions.
The City of Vernon is proposing a new approach to the inclusion within the City
boundaries of those properties that are immediately adjacent to both the City's road and
sanitary sewer infrastructure.
Council, at its Regular Open Meeting held on August 11, 2014 , passed the following
resolution :
"THAT Council forward the report dated July 21, 2014 and titled Proposed Block
Boundary Extension to the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan for its
review and consideration of exploring the proposed block boundary extension of all
properties directly adjacent to both the City's road and sanitary infrastructure;
AND FURTHER, that the draft Official Community Plan be amended to include the
Boundary Extension Section as contained in Attachment 4 of the report dated July
21, 2014 and titled Proposed Block Boundary Extension from the Director of
Community Development.
CARRIED."
.../2
Page 126 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
August 18, 2014
Regional District of North Okanagan
Re: Proposed Block Boundary
Extension
Page 2
I have attached the report cited in the above resolution for the Board's consideration.
On behalf of Council, I would respectfully ask that you give some thought to the
proposal. The intent of the proposal is to provide the affected property owners a one
time opportunity for inclusion within City boundaries and access to City sewer services.
This would bring one-off boundary applications to an end, be far more efficient for our
staff and the Ministry to deal with and will stop the current practice which simply
continues to be a burden to our normally positive working relationships.
Enclosure
cc: Mayor & Council
K. Flick, Director of Community Development
Page 127 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF VERNON
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
SUBMITTED BY:
Kim Flick, Director of Community Development
DATE:
FILE:
SUBJECT:
July 21, 2014
3370-01
PROPOSED BLOCK BOUNDARY EXTENSION
PURPOSE:
To propose a block boundary extension of all properties adjacent to both the City's road and
sanitary infrastructure.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Council foJWard the report dated July 21, 2014 and titled Proposed Block Boundary
Extension to the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan for its review and
consideration of exploring the proposed block boundary extension of all properties directly
adjacent to both the City's road and sanitary infrastructure;
AND FURTHER, that the draft Official Community Plan be amended to include the Boundary
Extension Section as contained in Attachment 4 of the report dated July 21, 2014 and titled
Proposed Block Boundary Extension from the Director of Community Development.
ALTERNATIVES & IMPLICATIONS:
1. THAT Council receive the report dated July 21, 2014 and titled Proposed Block Boundary
Extension from the Director of Community Development.
Note: This alternative is available should Council elect to retain the current approach to
boundaty extensions. The prevailing lot by Jot response to boundaty extension
applications wou_Jd continue to be utilized and the associated issues with that process
would be expected to continue.
ANALYSIS:
A.
Committee/Board Recommendations:
N/A
P18
Page 128 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
-28.
Rationale:
1. Summary of the Problem and Proposed Solution
The purpose of this report is to propose a new approach to the inclusion within the
City boundaries of those properties that are immediately adjacent to both the City's
road and sanitary sewer infrastructure.
Increasingly, the City is receiving applications from property owners with failing septic
systems that are immediately adjacent to the City's sewer infrastructure. The City's
current policy regarding boundary extensions is to accept applications from property
owners where the property meets certain criteria. This process has proven lengthy
and contentious, consumes significant staff time and resources and creates
animosity between the City and RDNO.
It is proposed that all those properties that are immediately adjacent to a City road
and sewer line be offered a one time opportunity to participate in a block boundary
extension process. Such a process would replace the property by property approach,
greatly reducing the staff resources involved in annexations and providing certainty
to RDNO as to the City's long term intentions.
2. What would a block boundary extension process look like?
Preliminary mapping indicates that there are 77 RDNO properties that are adjacent
to both the City's road and sanitary sewer infrastructure (Attachments 1 - 3). The
block annexation is proposed only to include these properties. There are several
properties that are adjacent to a sanitary main or have a sewer connection but are
not adjacent to a City road. In these cases, the City would have to take on Increased
costs related to road maintenance and life cycle replacement. It is recommended that
properties in this category not be included in the block boundary extension due to
that significant increase in costs.
The process would Involve input from all of the impacted property owners and
adjacent residents, including RDNO residents. It is recommended that Council
support boundary extension only for those property owners that would like to be
included. Including property owners in the boundary extension that do not wish to be
included may make the process more contentious.
Should properties ultimately become part of the City, the-affected property owners
should be made aware of any changes in their costs, including taxation and utilities.
It is proposed that properties not be required to connect to the sanitary system upon
annexation, but rather that they connect as they choose. Should they opt not to
connect, payment of the sewer availability fee would be required.
Most of the properties involved are along Silver Star Road and are part of the Rural
Protection Area in the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS). Because of this, any
properties that are ultimately included in the proposed boundary extension that are
in the Rural Protection Area would be redesignated to Rural/Agricultural and given a
P19
Page 129 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
- 3comparable zoning district. This would provide assurance to RDNO that the City Is
not looking to expand its development footprint or put pressure on adjacent rural or
agricultural lands in the electoral areas. 1 For those properties that may have
residential designation or be in a designated growth area in the RGS, a comparable
City designation and zoning would likely be pursued. However, each property would
have to be examined in light of the City's growth strategy as the City's OCP
discourages new subdivisions at the periphery of the city until existing subdivisions
are more built out. This approach is largely intended to address the cost of providing,
maintaining and replacing infrastructure. By targeting growth in areas with existing
infrastructure or close to it, growth can be managed in an affordable and sustainable
way.
3. What would be the City's new approach to boundary extensions?
Key to the block approach is that it replace the existing property by property
approach. Eligible property owners would therefore be advised that the block
boundary extension would be the only opportunity to pursue inclusion in the City
boundaries. To ensure that properties do not pursue individual boundary extensions
prior to or after the block process, the boundary extension policies in the draft OCP
would need to be amended. These possible amendments are illustrated in
Attachment 4.
Further, it is recommended that Council stop accepting boundary extension
applications to facilitate a sewer connection to a property outside the City without the
support of RDNO. )"he draft OCP {Attach111ent 4) and boundary extension procedures
would need to be amended to clearly state this. It is proposed that the OCP also be
amended to specify that with RDNO support, the City would consider a block
boundary extension process in the future. This has the advantage of eliminating the
single property or small block boundary extensions and the considerable resources
required to process them. These proposed amendments would be reflected in a
revised draft OCP that would be brought forward for Council's consideration to the
Regular Open Meeting of September 8, 2014.
This approach also'addresses many of the issues identified by RDNO in its letters of
March 7, 2014, provided in response to the City's referral of its draft OCP (Attachment
5). Though the boundary extension policies tabled in the draft OCP were far more
restrictive than the previous OCP, it appears that intent was not clear.
Page 2 of the letter from Laura Frank, Sustainability Coordinator, contains a table
itemizing RDNO's concerns in light of the draft Electoral Area Band C OCP. The
draft Electoral Area B and C OCP (Attachment 5} specifically opposes boundary
extension applications that are initiated for septic sewer expansion to remedy
environmental or health issues, but supports extra-territorial service extension. The
draft Electoral Area Band C OCP also identifies a comprehensive list of criteria that
must be met prior to RDNO supporting any boundary extension application.
1 The RGS permits extension of sewer to these properties to serve the existing level of development only, not to increase
the development potential of the property.
P20
Page 130 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
-4The proposed block approach and associated amendments to the draft OCP
annexation policies would address the following concerns:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Eliminates reference to an "Ultimate City Boundary".
Does not support property by property boundary extensions.
Involves comprehensive consultation with Area B and C residents adjacent
to/in the vicinity of the block areas.
The application is for a large area (greater than 50 properties).
Involves a detailed financial analysis of the impacts on City service provision.
The block approach is to be supported by RDNO in advance of undertaking it.
Eliminates policy to work with the province on streamlining the boundary
extension process.
This same letter also indicates that it does not support the possible boundary
extension of the Swan Lake corridor. The draft OCP already specifies that the City
would work with RDNO and Electoral Areas B and C on the possibility of including
this designated future growth area into the City of Vernon to accommodate the
extension of servicing required for significant commercial development (these
properties are not proposed to be included in the present block proposal). The draft
OCP policy is intended to realize a cooperative approach, while respecting the City's
position that it will not extend its services outside the City boundaries.
Requesting RDNO approval on the proposed block approach would likely expedite
the entire process as well as demonstrate that the City is committed to a cooperative
relationship. The growth strategy of the OCP and the RGS respects the rural
character of the Electoral Areas and there is no intent to expand the City's boundaries
beyond these properties. for which the sole intent is to permit connection to the
sanitary sewer to service the existing level of development. As such, it is
recommended that this report be forward to the RDNO Board with the request to
consider and endorse this approach.
4. Will there be any other boundary extensions?
The City has sufficient land base to accommodate growth for decades to come. The
only known exception to this is the Swan Lake corridor, which is discussed above.
The tabled OCP contains explicit references to the possibility of extending its
boundary to include lands that are in the Rural Protection Area but may ultimately
serve the City's growth strategy. In these cases, the policy indicates that the City will
require RDNO approval on the redesignation of those lands from Rural Protection
Area to Growth Area or Future Growth area prior to pursuing boundary extensions.
This is to ensure that the process happens with the certainty of ultimate development
potential. Should RDNO not support the redesignation, the lands would not be
supported for inclusion in the City's boundaries.
C.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Map of Silver Star/Herbe1t Road Properties Adjacent to City Roads and
P21
Page 131 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
- 5Sanitary Sewer
Attachment 2 - Map of BX/East Vernon Properties Adjacent to City Roads and Sanitary
Sewer
Attachment 3 - Map of Blue Jay/Longspoon Properties Adjacent to City Roads and
Sanitary Sewer
Attachment 4 - Draft Amended OCP Boundary Extension Section
Attachment 5- March 7, 2014 RDNO Letter regarding the City's OCP Referral
D.
Strategic Plan Objectives:
This proposal involves the following key objectives in Council's Strategic Plan:
Maintain a competitive local tax environment (while delivering programs and
services valued by the community).
)> Re-establish and rebuild positive, mutually beneficial local government
relationships.
)>
E.
Policy (Existing/Relevance/None):
1. The Services Beyond City Boundaries policy specifies that services will not be
extended beyond City boundaries. This policy has been under review given the
recent boundary extension applications that have involved failing septic systems, and
appears on this agenda for Council's consideration.
2. The Council policy Annexation Applications specifies that applications will be
accepted and reviewed on an annual basis, subject to certain criteria.
3. Existing OCP policy supports the extension of the municipal boundary as per an
"Ultimate City Boundary." The draft OCP proposes significant changes to these
policies.
F.
Relevant History:
Since 2006, the City has recei\'led 24 applications for boundary extension, driven largely
by the need to connect to the City's sanitary sewer system. Historically, connection to
the City's sewer system was intended to support increased density and new
development. Before 2008, the City's OCP supported development at the periphery of
the community. Given the limited ability to develop new subdivisions outside of growth
areas, boundary extensions for this purpose are generally not supportable.
G.
Applicant's Response:
N/A
H.
Reasons for Bylaw:
N/A
P22
Page 132 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
-6-
I.
Resources:
There are considerable implications for staff resources should the block boundary
extension be pursued. This cannot be added to the 2014 work program without
rescheduling other priorities. However, if the block boundary extension is endorsed by
Council and the RDNO, and the proposed process is completed, time consuming
individual applications will essentially stop.
BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:
There are a number of budget implications that would need to be explored, including:
o
o
o
Is an application fee charged to those that may ultimately be included in the City?
Typically for local government initiated processes, an application fee would not be
charged .
As the .intent is to minimize any increase in costs to the City, a detailed financial
assessment for each property would need to be undertaken.
It is noted that the sewer availability fee would apply for those properties that may
ultimately be included in the City but opt not to connect to the sanitary line imrnediately.
Prepared by:
fc;.2..~
Kim Flick, Director of
Community Development
P23
Page 133 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
-7APPROVALS
oz;,·w~ ;:
Supervisor
COUNCIL AGENDA INFORMATION:
DATE
~
~
~
~0
Regular
Date:
Item#
~181
In-Camera/COW
Date: August 11, 2014
Item#
0
0
Information Item
Date:
Item#
Agenda Addenda
Date:
Item#
REVIEWED WITH
REVIEWED WITH
REVIEWED WITH
REVIEWED WITH
Committees
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
181
181
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bylaw Services
Clerk
Economic Dev.
RCMP
Building & Licensing
Human Relations
NOTE:
Environment
Facilities
Finance
Fire
GVS- Parks
Utilities
Public Works
Planning
Engineering
Operations
GVS-Water
Other
..
City Admtmstrator's comments Will be provtded 1f required as an addendum to the report
G:\3000·3699 lAND AOMINISTRATION\3370 CITY BOUNDARY EXTENSIONS\01 General\140721 RPT KSF Boundary Extenslon.docxx
P24
Page 134 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Attachment 1 i
Legend
e
Properties Proposed for Inclusion
In Block Boundary Extension Proc ess
(Adjacent to City Sanitary Sewer and Road)
D
Ptopttie:~ Pfo~ed fOf lnch;cloh
-
Sm!Mail
(."~... ; RDNOJt.ui$dic~Ol1 Sotm:llry
Page 135 of 183
p,
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Attachment 2
I-
Page 136 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Properties Proposed for Inclusion in Block Boundary Extension Process
!Blue Jay Areal
Legend
Properties Proposed for Inclusion
In Bloc:k 9ound~ry Extension Procus
(AcJjaeent to City Sanitary Sewer ftnd Roacl)
CJ
Page 137 of 183
Ploilcl1'u ?ro;cud l'lrln:.I-Jsbtl
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Attachment 4
24.0 . . ~-ftej<a ti o nB oun d ary EYte sions
Provide a process for consideration of a ·~1-1-b ou n darv extensio n applications.
Undertake a study to determine the feasibility and desirability of amalga mat :on of' xten ding the City's
1Joun da1y to include lands in the Swan Lake Corridor.
Work with the Regional District of North Okanagan on the identification and redesignation of Rural
Protection Lands, as outlined in the Regional Growth Strategy, that serve the City's growth strategy.
Foster prosperity for pe ople, busine s and government
Protect and preserve green spaces and sensitive areas
Ensure housing meets the needs of the whole community
Create a culture of sustainability
Protect agricultural land
Create strong, compact and complete neighbourhoods
f.nsure de·:efepment pa)'S for itsetf
For many years, the City has accepted and supported tmAefa-t-ie-l·'f-·bou ndary e- ·tension applications for lands
contiguous to and within an ultimate City of Vernon boundary, identified to provide general guidance in the
consideration of a+li~SR-bo u nda rv ext en sion applications. This property by property approach is t(me
consuming for all parties and tends to reflect individual property interests as opposed to the goals; and
interests .outlined in the City and Regional District of North Okanagan's (RDNO) long term planning,
development and infrastructure phasing.
Futther, there are concerns related to the trend towards a-H+1&>f?.tief1--boundarv ext ens ion to facilitate
residential densiflcation. Allocations of increased density far from the City Centre and designated
neighbourhood centres are contrary to the growth strategy embodied in this plan. Attention must also be
paid to the rural-urban interface to ensure that the residential subdivision pattern does not encroach into
or serve to fragment ALR lands, particularly on the City's eastern boundary.
A;T,;.;:.;x;-Uefl-Botmdary Extensions I page 134
P28
Page 138 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
With the adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) on September 21,2011, specific areas for growth
and future growth, as well as rural areas intended to be protected from the pressures of urban development
were identified. As a result of the RGS, the City's trA+te1,- foo-peticy needs boundary extension Dolides need
to evolve to reflect these new regional designations.
As such, pursuant to RGS policy UC-2.4, the City will support a b.o ck boun darv exte nsion process along its
bou1 da ry p; cper-ty-By pro perty anne;:Jtio:l ;:;pplicat icns along its easte:~.:E~cla+V-in the rural protection
area to address issues of failing on-site septic systems where the properties are immediately adjacent to
City infrastructure. Individual or small block bounda ry extension applications w ill not be acce!Jted. In order
to meet the intent of the RGS policy, prope1ties annexed for this purpose will be included In Development
District 3, the Hillside Residential and Agricultural District, and be rezoned to an agricultural zoning district.
This further supports RGS policy UC-1.2.8, whereby municipalities are to recognize the rural protection
boundary in their Official Community Plans. The endo rse m .nt of RDNO is required prior to t he initiation of
a block bounda ry extension process.
Where a-H--afl-Ae*at-tona boundary extension application falls within the designated rural protection area, but
serves the City's growth strategy and is in keeping with the RGS goal of compact, complete communities, it
is necessary to receive RDNO approval as pc.rt ofprior to the-€-Rfl€7s~-bo und a ry extension process on the
redesignation of the lands as growth or future growth area, as appropriate.
In addition, the relative costs and benefits of the extension of the municipal boundaries in the Swan Lake
Corridor should be examined. This corridor is identified as a future growth area in the RGS and the extension
of servicing is key to realizing significant development potential. As the development of this area is beneficial
to the entire sub regional area given the potential to provide significant new highway oriented commercial
development, it Is desirable to work with RDNO and Electoral Areas B and C to ascertain the feasibility and
desirability of AA-:'lafl.Ag- xtonding the City's bou nda ry to includ - this corridor.
The RGS also speaks to the need for the Government of British Columbia to review and update municipal
expansion policies, ensuring that the process is equitable, transparent and inclusive. The City strongly
supports this initiative.
21.1
! 1-le
Gil'{ ma-y---t<+1~"'--<!-StH
GB R5iOC-r tWR-B-- :h fe.l ewiHg-;
e-5-fgP.ation of grm·:
~feaS-a
:f:l-r-{:lftt-1-p·ffit-:?ai-GH-c'Y.'eas id eiVJfi-2d in the Regiona l GfB-wt-h
~e-gy:
. .n!li:~·at-ion-Boun datY Extc:nsions
f page 135
P29
Page 139 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
b. Co sts of se:,:ici ng new-l·a-Fl-€15-fa:'d
kl-r~~l€tn
a:-E~t-i&n~te-Rt i a l
outsta r; G!-i+1g-se·Pik~re-v !s ier.
to any
p re ·~~~ ittl
~i-Ag ami fi s~ac-klssessme:- .
new
lttfl4.tl-5e5,\...Jith
due co nsideration to the City's !and usc sian
an ~
~-st~.,a-s-'. ~-P.e-RegfeH·a i-G~~;. te;·r<·
Eo---{;ens i deraticn~a l
urban interface a·
Eh-lt:k-Rt#":-Ea ·-tefl-&f-et:f.l2·P~4tas-.=s,
5-i+:gle app!icat!on .
24.2
1•
'f-.a-!3-F-ror~-E!et=-t
\h.'o rk in partn ers hip ••ffi:H.-..th e Gover: ·nefl-i:~Fi-t..J-sF.-CeitHtthl<H:-e-c-fca te a more str-ea:r<H·Hea
. .=rHH·8cJ t ien application pfOC-es-s-,
24._,. Review a-frnen 't}f}-boundary exte nsion applications annually, in conjunction with Official
Community Plan amendment applications.
24.~4 Recognize the rural protection boundary as embodied in the Regional Growth Strategy.
24.}5 ~H13i3-<:wt-eHfle+i&Hei:v.;W it h t he suppo rt of I<Di'JO . sup Dort
a bloc k boun dary e. tension pro cess where
connection to the City sewer system can replace failing septic systems and where the property is
immediately adjacent to City infrastructure and contiguous to the City boundary. Pursuant to the
RGS (Goal UC-2.4), such lands a+J-Aei.:etl-l=tH'-t~u rp os e are not to receive additional development
potential, and will be included in Development District 3, the Hillside Residential and Agricultural
District and rezoned to an agricultural zoning district. Do not accept il dividual or small b locl
bounda rv extension app lications.
24.G:l Work with RDNO and Electoral Areas Band Con the possibility of a bou nd ary xtensi on to include
t he aflfl€>:-ffl-~#k •
: 1 ~ 3-fuB:!re gro\-v-tfl..a-f€-0- Swan Lake Corridor. a de signa ted fut ure gro w t h
are a.-i-Rto t!1 e C i~to accommodate the extension of servicing required to realize
significant commercial development.
24.~7 Where a-H--a-l*le>f-ati
- a bo undarv ad justment application falls within the designated rural
protection area, and serves the City's .growth strategy, require the Regional District of North
Okanagan's approval on the redesignation of the lands as growth orfuture growth area in the RGS,
as appropriate, prior to ., lel;-atffi.R-exten sion of t he Citv bo undary7
24.6
Do not suppo rt th e ex tensio n of City services ou t side t he m unicipal boundaries.
P30
Page 140 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Regional District of North Okanagan
Annexation Impact Study Phase 2
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF VERNON
3400- 30\ll Street, Vernon, B.C. V1T 5E6
Telephone: (250) 545-1361
FAX: (250) 545-4048
website: www.vernon.ca
Corporate Policy Manual
r:Se:::--ct-:-:i-on-:--·--,.-------
--~~-----
~--------~,
~~--
Sub-Section:
~--+---j Services Beyond City Boundaries
!
--1-:--'
Title:
.
RELATED POLICIES
APPROVALS
POLICY
APPROVAL:
Approved by:
AMENDMENT
APPROVAL:
Amendment
Approved by;
Amendment
Approved by:
usean Harvey"
"Sean Ha!Vey"
"Sean Harvey"
Mayor:
Mayor:
Mayor:
Date:
Date:
Date:
NovemberS,
. 2000
·~~~
Apri126, 2004
SECTION AMENDED
/AMENDMENT
I APPROVAL:
____ j
R
March 14, 2005
Sections (4), (9) and
addition of Schedule
"A".
Council voted not to
allow connections to
City sewer outside of
City boundaries.
I
'-
. ·-·
I
i
..J'
Attachment 1 7 7
Final Report- April2014
Page 141 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Regional District of North Okanagan
Annexation Impact Study Phase 2
Corporate Policy Manual
Services~eyond City Boundaries
Page2
POLICY
This policy is required to provide services to lands beyond current City limits at
no added cost to City taxpayers, and to ensure that the works beyond City limits
meet current standards in order that upgrades will not be required once the area
is annexed in to the City.
DEFINITIONS
PROCEDURES
Council, at its March 14, 2005 Regular Open Meeting, adopted the following
resolution:
"THAT Council not allow connections to City sewer outside
of City boundaries."
CARRIED, with the Mayor and Councillor
Cochrane opposed.
78
Final Report- April2014
Page 142 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
POLICY NO. LU047
Page 1 of 3
Title
Municipal Annexations
Purpose
of Policy
Approved By
Approved By
Supercedes
To establish policies and procedures for the consideration of municipal
annexation referrals.
Regional Board
Effective Date July 8, 2003
Revised Date
GG008, GG009, GG010,
Prepared by Development Services
GG021; GR001, GR002
POLICY STATEMENT
This policy is subject to any specific provision of the Municipal
Act, or other relevant legislation or Union Agreement.
The Regional District recognizes that an adjoining municipality may initiate a process to annex
land within an Electoral Area. The Regional District also recognizes that the Ministry of
Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services has developed Policies that the Municipality and
the Regional District should follow. However, the Regional District also considers that these
Provincial Policies do not fully involve the Regional District and the residents in the Electoral
Areas; therefore, the following policies have been enacted to augment these Provincial Policies
General Annexation Policies
1.
The Regional District generally will only consider an annexation request that follows a
larger block of land or several properties and will generally not consider an annexation
request that includes an individual property or a small block of properties.
2.
The municipality must provide all current property owners and residents in a proposed
annexation area an opportunity to register their approval or rejection of the proposed
annexation; and
it is the policy of the Regional District that this consultation should be done by
information sessions followed by a petition or referendum. The Regional District does
not support the use of a counter-petition process as a means to determine public support
for a proposed annexation.
3.
The Regional District may hold a public meeting on a proposed annexation prior to the
Regional District providing any resolution on the proposed annexation.
4.
It is the policy of the Regional District that the results of the consultation with property
owners and residents as well as the results of any petition or referendum should be
made generally available prior to the Regional District providing any resolution on the
proposed annexation; however,
the Regional District also recognizes that there may arise special circumstances where a
resolution may be necessary before this information is available.
G:\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0340 Circulars, Directives, Orders, Manuals, Policies\0340.50 Policies and Procedures\50.01
Board Policy Manual\Land Use (LU)\Adopted\047 MUNICIPAL ANNEXATIONS.doc
02/26/08
Page 143 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
POLICY NO. LU047
Page 2 of 3
Title
Municipal Annexations
Purpose
To establish policies and procedures for the consideration of municipal
of Policy
annexation referrals.
Approved By
Effective Date
Approved By
Revised Date
Supercedes GG008, GG009, GG010,
Prepared by Development Services
GG021; GR001, GR002
POLICY STATEMENT
This policy is subject to any specific provision of the Municipal
Act, or other relevant legislation or Union Agreement.
5.
Any proposed annexation advanced by a municipality should include a proposal on any
financial or servicing impacts on the provision of local services in the Electoral Area
for consideration by the Regional District.
6.
Where a proposed annexation entails land development, the Regional District will only
support an annexation that is consistent with the policies of the Regional District
Official Community Plan and if not, the Regional District will consider an amendment
to the Plan prior to providing comment on the annexation request with special
consideration of buffers as may be appropriate with new developments adjacent to
Agricultural or Rural Lands in the Electoral Areas.
Annexation Policies Specific to City of Vernon Annexation Proposals
7.
It is understood that the annexation of land into the City of Vernon may be undertaken
by blocks; however, to preserve established social neighbourhood identities for the
long-term, the Regional District will generally only support block annexations that are
consistent with established social neighbourhoods such as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BX Villa
The BX
MacDonald Road area
Tillicum
Dixon Dam
Hartnell Road area
McLennan Road area
West Swan Lake
PV Road Commercial Properties to the Stickle Road area
Swan Lake Commercial District
Birnie Road area
North Commonage
G:\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0340 Circulars, Directives, Orders, Manuals, Policies\0340.50 Policies and Procedures\50.01
Board Policy Manual\Land Use (LU)\Adopted\047 MUNICIPAL ANNEXATIONS.doc
02/26/08
Page 144 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN
POLICY NO. LU047
Page 3 of 3
Title
Municipal Annexations
Purpose
To establish policies and procedures for the consideration of municipal
of Policy
annexation referrals.
Approved By
Effective Date
Approved By
Revised Date
Supercedes GG008, GG009, GG010,
Prepared by Development Services
GG021; GR001, GR002
POLICY STATEMENT
This policy is subject to any specific provision of the Municipal
Act, or other relevant legislation or Union Agreement.
8.
Notwithstanding the policy to preserve established social neighbourhood identities, the
Regional District will consider a block annexation that follows a logical servicing
boundary that has been established through a servicing study or a block annexation
within an ‘Urban Containment Boundary’ as defined in an Official Community Plan.
9.
The Regional District will not recognize an annexation application or petition to the
City of Vernon from an individual or developer who has agreed to annexation to
facilitate a connection to the City of Vernon sewer system and that individual or
developer does not currently wish to be annexed.
10.
When any comprehensive plan is being undertaken to consider the ‘Ultimate Boundary
of the City of Vernon’ or if a full annexation proposal is being presented towards the
‘Ultimate Boundary’, it will be necessary to consider the provision of local services to
the properties located on the east side of Kalamalka Lake which are not within this
‘Ultimate Boundary’.
G:\0100-0699 ADMINISTRATION\0340 Circulars, Directives, Orders, Manuals, Policies\0340.50 Policies and Procedures\50.01
Board Policy Manual\Land Use (LU)\Adopted\047 MUNICIPAL ANNEXATIONS.doc
02/26/08
Page 145 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
APPLI CJ.ri'I O~\~ t:o l 1
f~~Ni\~ E}{/. TRON
/\PPLICMi r
llmlCfiiPTIOtl or noros t:!o Dr:vnort,ti!NrH• AtliHlKI!UltJrO cnv
~----~-~-~.....,...._._.-_. _..,.... I
--~--·~---., 1
No propos•! <I d~.; vdc'lmwnt nlthl~ lim(! · contlnliCd ll[JtiC~tllut~lu s e, Owner would prefer to be within the
City n(Vc!lliou so lh~ sl! land ~ t:nniJC com hi •red ~~~part of the l'outhll l ~ Ncl!ihmuhtintl roud ;mod,llcd
{:U.
••
·~~
~
•
...
~~
~
planning processes. Subject propclllcs of(cr potc utl~l fo r ro ~ d 111\provcnHmts, tmll t<!.lll9•111llmts nml
y."'"'"~
pn s~ lblu fultl!~
~ ~~......_...._
clr!YciOJ1111C.'rtl IJmrxlnn C{lfllllllllllly IIN'(b.
------__...o.t.---·---
--~--------
I.<)C MIOII rLN lUI" t;OO.CCl MIO
tuRilOUJ ;Ili~O
l'llO:•I:O ll eS
(u,'CI.Ul~ IIO l ~I G I L~U U:n:
l 'illl: S m tGII ( ~S U llrW:> OLO)
W C~IVEO IIY:
noittJi~
- -
NOV-1.0·2000
~1 1;1 ~(lilt; n~,l~nll:lli!lll (.!(llllllillccl ~II !his fi.lnii T.~ (:t~llcctc!lullllcr' lllO ~-I CCtlom l-;r· Julormutionlltld
I
~,.~ ,IeetH~ I or J'nvn~y 1\ c~JS!l':~ll!!<~ ti S<'A! o n.!v_ ~l' 11w J2.!!.'J!:.I:~:_~!_!:Q.~I~'~!l'~J'mu· n::c ~1cst _
. __ _
Page 146 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Attachment 1
::.1- ll "·••.
City of Vemon
,..,.
4
3
2
5
PlAN 273 17
PLAN 1362
AN 1362
- - · --- -
--
G
Electoral Arca"C"
15
f\1 700
1'11
---~ -;~ - -
PLAN 352
Pli\N
:$•1%00
----t:.olojC (I PI\~IC I !It• ' ( l lult.l)
~~ I nnd~ "llh to Clly or V~o M,l
~-~ LGndH\ IIh lr HOIHJ
\
00~9
Page 147 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Attachment 7
Agricultural Land Commission
133-4940 Ccmodo Wny
Burnaby, British Colvmbio V5G 4K6
To!: 604 660-7000
Fax: 601! 660·7033
www.olc.gov.bc.cu
March 25, 2013
Dale Rintoul, City Planner,
City of Vernon
3400 30 111 Street
Verno11, B.C.
V1T 5E6
Dear Sir
Re: Boundary Extension Request fot· Lots 2 and 3, Plan 1362, Sf}Ction13, Twp. B, ODYD
(6231 Silver Star Road)
Thank you for the referral date March 20, 2013 which requested the Agricultural Land
Commission's comments about a proposal to annex the above noted properties into the City of
Vernon, so they may be considered as pa1i of the Foothills Neighbourhood and associated
·
planning processes.
This is to advise that the annexation of Lots 2 and 3 into the City of Vernon is not supported for
the following reasons;
1) the properties lie within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) and the best available
information indicates that the land has capability for agricultural uses.
2) no previous ALC applications (there are none) or City of Vernon. discussions with the ALC
reference the addition of these properties to the Foothills Neighbourhood, either through the
Official Community Plan process, or in any other associated planning process.
3) adding these properties to a portion of the City (Foothills Neighbourhood) that does not
currently encompass any ALR land might raise expectations of land usG change, which may not
be supported by the Agricultural Land Commission. Experience Indicates that including arable
ALR land into urban City areas does not increase the likelihood that the Commission will assent
to subdivision; or non~farm uses on ALR land.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions about the above, please
contact this office.
Yours truly,
Page 148 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Agricultural Land Commission
133-4940 Canada Way
Burnaby, British Columbia V5G 4K6
Tel: 604 660-7000
Fax: 604 660-7033
www.alc.gov.bc.ca
February 3, 2009
Reply to the attention of Martin Collins
Dale Rintoul, Planner
The Corporation of the City of Vernon
3400 - 301h Ave Vernon, B.C.
V1T 5E6
Dear Sir
Re: Proposed Annexation of Lots 25, 26, 27, Sec. 35, Twp. 9, Plan 291, ODYD
Except Plan H14932 (1907-15th St, 1102 Pottery Rd, and 1904 Pottery Rd)
Our file: T-30987
Thank you for the referral dated February 2, 2009 which requested the Agricultural Land
Commission's comments on a proposed in9lusion into the City of Vernon of three 4 ha
lots lying in the Agricultural Land Reserve.
The Commission notes that stated purpose of the annexation is to develop the lands into
medium density or affordable housing. However, the Commission has no record that
an application for exclusion has been submitted to the City or forwarded for the
Commission's review.
A review of the best information available to the Commission indicates that the lands
have good agricultural capability and a long history of farm use.
In addition, in its most recent review of the Vernon Official Community Plan (OCP) the
Commission noted that the OCP stated there was capacity to add 10,000 units of
housing without having to access greenfield sites. Furthermore, in the Commission's
October 9, 2008 correspondence providing comments on the OCP, it expressed
concern about ad hoc, incremental annexations, particularly on the easterly boundary of
the City, because they generally reflected attempts to urbanize agricultural lands.
Speculation and land use uncertainty associated with annexation is inconsistent with the
purposes of the ALC Act because they tends to reduce agricultural investment and
activity.
In view of its previously stated position with respect to ad-hoc annexations and the
City's OCP statements about the lack of necessity to access greenfield sites for housing,
the Commission does not endorse the annexation of these lands into the City.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions please contact
Martin Collins at 605-660-7000.
. .. 2
Page 149 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Page2
File: T-30987
Yours truly,
PROVINCIAL AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION
Erik Karlsen, Chair
30987m14
Page 150 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.5
Page 151 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.6
REPORT
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
File No.: 3046.01.04
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Planning Department
DATE:
January 26, 2015
SUBJECT:
February Sustainability Report
RECOMMENDATION:
That the February Sustainability Report dated January 26, 2015 be received for information.
DISCUSSION:
1. Shuswap River Watershed Sustainability Plan – Boating Regulations
On November 18, 2014 RDNO hosted a meeting of parties interested in pursuing boating regulations
for the Shuswap River. The meeting was attended by representatives from the Lower Shuswap
Stewardship Society, the Conservation Officer Service, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans,
Splatsin First Nation, City of Vernon Protective Services - Safe Communities and members of the
Shuswap River Watershed Sustainability Plan (SRWSP) working groups. Representatives from the
Enderby and District Chamber of Commerce, Enderby and District Services Commission and
Kingfisher Interpretive Centre are interested in the project but were unable to attend the meeting.
The content of the meeting included an overview of the process to apply for Vessel Operating
Restriction Regulations through Transport Canada, a background with respect to boating on the
Shuswap River, the recommendations outlined in the SRWSP and the non-regulatory initiatives that
have occurred to date.
It was agreed at the November 18th meeting to pursue the following regulations, based on the
recommendations in the SRWSP:
Zone 1: From the mouth of the Lower Shuswap River at Mara Lake to the Baxter Bridge (Trinity Valley
Rd.) – vessel engine size limit of 10 Horse power.
Zone 2: Lower Shuswap River from the Baxter Bridge (Trinity Valley Rd.) upstream to Mabel Lake –
no motorized vessels.
Zone 3: From the mouth of Mid Shuswap River at Mabel Lake South upstream to the Shuswap Falls –
no motorized vessels.
In the SRWSP a no-wake zone was proposed for Zone 1. However, Transport Canada regulations do
not include a no-wake zone. After discussing what options there were to achieve this, an engine
horse power limit was decided as the best option. A speed restriction was also considered, but due to
the difficulty in enforcement, it was agreed that an engine size restriction was more practical.
Page 152 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.6
February Sustainability Report
Report to EAAC – January 26, 2015
Page 2
One of the concerns raised during the meeting was that an engine size restriction would have a
significant impact on river resident’s who currently own large boats and use the river to access Mara
Lake. RDNO staff are in discussions with Transport Canada staff to identify if there is potential for
special permits for residents to allow them to move up and down river, from within the restriction zone
to access lakes at a speed which does not create a wake. So far it has been indicated that this can
be included in the regulation application but may hamper the approval as it would involve an
administrative burden for Transport Canada. The Transport Canada representative is continuing to
look into this matter.
RDNO staff are currently developing a consultation strategy for the proposed boating regulations
which includes identification of stakeholders and interested parties, opportunities for delivery of
information regarding the proposed regulations and the development of a survey to glean feedback on
the proposed regulations. Consultation opportunities will include distributing information and surveys
through existing programs and events such as the Conservation Officer Enhanced Service, River
Ambassadors, Creel surveys and River events, and through specific public information meetings.
Direct contact will also be made with identified stakeholders and interested parties including
commercial operators, interest clubs (such as sportfishing clubs), community and resident
organisations and the SRWSP contact list.
The consultation strategy will be reviewed and approved by the partners pursuing the boating
regulations and will be implemented over the spring and summer of 2015.
The contact person with Transport Canada, Hillary Lawson, has indicated that she is planning a trip to
the North Okanagan in February 2015 and it is hoped that a tour can be organized to show her some
of the stretches of the Shuswap River that would be included in the proposed regulations.
2. Electoral Area “F” OCP Review
The Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan review, Phase I- Public Consultation, is underway. In
January 2015 the on-line survey went live and a hardcopy of the survey has been mailed out to
approximately 1,900 households within Electoral Area “F”. The survey is open until February 27,
2015.
Two public information meetings have been scheduled for:
•
•
February 11, 2015, 4:00PM to 7:00PM at the Grindrod Community Hall, 6920 Highway 97A,
Grindrod, BC; and
February 12, 2015, 4:00PM to 7:00PM at the Riverside Community Hall, 3784 Trinity Valley
Road, Enderby, BC.
The public information meetings will provide a forum for people to review background information on
the areas’ existing land use designations, population projections and community profile. The
meetings will also provide an opportunity for residents to ask questions of RDNO staff, raise any
concerns, issues and or areas of interest they would like considered in the Official Community Plan
review process. In March 2015 the results of this first phase of consultation will be compiled and
presented in a summary report which will inform further community discussion and ultimately the
drafting of a new Electoral Area “F” Official Community Plan.
Page 153 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.6
February Sustainability Report
Report to EAAC - January 26, 2015
Page 3
3. Community Works Fund
Two Tier 1 Community Works Fund projects have been approved:
Project #099- Whitevalley Community Stage Design $7,384.00
Project 99 involves the design of a community stage for Whitevalley Parks, Recreation and Culture to
be located in the Lumby Oval Park. A community stage will benefit residents of Electoral Areas "D",
"E" and the Village of Lumby by providing a venue for community cultural presentations. The total
cost of the project is $12,000.00, with the Village of Lumby contributing $4,616.00.
Project #100- Gunther Ellison Water Meter Upgrade $4,500.00
The Gunter Ellison Water Utility consists of 11 properties that are connected to the City of Enderby
Water System (Note: Only 10 properties are serviced with water meters). Over the past year, the City
of Enderby has installed water meters and an updated meter reading and billing system on all their
users and have passed the necessary bylaws for billing of customers based on a flat rate and a
consumption component. Therefore, the existing Gunter Ellison system needs to be upgraded so the
water meters are compatible with the Enderby system and the existing meter register replaced with a
compatible radio read register.
Submitted by:
Sustainability Coordinator
Approved for Inclusion:
Endorsed by:
~ ~~
Rob Smi1MCIP1RPP
General Manager, Planning and Building
(
\
\\
David Sewell
\
Chief Administrative Officer
Page 154 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
REPORT
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
File No.: 4020.30
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
John Friesen, Bylaw Enforcement Officer
DATE:
January 7, 2015
SUBJECT:
Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Bylaw Enforcement 2014 Annual Report dated January 7, 2015 be received for information.
DISCUSSION:
Registered and resolved Bylaw complaints in each quarter of 2014 are listed below:
First Quarter 2014
Nineteen (19) complaints were registered in the first quarter of 2014 compared to twenty-two (22) in
2013, fourteen (14) in 2012, sixteen (16) in 2011, sixteen (16) in 2010 and five (5) in 2009 during the
same period. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of the 2014 first quarter complaints were resolved by the
end of 2014.
First Quarter
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
ELECTORAL AREA
B
received
C
resolved
received
1
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 1915, 2004
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
1
2
2
2
2
E
resolved
received
TOTAL
F
resolved
received
resolved
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
received
1
ILLEGAL DUMPING
TOTAL
D
resolved
5
1
3
2
2
1
1
2
1
Page 155 of 183
2
2
1
received
resolved
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
6
4
1
1
2
2
2
2
8
7
2
1
19
2
1
17
Report to EAAC re:
Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
Page 2
Second Quarter 2014
Thirteen (13) complaints were registered in the second quarter of 2014 compared to twenty-one (21)
in 2013, seventeen (17) in 2012, twenty-five (25) in 2011, fourteen (14) in 2010 and twenty (20) in
2009 during the same period. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of the 2014 second quarter complaints were
resolved by the end of 2014.
Second Quarter
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
ELECTORAL AREA
B
received
C
resolved
received
D
resolved
received
E
resolved
received
TOTAL
F
resolved
received
resolved
3
1
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 1915, 2004
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
1
1
1
1
1
1
received
resolved
3
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
4
4
4
4
3
2
5
2
13
9
ILLEGAL DUMPING
TOTAL
1
1
Third Quarter 2014
Fourteen (14) complaints were registered in the third quarter of 2014 compared to fourteen (14) in
2013, twenty-two (22) in 2012, eighteen (18) in 2011, twenty-four (24) in 2010 and twenty-one (21) in
2009 during the same period. Seventy-one percent (71%) of the 2014 third quarter complaints were
resolved by the end of 2014.
Page 156 of 183
Report to EAAC re:
Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
Third Quarter
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 1915, 2004
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
Page 3
ELECTORAL AREA
B
received
C
resolved
received
D
resolved
1
1
3
E
received
TOTAL
F
received
resolved
resolved
received
1
3
1
2
1
2
2
1
resolved
received
resolved
1
1
5
1
3
3
2
1
1
3
3
1
3
1
1
ILLEGAL DUMPING
TOTAL
4
3
1
1
6
5
3
1
14
10
Fourth Quarter 2014
Sixteen (16) complaints were registered in the fourth quarter of 2014 compared to ten (10) in 2013,
ten (10) in 2012, thirty-one (31) in 2011, fifteen (15) in 2010 and sixteen (16) in 2009 during the same
period. Thirty-eight (38%) of the 2014 fourth quarter complaints were resolved by the end of 2014.
Fourth Quarter
ELECTORAL AREA
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
B
received
C
resolved
received
D
resolved
received
E
resolved
received
resolved
received
2
1
2
1
1
TOTAL
5
resolved
2
4
1
4
1
1
1
2
2
16
1
2
6
1
1
1
1
3
received
2
1
ILLEGAL DUMPING
resolved
1
2
1
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 1915, 2004
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
TOTAL
F
1
2
7
2
3
2
Page 157 of 183
2
Report to EAAC re:
Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
Page 4
Annual Totals of Registered Complaints in 2014
Seven (7%) less complaints were registered in 2014 compared to 2013.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of complaints registered in 2014 were resolved in 2014 compared to
seventy-five percent (75%) in 2013, seventy percent (70%) in 2012, seventy-four percent (74%) in
2011, sixty-five percent (65%) in 2010, sixty-five percent (65%) in 2009 and seventy-one percent
(71%) in 2008. Refer to the Annual Report Complaint Comparisons section for the number of
complaints registered at the end of each year.
Registered complaints for bylaw contraventions in 2014 are detailed below:
2014
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 2514, 2011
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
ELECTORAL AREA
B
received
C
resolved
3
1
1
D
resolved
received
E
resolved
received
TOTAL
F
resolved
1
1
received
resolved
received
resolved
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
6
2
1
2
12
1
1
1
2
1
2
7
1
1
4
1
16
9
1
1
4
4
5
5
7
2
42
68%
1
1
6
4
2
4
3
1
1
3
3
1
3
1
2
5
2
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
2
12
1
2
11
3
15
1
2
15
12
7
2
24¼%
80 %
24¼%
73 %
19¼%
29 %
3¼%
ILLEGAL DUMPING
ANNUAL TOTAL
received
2
4
3
2
18
10
9
2
62
100 %
29%
56 %
100%
During 2014, eight (8) of the sixty-nine (69) complaints registered in 2013 were resolved resulting in a
eighty-four percent (84%) compliance rate to date. In addition, one (1) of the sixty-three (63)
complaints registered in 2012 was resolved resulting in a ninety percent (92%) compliance rate to
date. Six (6) of the ninety (90) complaints registered in 2011 were resolved resulting in a ninety-eight
percent (98%) compliance rate to date. Four (4) of the 69 complaints registered in 2010 were
resolved resulting in a one hundred percent (100%) compliance rate to date. One (1) complaint
registered in 2008 has not been resolved to date. Refer to the Current Status of Registered
Complaints 2006 – 2013
Page 158 of 183
Report to EAAC re:
Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
Page 5
Annual Report Complaint Comparisons 2008 - 2013
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 2514, 2011
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
B
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 2514, 2011
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
1
1
4
2
1
3
3
8
1
2
2
8
1
3
21
2
22
4
31%
33%
6%
B
2
1
1
2
1
8
2
4
2
11
23
2
3%
1
2011
Electoral Area
C
D
E
3
9
27%
100%
22%
35%
16%
4
4
12
5
5
29
5
1
2
3
1
4
8
2
34
22
9%
38%
24%
1
1
7
5
4
10
2
7
2
12
4
13
2
63
6%
21%
100%
F
6
1
TOTAL
1
B
3
2
1
3
1
3
1
1
2
1
3
7
2
1
1
5
9
1
3
1
5
8
1
1
5
14
5
4
3
7
19
2
90
17
2
21
1
11
8%
21%
100%
25%
30%
16%
Page 159 of 183
1
11
4
2
1
2010
Electoral Area
C
D
E
2
1
1
3
2
1
5
4
TOTAL
2
10
TOTAL
F
3
2
14
F
2
1
3
18
11
1
3
2
22
4
1
3
1
2
67
1
8
2
2
5
4
8
2
2012
Electoral Area
C
D
E
3
1
2
2
1
1
3
3
2
2
1
B
2
1
1
3
7
ILLEGAL DUMPING
ANNUAL TOTAL
2
TOTAL
3
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
F
1
1
3
3
ILLEGAL DUMPING
ANNUAL TOTAL
2013
Electoral Area
C
D
E
1
1
4
1
1
13
6
4
2
2
14
2
3
17
5
69
4%
25%
100%
Report to EAAC re:
Bylaw Enforcement – 2014 Annual Report
▪
Buildings, Structures, Dwellings
▪
Illegal Suites
▪
Home Occupation
▪
Agricultural Use
▪
Unenclosed Parking and Storage
▪
Signage
B
3
2
▪ Other
BUILDING
BYLAW 1747, 2003
NOISE CONTROL
BYLAW 908, 1990
OPEN BURNING
BYLAW 2514, 2011
UNSIGHTLY PREMISES
BYLAW 2046, 2005
F
2
B
1
1
1
TOTAL
8
2
6
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
7
3
15
3
20
3
26%
35%
5%
ILLEGAL DUMPING
ANNUAL TOTAL
Page 6
2009
Electoral Area
C
D
E
3
1
1
3
TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ZONING BYLAW 1888, 2003
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
2008
Electoral Area
C
D
E
1
F
1
2
4
3
1
7
2
3
3
6
2
4
2
10
10
34
2
1
5
2
2
2
5
9*
2
1
5
3
3
2
6
18
10
11
1
2
17
3
57
2
19
24
4
5
21
2
73
4%
30%
100%
26%
33%
5%
7%
29%
100%
2
2
1
2
2
Current Status of Registered Complaints 2006 – 2013
Year
Total Number of
Registered Complaints
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
67
63
90
69
57
78
49
48
TOTAL
Percent
Resolved
Dec. 31, 2014
84.1
92.1
97.8
100
96.5
98.7
100
97.9
ZC = Zoning Contravention
BPC = Building Permit Contravention
UPC = Unsightly Premises Contravention
Page 160 of 183
Types of Contraventions
3-ZC, 2-BPC, 4-UPC
2-ZC, 2-BPC, 1-UPC
2-ZC
2-ZC
1-ZC
1 UPC
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.7
Report lo EAAC re:
Page7
Bylaw Enforcement- 2014 Annual Report
Submitted by:
)
,..- (_
-
-
~
John Friesen
Bylaw Enforcement Officer
Approved For Inclusion:
r
Endorsed by:
( _)c~
!.
r'
r (\
David Sewell,
Chief Administrative Officer
Pat Luscombe
Bylaw Enforcement Manager
Endorsed by:
Rob Smai/es, MCIP, General Manager, Planning and Building
Page 161 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
REPORT
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
File No.: 3010.06
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Rob Smailes, General Manager, Planning & Building
DATE:
January 15, 2015
SUBJECT:
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
1. Total Planning Applications [received from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014]: 130
a. Electoral Areas [includes Silver Star] –84 total
Type of Planning Application
A.L.C.
Campground Permits
Development Permit
Delegated Development Permit
Development Variance Permit
Liquor License Referral
OCP / RZ
Rezoning
Subdivision
Text Amendment
Temporary Use
Waiver Lot Frontage
Legal Documents
Referrals*
TOTAL
*no application fee is received
B
C
1
CSS
D
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
5
2
1
1
1
1
4
16
2
8
Total
F
1
1
3
1
1
5
2
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
3
6
19
14
3
4th qtr total comparison for 2014 and 2013:
2014
84
E
2013
100
Page 162 of 183
3
3
3
7
7
24
TOTAL
4
1
9
9
7
2
4
20
1
1
3
4
19
84
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 2
Planning Department
Applications Received - January - December Comparison 13/14
Electoral Areas
3
WVR
TU
0
5
1
1
TA
6
20
SUB
4
RZ
21
5
19
REF
OR
LIQ
0
1
1
1
LD
2014
2013
3
4
DVP
5
7
DP
18
13
CP
0
1
4
ALR
29
0
5
12
10
15
20
25
* Number of Applications Received to December 31
30
b. Municipal – 46 total
Type of Application
A.L.C.
Campground Permit
Development Permit
Development Variance Permit
Liquor License Referrals
Mobile Home Park Permit
OCP / RZ
Rezoning
Subdivision
NOTE: Subdivision applications are
processed by the EA Planner
Text Amendment
Waiver Lot Frontage
Temporary Use
Referrals
END
LUM
3
5
1
1
SPL
2
1
1
9
TOTAL
2
1
4
14
3
1
3
1
9
11
2
1
2
1
1
6
46
1
TOTAL
2
3
10
4
33
4th qtr total comparison for 2014 and 2013:
Total
2014
46
2013*
50
*2013 includes applications from ARM
Page 163 of 183
35
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 3
Planning Department
Applications Received - January - December Comparison 13/14
Municipalities
1
1
WVR
TU
0
1
2
TA
5
11
SUB
0
RZ
3
REF
1
MHP
2014
2013
6
3
OR
12
2
3
0
DVP
14
11
DP
4
3
CP
0
1
2
ALR
0
2
10
4
6
8
10
12
14
* Number of Applications Received to December 31
16
2. Outstanding Planning Applications:
a. Electoral Areas [includes Silver Star]
i. Planning applications are processed in the order in which they are received.
There were 15 total outstanding as of December 31, 2014 [detailed below].
ii. Estimated time to process an application from receipt of application to report
being forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission is approximately 7
weeks.
Type of Planning Application
A.L.C.
Development Permit
Development Variance Permit
Campground Permit
Legal Document
OCP / RZ
Rezoning
Referrals
Subdivision
Text Amendment
Waiver Lot Frontage
TOTAL
B
C
CSS
1
1
2
D
1
E
F
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
4
2
3
2
15
2
6
TOTAL
1
5
2
2
Page 164 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 4
Note: The above 'Outstanding' Electoral Area Planning applications count does not include
pending files [i.e. the application has been processed by Planning staff and forwarded to the
applicable APC for consideration or the application requires additional information prior to
completion or the applicant is working on conditions of approval]. The approximate number of
pending Electoral Area Planning applications is: 23 applications and 55 subdivision applications
b. Municipal
i. Planning applications are processed in the order in which they are received. 14
total outstanding [detailed below].
ii. Estimated time to process a planning application from receipt of application to
report being forwarded to the Municipal Administrator is approximately 7 weeks.
Type of Application
A.L.C.
Campground Permit
Development Permit
Development Variance Permit
Mobile Home Park
OCP / RZ
OCP
Referrals
Rezoning
Subdivision
Text Amendment
Waiver Lot Frontage
END
1
TOTAL
1
LUM
SPL
TOTAL
1
2
3
1
5
1
1
5
2
5
9
14
1
4
Note: The above 'Outstanding' Municipal Planning applications count does not include
pending files [i.e. all non-subdivision applications have been to Council for
consideration but require additional information prior to completion].
The
approximate number of pending Municipal applications is: 28 applications and 16
subdivision applications (Enderby – 3 Spallumcheen – 13)
3. Total Building Permit Applications [received from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014]:
261
a. Electoral Areas [includes Silver Star] – 158 total
$26,413,860 Total Construction Value
4th qtr total comparison for 2014 and 2013:
Total
2014
2013
158
135
$26,413,860 $11,276,000
b. Municipal – 103 total
$14,592,401 Total Construction Value
4th qtr total comparison for 2014 and 2013:
Total
2014
2013
103
121
$14,592,401 $13,710,720
Page 165 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 5
4. Total Housing Units [from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014]: 101
a. Electoral Areas [includes Silver Star] – 61 total
4th qtr total comparison for 2014 and 2013:
2014
61
Total
2013
35
b. Municipal – 40 total
4th qtr total comparison for 2014 and 2013:
2014
40
Total
2013
29
5. Total Authorization to Construct Permits: [received from January 1, 2014 to December 31,
2014] – 14
SFD
Accs Bldg
Agr Bldg
6
6
2
(3 in “D”, 3 in “E”)
(2 in “D”, 2 in “E”, 2 in SPL)
(2 in “D”)
6. Building Statistics Comparison – between RDNO, Coldstream and Vernon
No. Permits Comparision
RDNO / Coldstream / Vernon
2006-2014
700
655
600
500
477
518
505
400
470
425
474
420
366
363
RDNO
385
350
322
313
300
200
100
334
COLDSTREAM
256
261
VERNON
122
137
317
175
133
127
119
108
104
81
0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Page 166 of 183
2013
2014
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 6
No. Housing Units Comparison
RDNO / Coldstream / Vernon
2006-2014
800
747
700
600
511
500
RDNO
400
COLDSTREAM
368
VERNON
300
200
100
227
216
225
84
61
38
0
2006
2007
174
137
134
2008
2009
255
233
232
152
79
38
2010
25
2011
142
134
58
35
64
48
2012
2013
101
74
2014
7. Planning Department Personnel Matters
a. 2014 Planning Hours [to December 31, 2014] for Inquiries and Applications only.
Municipal
Electoral Areas
Silver Star
ALR
Total
Inquiries
288
1402
131
Applications
1547
1698
140
368
Inquiries
Silver Star
7%
Electoral
Areas
77%
Total Hours
1834
3101
271
368
5574
Applications
Silver
Star
4%
Municipal
16%
Electoral
Areas
50%
Page 167 of 183
Municipal
46%
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 7
b. The Planning department is operating with a staff of 2 clerical [Executive Assistant and
Clerk], 1 Planning Assistant, 1 Planning Technologist, 2 Planners (includes Deputy
Planning Manager) and 1 General Manager/Planner. In addition, the Sustainability
Coordinator, Sustainability Coordinator/Planning Technologist, Regional Growth
Strategy Coordinator and Chief Building Inspector report to the General Manager.
8. Building Department Personnel Matters
The Building Department is operating with a staff of 1 Sr. Building Inspector and 1 Chief
Building Inspector/Manager since December 2014. One Sr. Building Inspector retired in
November 2014. Service times have been maintained within the 2-3 week industry
standard for Permit issuance based on a complete Building Permit submission; although a
temporary reduction in service time did occur in September 2014 where permit times
approached 4 weeks.
9. Planning
a. The following is a list of projects and their status:
2014 Projects – Ongoing:
Work Plan Projects:
1. Electoral Area “F” OCP Review
Terms of Reference were approved August 20, 2014, and the project will be
funded from CWF, which was approved September 17, 2014 by the Board of
Directors. Two Public Information Meetings are scheduled for mid February.
The information gathered at the public information meetings will help inform
revisions to the existing plan and development of new policies to address the
current needs and aspirations of Electoral Area “F” residents.
2. Annexation Study to determine the impacts of incremental annexations on the
Electoral Areas
Urban Systems completed Phase I of the Electoral Area Annexation Impact
Study on February 2, 2012 and was requested to undertake Phase II of the
Project, which examined the cumulative financial, social, environmental, land
use and service delivery impacts of annexations on Electoral Areas. Phase II,
which concluded in March 2014, resulted in recommended actions that the
Electoral Area Advisory Committee (EAAC) could consider for Phase III of the
project. Phase II recommendations and finding have been incorporated into the
growth management, annexation and fringe management policies of the draft
Electoral Area “B” and “C” Official Community Plan. A proposed approach for
Phase III of the project will be presented to the Electoral Area Advisory
Committee in February 2015.
3. Shuswap River Planning
Implementation of the Shuswap River Watershed Sustainability Plan is now
underway. Four priority strategies were identified in May 2014 during a
workshop with working group members. Priorities for action in 2014-2015 are
pursuing boating regulations on the Shuswap River, researching possible
structures for an independent watershed advisory body, developing a
comprehensive education program that addresses and incorporates all the
strategies that speak to education and prioritizing high value riparian sites and
identifying potential funding sources for restoration. Staff are now working on
these strategies.
Page 168 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 8
4. Sustainability Program
The RDNO sustainability project has been developed to promote principles of
sustainability and support sustainability projects primarily within the Electoral
Areas of the Regional District. RDNO has continued to support local
community projects through this program including improvements to the
Grandview Bench, Mara and Kingfisher Halls and support for the construction of
flood protection works at the Kingfisher Interpretive Centre.
5. Soil Removal and Deposit Bylaw
Bylaw No. 2647 received First Reading on August 20, 2014. Bylaw No. 2647,
2014 was then referred to agencies on August 22, 2014. A report was provided
to the Electoral Area Advisory Committee on November 6, 2014 recommending
amendments to Bylaw No. 2647, that Second Reading be given, as amended,
and that the Bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing. The Board of Directors
reviewed the Bylaw with the proposed amendments at their November 19, 2014
meeting, at which time they deferred consideration of Second Reading until
additional information was provided on several aspects of the Bylaw.
Amendments to Bylaw No. 2647, 2014 regarding permit issuance authority, soil
volume criteria options, enhanced buffers and setbacks and further clarification
regarding the intent of the Bylaw were brought forward to the January 7, 2015
Board of Directors meeting, at which time the Bylaw received Second Reading
as amended. A Public Input Session will be held on February 5, 2015.
Projects Completed in 2014:
1. Electoral Areas “B” and “C” Official Community Plan Review
Bylaw No. 2626 was adopted September 3, 2014.
2. RDNO Subdivision Servicing Bylaw
Bylaw No. 2600 was adopted January 15, 2014
3. Shuswap River Watershed Sustainability Plan
Endorsed by the Board of Directors April 16, 2014
Unplanned Projects added to the 2013 Work Plan completed in 2014:
1. Amendment to Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 to allow secondary suites in the Electoral
Areas. Bylaw No. 2592 was adopted July 16, 2014.
2. Amendment to Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 to include provisions for agri-tourism
accommodation in the Electoral Areas. Bylaw No. 2589 was adopted July 16,
2014.
3. Amendment to Electoral Areas “D” and “E” Official Community Plan to include
policies regarding Genetically Modified Organisms. Bylaw No. 2603 was
adopted September 3, 2014.
4. Amendment to the text of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 to include provisions for
medical marihuana production facilities in the Electoral Areas. Bylaw No. 2606
was adopted October 15, 2014.
5. Amendment to the text of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 to prohibit mineral extraction
in the Country Residential Zone in Electoral Areas “B” and “C”. Bylaw No. 2613
was adopted October 15, 2014.
Page 169 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Report to Electoral Area Directors – January 15, 2015
Page 9
2014/2015 Work Plan projects, not yet started:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Zoning Bylaw Review/Rewrite;
Swan Lake Corridor Plan;
Silver Star OCP Review
Cosens Bay Local Area Plan; and
Fees Bylaw Review.
b. Municipal Planning Contract:
The member municipalities committed to a total of 2135 hours for 2014 as follows:
Enderby:
184.32 regular hours
2014 Total Hours Remaining [as of December 31, 2014] 0 (0%)
Lumby:
625.64 regular hours
2014 Total Hours Remaining [as of December 31, 2014] 0 (0%)
Spallumcheen:
1325 regular hours
2014 Total Hours Remaining [as of December 31, 2014] 1.47 (.07%)
Total Municipal Remaining
1.47 (.07%)
The Electoral Area Directors agreed to provide 200.64 additional hours to Lumby
and 9.32 additional hours to Enderby for the remaining of 2014, in order to remain at
regular rates.
The Municipal Planning Contracts have the following end dates:
Enderby: December 31, 2018
Lumby: December 31, 2018
Spallumcheen: December 31, 2016
10. Building Department Projects
a. Operational
 Continue with enforcement actions – on going;
 Reports to Member Municipalities to close outstanding files;
 Prepare report to Board regarding outstanding Member Municipality files;
 Implement remaining recommendations of Bldg Dept. Service Review Report.
b. Governance:
Completed Tasks:
 Bylaw 2644 and MOU were sent to Jeff Locke (Fulton & Company) on July 7, 2014
 Bylaw 2644 received First, Second and Third Readings July 16, 2014
 MOU signed by all participants in mid August 2014
 Bylaw 2644 sent to the Inspector of Municipalities on August 19, 2014
Page 170 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.8
Planning and Building 2014 Summary Report
Page 10
Report to Electoral Area Directors- January 15, 2015
c. Regulatory:
Required Actions/Steps:
• Changes to Regulatory Bylaw are required to exclude Municipal Participants and
other changes;
• Municipal Participants will also need to draft Bylaws and amendments to other
Bylaws (ie//Procedures Bylaw).
d. Agreements
Required Actions/Steps:
• Electoral Areas will have to agree to provide a contract service to the Participants.
• Topics covered will include service levels, responsibilities, service term , cost
structure etc.
r
Submitted by:
Approved for Inclusion:
Rob Smailes, MCIP, RPP
General Manager, Planning and Building
c
David SeiXIell
Chief Admi~istrative Officer
Page 171 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.9
Canadian Safe Boating Council
Consell canadien de Ia securlte nautlque
Kevin Monahan
Canadian Safe Boating Council
400 Consumers Road
Toronto, ON, M2J 1P8
December 29, 2014
Leah Mellott, GM, Electoral Area Administration
Regional District of North Okanagan
9848 Aberdeen Road
Coldstream, BC Vl B 2K9
Re: Nomination for Canadian Safe Boating Award (CASBA)
Dear Ms Mellot:
The Regional District of North Okanagan and the BC Conservation Officer ServiceNorth Okanagan Zone have been nominated for the Canadian Safe Boating Council' s
Marine Professional ofthe Year Award. I regret to inform you however, this award has
been allocated to another nominee. Nonetheless, I would like to congratulate you and
your staff for your outstanding contribution to boating safety in the North Okanagan.
Choosing the winning nomination is always a difficult decision on the part of our judging
committee, because there are always many very deserving nominations.
I am impressed by the efforts expended by both the Regional District and the BC
Conservation Officer Service to enhance safety on the water, and it appears that the 2014
season resulted in a significant impact on safe boating in the area. It is clear that both the
Regional District and the conservations officers took this project very seriously and
"went the extra mile" in order to make it happen.
We at the Canadian Safe Boating Council would like to present the Regional District of
North Okanagan Zone, with the enclosed certificate in recognition of its continuing
contributions to boating safety and the nomination for this award.
Sincerely,
i ;/
~ ~.
r(~
Kevin Monahan
Director, Canadian Safe Boating Council
Co-Chair, CASBA Committee
[email protected] pwrite.bc.ca
cc: Barbara Leslie, Ministry of Environment
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF
NORTH OKANAGAN
Page 172 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.9
Certificate of Nomination
The
CANADIAN SAFE BOATING
COUNCIL
canadian Safe Boating Council
Conseil canadien de Ia securite nautique
Congratulates
Regional District of North Okanagan
on its nomination for the
Marine Professional of the Year Award
For outstanding contributions to boating safety
December 29, 2014
Page 173 of 183
CASBA
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
REGIONAL DISTRICT
of
NORTH OKANAGAN
REPORT
File No.: 3046.01.04
TO:
Electoral Area Advisory Committee
FROM:
Anna Page, Sustainability Coordinator
DATE:
July 24, 2014
SUBJECT:
Renewed Gas Tax Fund Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:
That it be recommended to the Board of Directors that a Committee of the Whole workshop be held to
discuss the changes included in the renewed Gas Tax Agreement and implications for planning and
budgeting for shared projects.
DISCUSSION:
Background
In 2005 the New Deal for Cities and Communities was established to transfer a portion of Federal Gas
Tax funds to local governments. This program provided funding through various programs for nine
years, ending in 2013/14. In 2013 the Federal Government committed to continuing to distribute Gas
Tax funds to local governments and a renewed agreement came into effect on April 1st 2014. This
agreement continues until March 31st, 2024 and will be reviewed by March 31st, 2018.
The renewed agreement contains a number of changes including changes to the objectives,
distribution funds and eligible projects.
National Objectives
The renewed Gas Tax agreement has three national objectives: productivity and economic growth; a
clean environment; and strong cities and communities. This replaces the focus in the previous
agreement on infrastructure projects that improve the quality of the environment and contribute to
reduced greenhouse gas emissions, clean water or clean air.
Distribution Funds
In the past, Federal Gas Tax Funds were distributed to local governments in BC outside of Metro
Vancouver, through the Community Works Fund (CWF), Regional Significant Projects Fund (RSPF)
and the Strategic Priorities Fund (SPF). Under the renewed agreement, funds will be distributed
through the CWF and the SPF. Funds that were distributed through the RSPF in the past, will now
be distributed to individual local governments on a per-capita basis through the CWF. This means that
there will no longer be a fund explicitly set aside for Regional Projects. The RDNO and member
municipalities will each receive their share through the CWF and allocate as they see fit. This has
implications for planning and budgeting.
Page 174 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Renewed Gas Tax Agreement
Report to EAAC – July 24, 2014
Page 2
Community Works Fund
The CWF provides allocated funding, based on population, twice annually to local governments for
eligible projects as set out in the renewed Gas Tax agreement.
The first five years of CWF
allocations have been set and are as follows for the RDNO:
Year 1 2014/15
Year 2 2015/16
Year 3 2016/17
Year 4 2017/18
Year 5 2018/19
$782,806.88
$782,806.88
$821,947.69
$821,947.69
$861,076.61
The CWF is based on population and in the case of the RDNO, is based solely on Electoral Area
population. Funding for populations of member municipalities will be allocated to the corresponding
municipalities. The individual Electoral Area allocation is based on the following percentage of the
total:
B
C
D
E
F
20.08%
26.44%
19.45%
6.41%
26.89%
Appendix A provides CWF Allocations for all BC local governments for the first five years of the
renewed Gas Tax agreement.
Strategic Priorities Fund
The Strategic Priorities Fund is a pooled application based fund that provides funding for eligible
projects that are larger in scale, regional in impact, or innovative. Approximately $145.2 million in
funding will be distributed over the first five years of the renewed agreement. Information with
respect to applications will be made available later in 2014.
Eligible Projects
Under the renewed agreement the categories of eligible projects for use of the CWF have been
increased and are shown in Table A.
Table A. Eligible Projects
Project Category
Eligible projects include investments in infrastructure for its construction, renewal, or material
enhancement in each of the following categories:
Local roads, bridges (roads, bridges and active transportation infrastructure – cycling lanes and
paths, sidewalks, hiking and walking trails)
Highways – highway infrastructure
Short-sea shipping – infrastructure related to the movement of cargo and passengers around the
coast and inland waterways, without directly crossing an ocean.
Short-line rail – railway related infrastructure for carriage of passengers or freight.
Regional or local airports – airport related infrastructure (excludes the National Airport System).
Broadband connectivity – infrastructure that provides internet access to residents, businesses, and/or
institutions in Canadian communities.
Page 175 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Renewed Gas Tax Agreement
Report to EAAC – July 24, 2014
Page 3
Public Transit – infrastructure that supports a shared passenger transport system available for public
use
Drinking Water – infrastructure that supports drinking water conservation, collection, treatment and
management systems
Wastewater – infrastructure that supports wastewater and storm water collection, treatment and
management systems.
Solid Waste – infrastructure that supports solid waste management systems including the collection,
diversion and disposal of recyclables, compostable materials and garbage.
Community Energy Systems – infrastructure that generates or increases the efficient use of energy
Brownfield Redevelopment – remediation or decontamination and redevelopment of a bownfield site
within Local Governments boundaries, where the redevelopment includes:
 The construction of public infrastructure as identified in the context of any other eligible project
category under the GTF, and/or
 The construction of Local Government public parks and publicly-owned housing.
Sport Infrastructure – amateur sport infrastructure
Recreational Infrastructure – recreational facilities or networks.
Cultural Infrastructure – infrastructure that supports arts, humanities and heritage
Tourism Infrastructure – infrastructure that attract travelers for recreation, leisure, business or other
purposes.
Disaster Mitigation – infrastructure that reduces or eliminates long-term impacts and risks associated
with natural disasters.
Capacity Building – investments related to strengthening the ability of local governments to develop
long-term planning practices
A number of the new categories are not relevant to the RDNO, however the inclusion of sport,
recreational and cultural infrastructure and disaster mitigation open up possibilities.
RDNO CWF Expenditure Procedure
The RDNO expenditure procedure for the CWF, which stipulates assessment of projects under a two
tier system, can remain the same with the renewed Gas Tax agreement. The project assessments
have been amended to reflect the new principles and project categories in the renewed agreement.
Planning and Budgeting
Moving forward under the renewed Gas Tax agreement planning and budgeting will be important. In
the past substantial community benefit has been achieved from projects funded through the CWF by
the Electoral Areas, both jointly and individually. A number of projects have been undertaken which
fall under shared services such as energy efficiency projects on recreation infrastructure and
protection services buildings, where the Electoral Areas have covered the full cost, or the full local
government contribution. These included the recreation facility energy audits, Whitevalley recreation
facility upgrades and Lumby fire hall upgrades. With the inclusion of additional project categories
under the renewed agreement there are more opportunities to utilize the CWF for infrastructure
provided by shared services. However, as these services are funded by both the RDNO and member
municipalities, budgeting should include cost sharing opportunities, not just RDNO CWF dollars.
Page 176 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Renewed Gas Tax Agreement
Report to EAAC- July 24, 2014
Page4
Also of relevance are projects regional in scale and nature. In the past the RSPF was utilized to
undertake a number of projects including landfill gas management, Pottery Rd final closure,
development of the Regional Growth Strategy and development of the Regional Context Statements.
Given that the RSPF no longer exists, if regional projects are to be undertaken there will need to be
planning and budgeting undertaken with the member municipalities.
RDNO Committee of the Whole Workshop
Given the renewed Gas Tax Agreement, which the RDNO member Municipalities will have also
signed, staff believes it would be useful to hold a workshop with the RDNO Committee of the Whole to
discuss implications for planning and budgeting with respect to shared services and regional projects.
Early identification of projects and required funding will be useful to ensure that funds are set aside by
all parties.
SUMMARY:
A portion of Federal Gas Tax Funds continue to be distributed to local governments in BC under the
renewed Gas Tax Agreement. The renewed agreement includes a number of changes including
changes to the objectives, distribution funds and eligible projects. The implications of these changes
mean that planning and budgeting for projects will be critical especially with respect to shared
services and regional projects. Staff suggests a workshop is held with the RDNO Committee of the
Whole to discuss the renewed Gas Tax Agreement and planning and budgeting.
Submitted by:
#---
Anna Page
Sustainability Coordinator
Approved For Inclusion:
Endorsed by:
~
~~
RoJ:)
atles, MCIP
General Manager, Planning and Building
Page 177 of 183
David Sewell, Administrator
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Renewed Gas Tax Agreement
Report to EAAC – July 24, 2014
Page 5
Appendix A
Gas Tax Agreement Community Works Fund Allocations
Year 1 - Year 5
Page 178 of 183
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Union of BC Municipalities
Gas Tax Agreement Community Works Fund Allocations
Year 1 - Year 5
Recipient Name
Year 1
2014/15
Projected
Year 2
2015/16
100 Mile House
$ 125,771.59 $ 125,771.59
Abbotsford
$ 5,413,350.87 $ 5,413,350.87
Alberni-Clayoquot
$ 444,325.63 $ 444,325.63
Alert Bay
$
67,878.24 $
67,878.24
Anmore
$
55,972.13 $
55,972.13
Armstrong
$ 243,446.55 $ 243,446.55
Ashcroft
$ 115,406.23 $ 115,406.23
Barriere
$ 121,231.72 $ 121,231.72
Belcarra
$
51,838.46 $
51,838.46
Bowen Island
$
59,711.85 $
59,711.85
Bulkley-Nechako
$ 838,932.49 $ 838,932.49
Burnaby
$ 687,230.84 $ 687,230.84
Burns Lake
$ 131,516.73 $ 131,516.73
Cache Creek
$
91,782.85 $
91,782.85
Campbell River
$ 1,302,922.99 $ 1,302,922.99
Canal Flats
$
78,725.71 $
78,725.71
Capital
$ 1,043,748.80 $ 1,043,748.80
Cariboo
$ 1,633,811.01 $ 1,633,811.01
Castlegar
$ 364,014.18 $ 364,014.18
Central Coast
$ 178,803.67 $ 178,803.67
Central Kootenay
$ 1,269,737.76 $ 1,269,737.76
Central Okanagan
$ 641,669.24 $ 641,669.24
Central Saanich
$ 690,241.80 $ 690,241.80
Chase
$ 150,238.66 $ 150,238.66
Chetwynd
$ 155,863.27 $ 155,863.27
Chilliwack
$ 3,181,142.37 $ 3,181,142.37
Clearwater
$ 143,649.83 $ 143,649.83
Clinton
$
75,551.82 $
75,551.82
Coldstream
$ 464,373.36 $ 464,373.36
Columbia Shuswap
$ 844,155.35 $ 844,155.35
Colwood
$ 696,549.40 $ 696,549.40
Comox
$ 597,475.84 $ 597,475.84
Comox Valley
$ 950,500.73 $ 950,500.73
Coquitlam
$ 410,999.84 $ 410,999.84
Courtenay
$ 1,018,196.98 $ 1,018,196.98
Cowichan Valley
$ 1,484,196.27 $ 1,484,196.27
Cranbrook
$ 826,156.58 $ 826,156.58
Creston
$ 263,172.88 $ 263,172.88
Cumberland
$ 186,517.42 $ 186,517.42
Dawson Creek
$ 515,356.47 $ 515,356.47
Delta
$ 335,083.57 $ 335,083.57
Duncan
$ 248,147.12 $ 248,147.12
East Kootenay
$ 677,907.82 $ 677,907.82
Elkford
$ 151,363.58 $ 151,363.58
Enderby
$ 167,795.49 $ 167,795.49
Esquimalt
$ 701,209.80 $ 701,209.80
Fernie
$ 228,702.03 $ 228,702.03
Fort St. James
$ 117,937.30 $ 117,937.30
Fort St. John
$ 797,631.75 $ 797,631.75
Fraser-Fort George
$ 644,280.67 $ 644,280.67
Fraser Lake
$
96,885.18 $
96,885.18
Fraser Valley
$ 718,244.34 $ 718,244.34
Fruitvale
$ 130,994.44 $ 130,994.44
Gibsons
$ 228,260.09 $ 228,260.09
Gold River
$ 100,902.76 $ 100,902.76
Golden
$ 198,690.69 $ 198,690.69
Grand Forks
$ 210,100.63 $ 210,100.63
Granisle
$
62,173.27 $
62,173.27
Greenwood
$
78,444.48 $
78,444.48
GVRD
$ 110,317.94 $ 110,317.94
Harrison Hot Springs
$ 108,978.10 $ 108,978.10
Hazelton
$
60,847.47 $
60,847.47
Highlands
$ 135,172.73 $ 135,172.73
Hope
$ 289,809.44 $ 289,809.44
Houston
$ 176,433.29 $ 176,433.29
Hudson's Hope
$
88,970.54 $
88,970.54
CWF Payment information is based on current census data.
Boundary changes, incorporations of new local governments
may also vary the available funding in subsequent years.
Funds are subject to Federal transfer of Gas Tax.
Projected
Year 3
2016/17
Projected
Year 4
2017/18
Projected
Year 5
2018/19
$ 132,060.22
$ 5,684,021.83
$ 466,542.16
$
71,272.16
$
58,770.74
$ 255,619.00
$ 121,176.58
$ 127,293.35
$
54,430.38
$
62,697.45
$ 880,879.62
$ 721,592.76
$ 138,092.62
$
96,372.02
$ 1,368,069.94
$
82,662.01
$ 1,095,936.87
$ 1,715,502.56
$ 382,215.08
$ 187,743.93
$ 1,333,225.43
$ 673,753.08
$ 724,754.30
$ 157,750.66
$ 163,656.51
$ 3,340,201.48
$ 150,832.38
$
79,329.43
$ 487,592.30
$ 886,363.62
$ 731,377.28
$ 627,349.98
$ 998,026.34
$ 431,550.05
$ 1,069,107.45
$ 1,558,407.00
$ 867,464.91
$ 276,331.66
$ 195,843.38
$ 541,124.59
$ 351,837.91
$ 260,554.61
$ 711,803.61
$ 158,931.83
$ 176,185.34
$ 736,270.70
$ 240,137.24
$ 123,834.21
$ 837,513.82
$ 676,495.08
$ 101,729.47
$ 754,156.99
$ 137,544.22
$ 239,673.21
$ 105,947.93
$ 208,625.32
$ 220,605.76
$
65,281.94
$
82,366.72
$ 115,833.88
$ 114,427.04
$
63,889.85
$ 141,931.42
$ 304,300.07
$ 185,255.04
$
93,419.09
$ 132,060.22
$ 5,684,021.83
$ 466,542.16
$
71,272.16
$
58,770.74
$ 255,619.00
$ 121,176.58
$ 127,293.35
$
54,430.38
$
62,697.45
$ 880,879.62
$ 721,592.76
$ 138,092.62
$
96,372.02
$ 1,368,069.94
$
82,662.01
$ 1,095,936.87
$ 1,715,502.56
$ 382,215.08
$ 187,743.93
$ 1,333,225.43
$ 673,753.08
$ 724,754.30
$ 157,750.66
$ 163,656.51
$ 3,340,201.48
$ 150,832.38
$
79,329.43
$ 487,592.30
$ 886,363.62
$ 731,377.28
$ 627,349.98
$ 998,026.34
$ 431,550.05
$ 1,069,107.45
$ 1,558,407.00
$ 867,464.91
$ 276,331.66
$ 195,843.38
$ 541,124.59
$ 351,837.91
$ 260,554.61
$ 711,803.61
$ 158,931.83
$ 176,185.34
$ 736,270.70
$ 240,137.24
$ 123,834.21
$ 837,513.82
$ 676,495.08
$ 101,729.47
$ 754,156.99
$ 137,544.22
$ 239,673.21
$ 105,947.93
$ 208,625.32
$ 220,605.76
$
65,281.94
$
82,366.72
$ 115,833.88
$ 114,427.04
$
63,889.85
$ 141,931.42
$ 304,300.07
$ 185,255.04
$
93,419.09
$ 138,459.69
$ 5,953,815.88
$ 488,810.03
$
74,787.74
$
61,694.23
$ 267,880.32
$ 127,059.72
$ 133,466.68
$
57,147.27
$
65,807.84
$ 922,804.37
$ 756,066.42
$ 144,778.28
$ 101,078.38
$ 1,433,107.83
$
86,717.95
$ 1,148,064.31
$ 1,797,023.26
$ 400,482.33
$ 196,785.13
$ 1,396,610.24
$ 705,851.39
$ 759,272.19
$ 165,368.93
$ 171,554.96
$ 3,498,800.68
$ 158,122.43
$
83,227.26
$ 510,858.82
$ 928,548.54
$ 766,209.39
$ 657,246.85
$ 1,045,508.73
$ 452,217.74
$ 1,119,962.05
$ 1,632,474.81
$ 908,753.24
$ 289,575.62
$ 205,268.84
$ 566,930.78
$ 368,711.33
$ 273,050.07
$ 745,707.11
$ 166,606.14
$ 184,678.19
$ 771,334.96
$ 251,664.08
$ 129,843.43
$ 877,381.22
$ 708,723.47
$ 106,690.00
$ 790,069.80
$ 144,203.86
$ 251,178.03
$ 111,108.59
$ 218,657.18
$ 231,205.98
$
68,513.34
$
86,408.65
$ 121,473.55
$ 119,989.96
$
67,055.20
$ 148,799.20
$ 318,870.90
$ 194,178.16
$
97,985.37
Page 179 of 183
Page 1 of 3
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Union of BC Municipalities
Gas Tax Agreement Community Works Fund Allocations
Year 1 - Year 5
Recipient Name
Year 1
2014/15
Projected
Year 2
2015/16
Invermere
$ 168,719.54 $ 168,719.54
Jumbo
$
50,000.00 $
50,000.00
Kamloops
$ 3,492,183.54 $ 3,492,183.54
Kaslo
$
91,220.39 $
91,220.39
Kelowna
$ 4,763,105.29 $ 4,763,105.29
Kent
$ 277,555.82 $ 277,555.82
Keremeos
$ 103,433.83 $ 103,433.83
Kimberley
$ 317,249.53 $ 317,249.53
Kitimat
$ 384,865.42 $ 384,865.42
Kitimat-Stikine
$ 697,232.39 $ 697,232.39
Kootenay Boundary
$ 443,240.88 $ 443,240.88
Ladysmith
$ 368,232.64 $ 368,232.64
Lake Country
$ 520,378.45 $ 520,378.45
Lake Cowichan
$ 169,482.88 $ 169,482.88
Langford
$ 1,224,258.74 $ 1,224,258.74
Langley, Township
$ 347,398.94 $ 347,398.94
Langley, City
$ 121,599.90 $ 121,599.90
Lantzville
$ 194,673.11 $ 194,673.11
Lillooet
$ 143,288.24 $ 143,288.24
Lions Bay
$
53,762.56 $
53,762.56
Logan Lake
$ 133,284.47 $ 133,284.47
Lumby
$ 119,544.34 $ 119,544.34
Lytton
$
59,160.09 $
59,160.09
Mackenzie
$ 190,896.59 $ 190,896.59
Maple Ridge
$ 267,109.19 $ 267,109.19
Masset
$
85,515.42 $
85,515.42
McBride
$
73,543.03 $
73,543.03
Merritt
$ 335,770.58 $ 335,770.58
Metchosin
$ 242,964.44 $ 242,964.44
Midway
$
77,078.50 $
77,078.50
Mission
$ 1,513,444.26 $ 1,513,444.26
Montrose
$
91,381.09 $
91,381.09
Mount Waddington
$ 200,378.08 $ 200,378.08
Nakusp
$ 113,035.85 $ 113,035.85
Nanaimo, City
$ 3,417,135.11 $ 3,417,135.11
Nanaimo, Regional District
$ 1,596,728.73 $ 1,596,728.73
Nelson
$ 460,998.59 $ 460,998.59
New Denver
$
70,248.61 $
70,248.61
New Hazelton
$
76,757.09 $
76,757.09
New Westminster
$ 238,344.77 $ 238,344.77
North Cowichan
$ 1,207,344.72 $ 1,207,344.72
North Okanagan
$ 782,806.88 $ 782,806.88
North Saanich
$ 495,509.62 $ 495,509.62
North Vancouver, District
$ 290,974.88 $ 290,974.88
North Vancouver, City
$ 187,587.37 $ 187,587.37
Northern Rockies
$ 274,100.70 $ 274,100.70
Oak Bay
$ 773,767.32 $ 773,767.32
Okanagan-Similkameen
$ 968,499.50 $ 968,499.50
Oliver
$ 243,808.13 $ 243,808.13
Osoyoos
$ 244,651.83 $ 244,651.83
Parksville
$ 531,185.74 $ 531,185.74
Peace River
$ 912,333.71 $ 912,333.71
Peachland
$ 258,914.24 $ 258,914.24
Pemberton
$ 145,176.51 $ 145,176.51
Penticton
$ 1,370,860.29 $ 1,370,860.29
Pitt Meadows
$ 100,631.79 $ 100,631.79
Port Alberni
$ 762,839.50 $ 762,839.50
Port Alice
$
82,341.53 $
82,341.53
Port Clements
$
65,186.46 $
65,186.46
Port Coquitlam
$ 210,842.14 $ 210,842.14
Port Edward
$
71,855.64 $
71,855.64
Port Hardy
$ 211,024.67 $ 211,024.67
Port McNeill
$ 150,640.42 $ 150,640.42
Port Moody
$ 144,135.27 $ 144,135.27
Pouce Coupe
$
79,649.75 $
79,649.75
Powell River, City
$ 578,914.61 $ 578,914.61
CWF Payment information is based on current census data.
Boundary changes, incorporations of new local governments
may also vary the available funding in subsequent years.
Funds are subject to Federal transfer of Gas Tax.
Projected
Year 3
2016/17
Projected
Year 4
2017/18
Projected
Year 5
2018/19
$ 177,155.59
$
52,500.00
$ 3,666,794.91
$
95,781.43
$ 5,001,263.56
$ 291,433.76
$ 108,605.56
$ 333,112.17
$ 404,108.91
$ 732,094.42
$ 465,403.18
$ 386,644.47
$ 546,397.67
$ 177,957.10
$ 1,285,472.43
$ 364,769.07
$ 127,679.94
$ 204,406.86
$ 150,452.72
$
56,450.69
$ 139,948.74
$ 125,521.60
$
62,118.10
$ 200,441.50
$ 280,464.78
$
89,791.21
$
77,220.19
$ 352,559.29
$ 255,112.79
$
80,932.44
$ 1,589,117.41
$
95,950.17
$ 210,397.08
$ 118,687.69
$ 3,587,994.01
$ 1,676,566.15
$ 484,048.79
$
73,761.05
$
80,594.96
$ 250,262.12
$ 1,267,712.70
$ 821,947.69
$ 520,285.38
$ 305,523.76
$ 196,966.82
$ 287,805.88
$ 812,456.15
$ 1,016,925.06
$ 255,998.67
$ 256,884.54
$ 557,745.34
$ 957,950.94
$ 271,860.09
$ 152,435.39
$ 1,439,404.15
$ 105,663.41
$ 800,981.93
$
86,458.63
$
68,445.79
$ 221,384.34
$
75,448.44
$ 221,576.01
$ 158,172.50
$ 151,342.09
$
83,632.26
$ 607,860.68
$ 177,155.59
$
52,500.00
$ 3,666,794.91
$
95,781.43
$ 5,001,263.56
$ 291,433.76
$ 108,605.56
$ 333,112.17
$ 404,108.91
$ 732,094.42
$ 465,403.18
$ 386,644.47
$ 546,397.67
$ 177,957.10
$ 1,285,472.43
$ 364,769.07
$ 127,679.94
$ 204,406.86
$ 150,452.72
$
56,450.69
$ 139,948.74
$ 125,521.60
$
62,118.10
$ 200,441.50
$ 280,464.78
$
89,791.21
$
77,220.19
$ 352,559.29
$ 255,112.79
$
80,932.44
$ 1,589,117.41
$
95,950.17
$ 210,397.08
$ 118,687.69
$ 3,587,994.01
$ 1,676,566.15
$ 484,048.79
$
73,761.05
$
80,594.96
$ 250,262.12
$ 1,267,712.70
$ 821,947.69
$ 520,285.38
$ 305,523.76
$ 196,966.82
$ 287,805.88
$ 812,456.15
$ 1,016,925.06
$ 255,998.67
$ 256,884.54
$ 557,745.34
$ 957,950.94
$ 271,860.09
$ 152,435.39
$ 1,439,404.15
$ 105,663.41
$ 800,981.93
$
86,458.63
$
68,445.79
$ 221,384.34
$
75,448.44
$ 221,576.01
$ 158,172.50
$ 151,342.09
$
83,632.26
$ 607,860.68
$ 185,694.46
$
55,125.00
$ 3,840,888.26
$ 100,459.78
$ 5,238,666.39
$ 305,394.18
$ 113,892.30
$ 349,049.90
$ 423,414.84
$ 766,960.55
$ 487,617.01
$ 405,121.86
$ 572,454.03
$ 186,534.00
$ 1,346,591.75
$ 382,258.00
$ 133,883.49
$ 214,238.58
$ 157,724.76
$
59,263.74
$ 146,722.46
$ 131,610.87
$
65,199.40
$ 210,085.10
$ 293,940.85
$
94,185.37
$
81,017.96
$ 369,419.62
$ 267,350.09
$
84,906.33
$ 1,664,642.17
$ 100,636.52
$ 220,512.99
$ 124,452.75
$ 3,758,348.91
$ 1,756,239.63
$ 507,147.20
$
77,394.72
$
84,552.84
$ 262,300.55
$ 1,327,989.47
$ 861,076.61
$ 545,102.93
$ 320,192.63
$ 206,468.41
$ 301,594.19
$ 851,134.77
$ 1,065,304.04
$ 268,277.99
$ 269,205.90
$ 584,340.04
$ 1,003,532.09
$ 284,891.91
$ 159,801.50
$ 1,507,826.26
$ 110,818.97
$ 839,116.19
$
90,694.68
$
71,827.29
$ 232,048.19
$
79,162.15
$ 232,222.26
$ 165,810.79
$ 158,671.95
$
87,734.23
$ 636,832.94
Page 180 of 183
Page 2 of 3
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item E.10
Union of BC Municipalities
Gas Tax Agreement Community Works Fund Allocations
Year 1 - Year 5
Recipient Name
Year 1
2014/15
Projected
Year 2
2015/16
Projected
Year 3
2016/17
Projected
Year 4
2017/18
Projected
Year 5
2018/19
Powell River, Regional District
Prince George
Prince Rupert
Princeton
Qualicum Beach
Queen Charlotte
Quesnel
Radium Hot Springs
Revelstoke
Richmond
Rossland
Saanich
Salmo
Salmon Arm
Sayward
Sechelt
Sechelt Indian
Sicamous
Sidney
Silverton
Skeena-Queen Charlotte
Slocan
Smithers
Sooke
Spallumcheen
Sparwood
Squamish
Squamish-Lillooet
Stewart
Strathcona
Summerland
Sun Peaks
Sunshine Coast
Surrey
Tahsis
Taylor
Telkwa
Terrace
Thompson-Nicola
Tofino
Trail
Tumbler Ridge
Ucluelet
Valemount
Vancouver
Vanderhoof
Vernon
Victoria
View Royal
Warfield
Wells
West Kelowna
West Vancouver
Whistler
White Rock
Williams Lake
Zeballos
$ 319,941.31
$ 2,941,614.16
$ 552,519.10
$ 159,438.92
$ 399,007.31
$
87,925.97
$ 452,039.39
$
81,216.61
$ 336,815.15
$ 593,752.16
$ 192,865.20
$ 4,459,376.12
$
95,760.25
$ 751,630.45
$
62,735.73
$ 423,273.50
$
82,903.99
$ 148,069.17
$ 499,085.27
$
57,834.28
$ 191,659.93
$
61,892.04
$ 267,110.11
$ 509,410.45
$ 253,088.75
$ 197,324.72
$ 739,336.65
$ 311,062.45
$
69,846.85
$ 453,405.37
$ 503,183.20
$
64,905.23
$ 616,237.95
$ 1,386,737.98
$
62,695.56
$ 105,161.39
$ 104,237.35
$ 511,459.42
$ 978,342.57
$ 125,369.83
$ 358,590.44
$ 158,876.46
$ 115,366.05
$
90,979.33
$ 1,772,845.32
$ 229,987.65
$ 1,582,707.37
$ 3,264,748.24
$ 426,889.33
$ 118,298.89
$
59,843.07
$ 1,291,111.30
$ 171,880.55
$ 444,687.21
$ 105,207.95
$ 485,184.44
$
55,021.98
$ 319,941.31
$ 2,941,614.16
$ 552,519.10
$ 159,438.92
$ 399,007.31
$
87,925.97
$ 452,039.39
$
81,216.61
$ 336,815.15
$ 593,752.16
$ 192,865.20
$ 4,459,376.12
$
95,760.25
$ 751,630.45
$
62,735.73
$ 423,273.50
$
82,903.99
$ 148,069.17
$ 499,085.27
$
57,834.28
$ 191,659.93
$
61,892.04
$ 267,110.11
$ 509,410.45
$ 253,088.75
$ 197,324.72
$ 739,336.65
$ 311,062.45
$
69,846.85
$ 453,405.37
$ 503,183.20
$
64,905.23
$ 616,237.95
$ 1,386,737.98
$
62,695.56
$ 105,161.39
$ 104,237.35
$ 511,459.42
$ 978,342.57
$ 125,369.83
$ 358,590.44
$ 158,876.46
$ 115,366.05
$
90,979.33
$ 1,772,845.32
$ 229,987.65
$ 1,582,707.37
$ 3,264,748.24
$ 426,889.33
$ 118,298.89
$
59,843.07
$ 1,291,111.30
$ 171,880.55
$ 444,687.21
$ 105,207.95
$ 485,184.44
$
55,021.98
$ 335,938.54
$ 3,088,696.71
$ 580,145.38
$ 167,410.94
$ 418,957.90
$
92,322.29
$ 474,641.61
$
85,277.46
$ 353,656.09
$ 623,440.09
$ 202,508.55
$ 4,682,347.74
$ 100,548.30
$ 789,212.41
$
65,872.53
$ 444,437.42
$
87,049.21
$ 155,472.69
$ 524,039.82
$
60,726.00
$ 201,243.01
$
64,986.65
$ 280,465.75
$ 534,881.27
$ 265,743.32
$ 207,191.05
$ 776,303.92
$ 326,615.74
$
73,339.21
$ 476,075.89
$ 528,342.65
$
68,150.50
$ 647,050.20
$ 1,456,075.68
$
65,830.34
$ 110,419.50
$ 109,449.25
$ 537,032.68
$ 1,027,260.29
$ 131,638.37
$ 376,520.16
$ 166,820.35
$ 121,134.40
$
95,528.32
$ 1,861,488.62
$ 241,487.15
$ 1,661,843.71
$ 3,427,987.70
$ 448,234.03
$ 124,213.87
$
62,835.23
$ 1,355,667.65
$ 180,474.65
$ 466,921.83
$ 110,468.38
$ 509,443.93
$
57,773.08
$ 335,938.54
$ 3,088,696.71
$ 580,145.38
$ 167,410.94
$ 418,957.90
$
92,322.29
$ 474,641.61
$
85,277.46
$ 353,656.09
$ 623,440.09
$ 202,508.55
$ 4,682,347.74
$ 100,548.30
$ 789,212.41
$
65,872.53
$ 444,437.42
$
87,049.21
$ 155,472.69
$ 524,039.82
$
60,726.00
$ 201,243.01
$
64,986.65
$ 280,465.75
$ 534,881.27
$ 265,743.32
$ 207,191.05
$ 776,303.92
$ 326,615.74
$
73,339.21
$ 476,075.89
$ 528,342.65
$
68,150.50
$ 647,050.20
$ 1,456,075.68
$
65,830.34
$ 110,419.50
$ 109,449.25
$ 537,032.68
$ 1,027,260.29
$ 131,638.37
$ 376,520.16
$ 166,820.35
$ 121,134.40
$
95,528.32
$ 1,861,488.62
$ 241,487.15
$ 1,661,843.71
$ 3,427,987.70
$ 448,234.03
$ 124,213.87
$
62,835.23
$ 1,355,667.65
$ 180,474.65
$ 466,921.83
$ 110,468.38
$ 509,443.93
$
57,773.08
$ 352,010.35
$ 3,235,364.09
$ 607,802.78
$ 175,487.51
$ 438,968.29
$
96,836.53
$ 497,293.74
$
89,457.48
$ 370,568.45
$ 653,241.71
$ 212,250.21
$ 4,904,620.66
$ 105,452.79
$ 826,788.32
$
69,131.94
$ 465,656.60
$
91,313.29
$ 162,982.89
$ 549,035.48
$
63,741.26
$ 210,924.64
$
68,204.04
$ 293,905.84
$ 560,391.26
$ 278,484.94
$ 217,154.85
$ 813,267.42
$ 342,245.26
$
76,952.86
$ 498,796.06
$ 553,542.44
$
71,517.98
$ 677,881.69
$ 1,525,510.54
$
69,087.76
$ 115,792.30
$ 114,776.02
$ 562,644.75
$ 1,076,129.59
$ 138,017.83
$ 394,517.23
$ 174,868.91
$ 127,015.53
$ 100,194.66
$ 1,950,221.04
$ 253,078.03
$ 1,740,818.74
$ 3,590,751.63
$ 469,633.33
$ 130,241.10
$
65,950.56
$ 1,420,117.16
$ 189,191.22
$ 489,207.71
$ 115,852.66
$ 533,747.14
$
60,648.24
CWF Payment information is based on current census data.
Boundary changes, incorporations of new local governments
may also vary the available funding in subsequent years.
Funds are subject to Federal transfer of Gas Tax.
Page 181 of 183
Page 3 of 3
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item G.1
Regional District of North Okanagan
Building Inspections Statistical Report for Dec 2014
Class:
Electoral Areas:
H Units: Permits:
Residential
Residential YTD
2
Armstrong
Value:
Enderby
H Units: Permits:
Value:
Lumby
H Units: Permits:
Value:
H Units: Permits:
Spallumcheen
Value:
H Units: Permits:
Value:
5
$847,800
1
2
$222,000
0
1
$8,000
1
1
$348,000
4
5
$1,763,318
59 128
$22,143,260
19
34
$5,653,368
2
6
$704,000
5
7
$1,301,500
13
32
$5,050,123
Commercial
1
2
$367,000
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Commercial YTD
2
11
$1,479,500
0
3
$152,200
1
2
$250,000
0
3
$17,670
0
1
$4,200
Industrial
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Industrial YTD
0
2
$150,000
0
1
$117,540
0
2
$655,000
0
0
$0
0
1
$80,000
Public
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Public YTD
0
3
$24,600
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Agricultural
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Agricultural YTD
0
14
$2,616,500
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
11
$606,800
Ttls for Month
3
7
$1,214,800
1
2
$222,000
0
1
$8,000
1
1
$348,000
4
5
$1,763,318
Same Month Prev Yr
1
4
$621,000
1
3
$69,000
0
0
$0
0
1
$7,000
0
0
$0
Yr to Date
61 158
$26,413,860
19
38
$5,923,108
3
10
$1,609,000
5
10
$1,319,170
13
45
$5,741,123
Last Yr to Date
35 135
$11,276,000
3
31
$2,418,970
2
15
$691,950
4
13
$1,099,800
20
62
$9,500,000
Totals for all Areas:
Building Permits Report
Year To Date
Last Year To Date
Page 1 of 1
Printed: 1/9/2015
Page 182 of 183
Units Permits
101
261
64
256
Value
$41,006,261.00
$24,986,720.00
ELECTORAL AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REGULAR AGENDA
February 5, 2015 -Item G.1
Regional District of North Okanagan
Building Inspections Statistical Report for Dec 2014
"B"
Class:
H Units: Permits:
"C"
Value:
"D"
H Units: Permits:
Value:
"E"
H Units: Permits:
Value:
"F"
H Units: Permits:
Value:
H Units: Permits:
Value:
Residential
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
1
3
$166,800
1
2
$681,000
0
0
$0
Residential YTD
6
20
$2,369,600
15
37
$6,870,880
12
31
$4,681,500
6
9
$1,733,800
20
31
$6,487,480
Commercial
0
1
$17,000
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
1
1
$350,000
Commercial YTD
0
4
$244,500
0
4
$480,000
0
0
$0
0
1
$80,000
2
2
$675,000
Industrial
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Industrial YTD
0
0
$0
0
2
$150,000
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Public
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Public YTD
0
2
$7,600
0
1
$17,000
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Agricultural
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Agricultural YTD
0
0
$0
0
3
$322,000
0
2
$60,400
0
0
$0
0
9
$2,234,100
Ttls for Month
0
1
$17,000
0
0
$0
1
3
$166,800
1
2
$681,000
1
1
$350,000
Same Month Prev Yr
0
1
$3,000
0
2
$68,000
1
1
$550,000
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
Yr to Date
6
26
$2,621,700
15
47
$7,839,880
12
33
$4,741,900
6
10
$1,813,800
22
42
$9,396,580
Last Yr to Date
1
30
$1,228,850
11
41
$3,874,650
8
18
$1,573,800
2
5
$326,200
13
40
$4,272,500
Totals for all Areas:
Building Permits Report
Year To Date
Last Year To Date
Page 1 of 1
Printed: 1/9/2015
Page 183 of 183
Units Permits
61
158
35
135
Value
$26,413,860.00
$11,276,000.00
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Related manuals

Download PDF

advertisement