1. home and garden

Tri-Municipal Council Meeting
Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 7:00 p.m.
North Saanich Municipal Hall
1620 Mills Road
AGENDA
PAGE NO.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3.
PRESENTATIONS
4.
(a)
Primary Health Care Service Delivery and Medical Education
Centre - Saanich Peninsula Hospital [Sidney]
Dr. Carl Whiteside, Academic Adv., Faculty of Medicine UBC
(ret'd) and Karen Morgan, Saanich Peninsula Hospital
Foundation.
Project Summary.pdf
Tri Municipal PDF Final.pdf
What can we do.pdf
(b)
Peninsula Emergency Measures Organization
Jean Galvin, Emergency Support Services
(c)
Capital Region Emergency Services Telecommunications Inc.
[North Saanich]
Gord Horth, General Manager
(d)
Saanich Peninsula Housing Options [Sidney]
Tim Wake and Jim Bennett
Saanich Peninsula Housing Options Report.pdf
(e)
Earthquake Vulnerabilities of Ferry Links for Vancouver Island
and Coastal Communities [Sidney]
Ray Hebden, Hebden Engineering Inc., and Greg Ramsay,
Ramsay Machine Works
Presentation Board 1 - FINAL.pdf
Presentation Board 2 - FINAL.pdf
Presentation Board 3 - FINAL.pdf
Presentation Board 4 - FINAL.pdf
Brief 21 5 14.pdf
3-7
[North Saanich]
PROPOSED CHANGES TO FLOOD HAZARD AREA LAND USE
9 - 16
17 - 26
TRI-MUNICIPAL COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
February 11, 2015
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES AND SEA LEVEL RISE
[Central Saanich]
(a)
Central Saanich Staff report
Committee Report SLR.PDF
5.
CREATION OF A TRI-MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE TO SECURE
FUNDING FROM THE PROVINCE FOR AN AMALGAMATION
STUDY
[North Saanich]
6.
JUBILEE CELEBRATIONS
[North Saanich]
7.
2015 FLAVOUR TRAIL
[North Saanich]
8.
SHARING A SINGLE FACILITY FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS
AND SERVICES
[North Saanich]
9.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF SHARED LEGAL SERVICES
[Central Saanich]
10.
LOCATION OF NEXT TRI-MUNICIPAL MEETING
11.
ADJOURNMENT
27 - 34
Page 2 of 34
!!
!
Proposal!to!Establish!a!Primary!Health!Care!Service!Delivery!and!
Medical!Education!Center!on!the!grounds!of!the!Saanich!Peninsula!
Hospital!(SPH)!**!
!
!
Quick!Summary!of!Project:!!
!
D The!Saanich!Peninsula!Hospital!Foundation,!(in!collaboration!with!the!
South!Island!Division!of!Family!Practice!and!Vancouver!Island!Health),!
has! expressed! an! interest! in! establishing! a! Primary' Health' Care,'
Service' Delivery' and' Medical' Education' Center' on! the! grounds! of!
the! Saanich! Peninsula! Hospital! in! order! to! address! the! present! and!
future!medical!service!needs!of!the!hospital!(acute!and!chronic)!and!of!
the!community!it!is!responsible!for!serving.!
!
D It! is! proposed! that! the! educational! component! of! the! center! would!
offer! community! and! hospital! based,! experiential! learning!
opportunities!for!medical!trainees!throughout!the!continuum!of!their!
training! years.! These! trainees! would! be! undergraduate/postgraduate!
(FP! and! Generalist! Specialists)! who! are! linked! to! existing! medical!
education!programs!on!the!South!Island.!
D
D
!
D
D
It! is! clear! that! many! community! hospitals! in! nonDurban! areas! are!
losing! the! services! of! physicians! willing! to! cover! inpatient! needs! and!
that!the!services!of!hospitalists!to!such!settings!are!either!not!available!
or!uneconomical!either!for!the!physicians!or!the!health!authorities.!
!
It! is! proposed! that! the! Center! would! focus! on! attracting! existing! and!
newly! recruited! physicians! and! their! practices! to! this! unit,! with! a!
commitment!to!enhance!and!expand!coverage!of!the!hospital!services!
while!maintaining!a!community!based!practice!population.!!
Such!a!Center!would!foster!a!model!of!education!and!service!delivery,!
which! demonstrates! peer/interprofessional! and! generalist! specialist!
collaboration! while! ensuring! a! balance! between! work! and! personal!
needs.!
!
Medical! trainees! exposed! to! such! a! model! of! service! delivery! would!
thus! graduate! with! the! skills! to! address! hospital! and! community!
service!needs!in!a!collaborative!and!efficient!manner!while!having!the!
skills!to!maintain!a!healthy!and!balanced!life!style.!
!
**!funding!support!through!the!SPH!Foundation.!
Page 3 of 34
!
!
Page 4 of 34
Ensuring the Future Medical Human Resource Needs of
the Saanich Peninsula Hospital and the Peninsula
A presentation to the Peninsula Tri Municipal Council - Feb. 11, 2015
* Clay Barber - Executive Director- South Island
Division Family Practice
* Karen Morgan - Saanich Peninsula Hospital
Foundation
* Aspasia Zabaras- Project Director, Island
Island Health /VIHA.
* MI Cousins - Recruitment Coordinator,
South Island Division of Family Practice.
* Dawn Nedzelski - Community Director
Saanich Peninsula , IH/Viha
* Carl Whiteside - Academic Adv. , Faculty
of Medicine UBC (ret'd)
Page 5 of 34
Page 6 of 34
How can the Tri Municipal Council help out?
 Work collaboratively to achieve the “common
interest” outcomes.
 Identify individuals from the Tri Municipal
Council who can act as liaison persons with
our efforts to achieve the outcomes.
 Welcome health professions to the Peninsula.
 Assist medical students and post graduate
residents with accommodation costs during
educational rotations at the hospital and on
the peninsula.
 Offer affordable housing for recruited medical
and health professionals.
 offer student debt repayment opportunities.
 Improve Transportation opportunities on the
peninsula to the SPH from your communities.
Thank you
Page 7 of 34
Page 8 of 34
Saanich Peninsula Housing Options Finding a Way Forward Prepared by Tim Wake, Affordable Housing Consultant and submitted to the three Saanich Peninsula
Councils at the request of the Saanich Peninsula Housing Roundtable, an experiment in consensus
decision-making on housing issues convened by Elizabeth May, MP (Saanich – Gulf Islands).
Housing Roundtable
The Saanich Peninsula Affordable Housing Roundtable was convened in late 2013 and
has met a number of times to discuss the shortage of suitable rental and ownership
housing for people working in Sidney, North Saanich and Central Saanich. The Housing
Roundtable is composed of a broad collection of housing stakeholders from the private,
non-profit and public sectors including municipal staff, elected officials, employers, the
development community, the local Chamber of Commerce as well as the existing housing
organizations in the Capital Regional District. The Housing Roundtable has the following
participants:
Elizabeth May, MP Saanich - Gulf Islands
Gary Holman, MLA Saanich North and The Islands
Councillor Tim Chad, Town of Sidney
Councillor Steve Price, Town of Sidney
Mayor Alice Finall, District of North Saanich
Councillor Ted Daly, District of North Saanich
Councillor Conny McBride, District of North Saanich
Councillor Celia Stock, District of North Saanich
Councillor Alicia Cormier, District of Central Saanich
Councillor Carl Jensen, District of Central Saanich
Councillor Ryan Windsor, District of Central Saanich
Councillor Paul Gerrard, District of Saanich
John Treleaven, Saanich Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors
Ian Brown, Saanich Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors
Art Finlayson, Saanich Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors
Silvia Bonet, Architect, Architectural Institute of BC
Henry Kamphof, Senior Manager, Capital Regional District
Lee King, Consultant, with CMHC background
Jim Bennett, Government Relations Coordinator, Victoria Real Estate Board
Michael Hall, Director of Product Support, Viking Air
Ken Lewis, President, Seastar Chemicals
Casey Edge, Executive Director, Victoria Homebuilders Association
Rosemary Bongars, Owner, Avalon Spa, Sidney
Geoff Orr, President, North Saanich Residents Association
Adam Olsen, former Central Saanich Councillor, Interim Leader of the Green Party of BC
John Juricic, Executive Director, Sidney North Saanich Industrial Group
Shelley Mann, Chair of Government Relations, Victoria Real Estate Board
Alanna Holroyd, Executive Director, Greater Victoria Rental Development Society
Ian Batey, Board Chair, Greater Victoria Housing Society
…continued on next page
Saanich Peninsula Housing Options
Tim Wake – Affordable Housing Consultant
1
October 2014
Page 9 of 34
Marlaina Elliott, Director of Development Services, Town of Sidney
Peter Laughlin, Director (Vancouver Island), Omicron
Denis Paquette, Sidney Waterfront Inn and Suites
Barbara Fallott, Sidney Resident, Business Owner and candidate for Sidney Council
Sidney and North Saanich Workforce Housing Survey
The Sidney and North Saanich Industrial Group conducted a survey of its employees in
2012 to provide some context of the housing shortage. It found that 67% of respondents
were commuting to work from outside the three Saanich Peninsula municipalities and there
was strong demand for a range of rental and ownership housing. Interest in purchasing
housing (44% of respondents) is higher than interest in rental (27% of respondents).
Purchasers can afford $250,000 to $500,000 for a home (condo, townhome or single
family) and 65% of renters could afford up to $1200 per month.
The Sidney and North Saanich Industrial Group consists of the following companies:
(2,200 employees, $110 million annual payroll)
Scott Plastics
Seastar Chemicals
Van Isle Marina
Nicholson Manufacturing
Slegg Lumber
Viking Air
Thrifty Foods
Cube Global Storage
Epicure Selections
Ramsay Group Machine
Works
VIH Aviation Group
Stantec
AXYS Analytical Services
Scotty Marine and
Fishing Products
Harbour Digital Media
2014 Saanich Peninsula Mayors’ Breakfast and Follow Up Interviews
The housing issue was the main focus of the Saanich Peninsula Mayors’ Breakfast in February
and in August, Elizabeth May’s office contracted Tim Wake to conduct a series of interviews
with local developers, municipal staff and elected officials. Jim Bennett assisted with
coordinating interviews with the following:
Peter Laughlin, Director (Vancouver Island), Omicron
George Schell, Allanda Consulting, Real Estate Development Consultants
Kaye Melliship, Executive Director, Greater Victoria Housing Society
Roger Garside, Local Developer
Art Finlayson and Sylvia Bonet, Finlayson Bonet Architecture, Central Saanich
Jack Barker, former Councillor and Realtor, Sidney
Grant Rogers, Marker Group, Sidney
Bruce Greig, Director of Planning and Development Services, District of Central Saanich
Randy Humble, CAO and Marlaina Elliott, Development Services, Town of Sidney
Rob Buchan, CAO, District of North Saanich
Councillor Ted Daly, District of North Saanich
Councillor Ryan Windsor, District of Central Saanich
Councillor Carl Jensen, District of Central Saanich
Councillor Craig Mearns, District of North Saanich
Councillor Steve Price and Randy Humble, CAO, Town of Sidney
Mayor Alice Finall and Rob Buchan, CAO, District of North Saanich
Saanich Peninsula Housing Options
Tim Wake – Affordable Housing Consultant
2
October 2014
Page 10 of 34
Observations
The term Workforce Housing is used throughout this report to identify affordable housing
that is intended to house working families and individuals whose place of work is located in
North Saanich, Central Saanich or Sidney. It is distinct and separate from social housing, which
requires subsidies from higher levels of government and is the subject of a separate initiative
currently being led by MLA Gary Holman.
These three municipalities are very different but share a common problem – a shortage of
housing for individuals, couples and families who wish to work and make their home on the
Saanich Peninsula. The economic success of the region and the vitality of these three
communities will depend on the degree to which the housing shortage can be addressed.
The following table highlights some of the differences across the three jurisdictions.
Population
(2011)
Area
(sq. km.)
Density
(persons per
sq.km.)
Average
Walk Score★
North Saanich
11,089
37
289
15
Central Saanich
15,936
41
386
35
Sidney
11,583
5
2,184
90
★
Walk Score is a number between 0 and 100 that measures the walkability of any address (www.walkscore.com)
Given these and other fundamental differences, it is clear that each of these jurisdictions will
have different opportunities to contribute to a regional housing solution. It is very unlikely that
an effective regional solution will emerge without collaboration across the jurisdictions and the
sectors (public, private and non-profit).
It is interesting to note that while all three jurisdictions have incorporated language in their
OCP’s around mixed-use development, encouraging a diversity of housing size, type, tenure and
price, and focusing on compact affordable options, the actual need for housing is assessed
based on projected population growth rather than on employment and commuting numbers.
Nonetheless, local governments, the employers and the development sector appear to be aware
of the housing problem and prepared to do something about it.
In addition, there is consensus across the local governments and stakeholder groups that
zoning and development opportunities exist in all three municipalities. In the limited discussions
that we had, Jim Bennett and I have identified at least 200 housing units that were approved,
in the approval process or about to be proposed. Clearly the willingness to develop housing is
there. The challenge is that while these units will likely be built, they will not likely meet the
needs of the target households ($50,000 - $90,000 annual household income), and none of
these units will be purpose built rental.
Sidney, in spite of its smaller size, has the most development and redevelopment
opportunities, is most comfortable with higher densities, has by far the highest Walk Score
(proximity to employment, services, education and recreation) and would be a prime location
for various forms of rental housing and multi-unit home ownership.
Page 11 of 34
The Central Saanich OCP has clear direction in Section 4 – Residential Growth Management
and Housing: Creating Compact, Complete and Diverse Communities that lay out a framework
supporting the development of a range of affordable workforce housing. A Housing Capacity
Study done in 2007 identifies available land and the capacity for residential growth by dwelling
type. A Residential Densification Study completed in 2012 recommends potential densification
options in relation to specific physical, social and contextual restraints and opportunities. This
work has informed recent rezoning and development approval decisions. Central Saanich is well
positioned to contribute to regional housing solutions.
North Saanich has an important role to play in the development of housing solutions. While it
does have some multi-family zoning (Eagle Ridge Estates, McDonald Park, Kiwanis Village and
Lochside Drive), Kiwanis Village is the only project that addresses lower income. The Canora
Mews project, a small lot subdivision currently under development, provides some options for
the upper end of affordable homeownership. Two areas (one near Parkland Secondary School
and the second around McTavish and Canora Roads) are under consideration for higher density
affordable housing. Up to 520 new units are proposed over the next five years. If these units
were approved for construction based on a range of tenures and prices, they could make a
significant impact towards addressing the workforce housing shortage.
Developers, Municipal Staff and Elected Officials we spoke with were all generally
supportive of the direction proposed in this document.
Comments
•
The supply of workforce housing on the Saanich Peninsula, rental and ownership, can
only be increased through a concerted collaborative effort. Local governments can revise
OCP’s policies to increase densities, approve zoning changes, and encourage
development, but this will not address affordability. It may create more units, but it will
not ensure affordability.
•
The way to ensure a more robust supply of affordable workforce units is to make the
changes to allow for more units and then partner with the private sector to find ways to
produce affordable workforce units with little or no additional cost to taxpayers or to the
developers.
•
Creating a diverse inventory of workforce housing units is only the first part of the
challenge. We then need a functional and manageable system of administering
restrictions on those units so they are in fact only available to local employees and their
families and, most importantly, that their affordability is protected over time.
•
In my experience, the only way this has been successfully achieved in other jurisdictions
is by mandating an arm’s length non-profit housing organization to facilitate the
construction of affordable workforce units, units that can be rented or purchased
affordably by wage earners with average household incomes in the region. This housing
organization can be small, nimble, effective and efficient and does not need to incur any
ongoing cost to local taxpayers. It can develop its own funding mechanisms as well as
fair and transparent processes for ensuring units retain their relative affordability over
time.
Page 12 of 34
•
The three primary goals of the housing organization would be:
1. To increase the supply of affordable workforce housing (rental and ownership) in the
Saanich Peninsula each year for the next ten years, beginning in 2016.
2. To measure annually and consistently increase the percentage of the workforce that
is resident on the Saanich Peninsula each year for the next ten years, beginning in
2016.
3. To create a qualification and waitlist process to ensure that employees working
locally occupy new workforce housing units.
•
This housing organization would be most likely to succeed if it was a true partnership
between the public and private sectors and the local housing stakeholders. The
partnership should have committed support and representation from all three
municipalities, the development sector, local employers, the CRD and the Greater
Victoria Housing Society. As it would be a partnership, the working name of the
organization for this discussion will be the Saanich Peninsula Housing Partnership.
Recommendations
The following recommendations constitute an Action Plan to create the
Saanich Peninsula Housing Partnership:
1. Secure funding from interested Founding Partners and Stakeholders to
fund the creation and initial work of the organization. The budget for the first 9
months would be $45,000 and should come evenly from the employer group, the
development community, and the regional district. Further funding would be based
on initial performance and rely on the new organization to determine a working
formula for 2016 and beyond.
2. Create this organization initially with one part time contract consultant to
formally establish the founding partnership and seed funding, nominate the founding
Board of Directors (a skills based board with representation from senior municipal
staff, elected officials, experienced developers/financiers, non-profit housing
providers, interested parties from the community and local employers) and begin the
work of finding new workforce housing development opportunities in each of the
three municipalities.
3. Secure commitments from developers for the planning, and if possible the
construction, of 10 new units of workforce housing for those employed on the
Saanich Peninsula per quarter for each of the first three quarters of operation.
4. Challenge this PARTNERSHIP Board to draft and approve a constitution and
bylaws, register the partnership and develop a sustainable funding formula so that it
will be self-funding moving forward. A number of potential funding models
exist and have been utilized in other jurisdictions.
Page 13 of 34
5. Develop a five-year plan to produce workforce housing units, administer the sale
and occupancy of those units to ensure they house working families and remain
affordable in the future as they turn over.
6. Establish a reporting and community engagement process to ensure the
community is informed of the progress made in the provision of workforce housing
units and the process by which the units may be accessed.
Conclusions
Continuing with the status quo of rezoning properties and hoping that it will result in workforce
housing units being developed on the Saanich Peninsula is unlikely to deliver any more in future
than it has in the past.
Creating an organization with a clear mandate to facilitate the creation of workforce housing
units, administer the sale and resale of those units to ensure a resident workforce and a diverse
and vibrant community, and measure progress towards meeting a range of housing needs, can
be achieved in these three communities with little cost to the taxpayer or the developers.
A partnership across all sectors will be most likely to succeed in this initiative.
It is worthwhile to conclude with the thought that seeking more affordability for those who
choose to work in the community and live closer to their work does NOT necessarily mean
providing for more density in the three Peninsula communities of North Saanich, Central
Saanich and Sidney than is currently being contemplated in the latest Official Community Plans.
Page 14 of 34
Appendix A Tim Wake Background and Experience
Tim Wake has 16 years experience working in creating affordable workforce housing, both
homeownership and rental. He worked with the Whistler Housing Authority (WHA) from its
inception in 1997 until 2005, served as a Municipal Councillor in Whistler and director on the
WHA Board from 2005 to 2008 and has been an Affordable Housing Consultant since 2005.
Speaking Engagements and Presentations (2005 – 2014)
Bowen Island Municipality
City of Calgary
City of Cranbrook
City of Nanaimo
City of Nelson
City of Prince George
City of Trail
City of Victoria
City of Whitehorse
City of Yellowknife
Hornby Island
Richmond Poverty Response Committee
Saanich Peninsula Mayor’s Breakfast
Town of Banff
Town of Canmore
Town of Comox
Town of Gibsons
Town of Oliver
Village of Kaslo
Village of Nakusp
Village of Valemount
Clients (as Consultant)
Bowen Island Municipality
Canada Mortgage and Housing
City of Yellowknife NWT
Columbia Basin Trust
Columbia Institute
District of Squamish BC
Fresh Outlook Foundation
Hesperia Development Corporation
Hornby Island Community Enhancement Corporation
Islands Trust, Salt Spring Island Office
Jackson Hole Community Housing Trust
Jackson Hole Town Council
Oliver Community Economic Development Society
Queenstown Lakes District Council, New Zealand
Simon Fraser University City Program
Smart Growth BC
Teton County WY - Board of County Commissioners
Tofino Housing Corporation
Westbank Developments
Page 15 of 34
Boards
(serving as a director)
Whistler Housing Authority (2005 – 2008)
Whistler Centre for Sustainability (2008 – present)
Whistler Community Services Society (2005 – 2008)
Maurice Young Millennium Place Society (2005 – 2011)
Special Olympics BC Whistler (2006 – 2008)
Abbeyfield Society of Bowen Island (2010 – 2011)
Bowen Community Housing Association (2006 – 2008)
Lake O’Hara Trails Club (1976 – present)
Committees
Canada Green Building Council
Whistler Community Services Society
Maurice Young Millennium Place Society
Special Olympics BC Whistler
Bowen Island Sustainability Framework Working Group
Whistler Transportation Advisory Group
Bowen Island Affordable Housing Working Group
Publications
•
•
•
A Review of Best Practices in Affordable Housing (2007)
Creating Market and Non-Market Affordable Housing: A Smart Growth Tool Kit
for BC Municipalities (2008)
A Guide for Canadian Municipalities for Creating a Housing Action Plan (CMHC,
2010).
Reports
•
•
•
•
Creating Housing Affordability for the City of Yellowknife (2009)
Affordable Housing Experience in Canadian Resort Communities (2009)
Comprehensive Housing Action Plan for the Town of Canmore (2008)
The Evolution and Impact of Secondary Suites in Whistler (2007)
Certificates
•
•
Certificate of Appreciation, SFU Beedie School of Business Mentors in Business
Program (2012)
Real Estate Sales Person’s and Sub-Mortgage Broker’s Pre-Licensing Course –
Property Management Option / UBC and The Real Estate Council of British
Columbia (1996)
Awards
•
•
•
Georgie Award for Best Technical Innovation – Beaver Flats, Whistler (2002)
CMHC Affordable Housing Innovation Award – Beaver Flats, Whistler (2002)
Georgie Award for Excellence by a Local Government in Cooperation/Leadership
with Industry – Beaver Flats, Whistler (2000)
Page 16 of 34
Risk of Major Earthquake
Alaska
March 1964
Est. magnitude 9.2
Pacific NW North America
January 1700
Magnitude - Unknown
NEXT??
Japan
March 2011
Magnitude 9.0
Mexico City
September 1985
Magnitude 8.0
Chile
May 1960
Magnitude 9.5
Sumatra
December 2004
Magnitude 9.4
Chile
February 2010
Magnitude 8.8
Christchurch
February 2011
Magnitude 6.3
NOTES:
1. Scientists believe that there is an interaction between major tectonic
movements around the Pacific Rim.
2. Scientists also believe that a major subjuction earthquake along the
Cascadia Fault off the coast of Vancouver Island and Washington
State will likely trigger slippage on other fault lines from California to
Alaska. This seems to be confirmed by geologic bore holes in the
continental shelf.
3. Geologic records indicate a statistical return period of 240 - 550
years, depending on magnitude.
4. Tsunami records from Japan indicate last major earthquake on
Northwest Coast of North America was January, 1700 314 years ago.
Credit: "Earthquakes in Western Canada"
(Alison L. Bird)
Page 17 of 34
Page 18 of 34
Earthquake Damage to
Infrastructure
Christchurch, New Zealand - February 2011
Christchurch, New Zealand - February 2011
Christchurch, New Zealand - 1 year after
Chi-Chi, Taiwan - September 1999
(Credit: R. Boulanger, U.C. Davis)
Page 19 of 34
Page 20 of 34
Effects of Earthquake on
Ferry Terminals
Deltaport/
Roberts Bank
Horseshoe Bay
Ferry Terminal
Tsawwassen
causeway
Tsawwassen
Ferry Terminal
Tsawwassen
Horseshoe Bay
Swartz Bay
Berth #2
Swartz Bay
Berth #2
Swartz Bay
NOTES:
1. Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal likely to be lost after major earthquake due to
liquefaction of soft base.
2. Horseshoe Bay Ferry Terminal likely to be lost after major earthquake due to
inadequacy of design.
3. Recently installed floating Swartz Bay Berth #2 expected to be fully
functional after major earthquake.
Page 21 of 34
Page 22 of 34
Alternate Ferry Routes Swartz Bay & Langdale Departures
Langdale
Horseshoe Bay
Vancouver
Departure Bay
Nanaimo
Duke Point
Tsawwassen
Swartz Bay
Victoria
LEGEND:
NOTES:
Ferry terminal
1. Proposed that fully floating berths (similar to Swartz Bay Berth #2) be
constructed at Langdale (Berth #1A) and Duke Point (Berth #2).
Ferry terminal
(NON-OPERATIONAL)
2. New floating berth at Langdale would provide entry point for Sunshine Coast
after earthquake.
Alternate ferry route
3. Existing floating berth at Swartz Bay (Berth #2) would provide entry point for
Vancouver Island after earthquake.
4. Proposed new floating berth at Duke Point would be constructed so it could
be rapidly relocated to a prepared point at the east end of Burrard Inlet,
providing hub point for post-disaster service to Vancouver Island and the
Sunshine Coast.
Page 23 of 34
Page 24 of 34
B.C. DUE FOR MEGA-EARTHQUAKE ALONG COAST: SEISMIC RISK
TO VITAL TRANSPORTATION LINKS BETWEEN VANCOUVER
ISLAND, COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND THE LOWER MAINLAND
MAY 21, 2014
BACKGROUND
The probability of a very large (magnitude 9 plus) megathrust earthquake occurring off of the northwest coast of North
America is increasing all of the time. Statistically it is estimated that there is a one in three chance of this major
earthquake happening in the next fifty years. 1
Vancouver Island and coastal BC are at special risk to this earthquake due to the vulnerability of the ferry service links to
the BC mainland. Virtually all food, essential goods and materials are transported to the island and coastal communities
by truck. All truck traffic on BC Ferries is routed through either the Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal in Delta or the Horseshoe
Bay Ferry Terminal in West Vancouver.
The Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal is constructed on a very deep, soft, alluvial foundation that is expected to liquefy under
the heavy and prolonged shaking of a megathrust earthquake. The existing ferry terminal will be unusable after a major
earthquake and will require a complete rebuild.
Horseshoe Bay Ferry Terminal is at risk due to the age of the berths that were constructed well before current codes for
earthquake design. It is likely that the terminal’s three berths will be damaged beyond use or repair by the earthquake,
and may in fact be buried as a result of the collapse of the adjacent steep and unstable rock walls.
Commercial drop-trailer service to Vancouver Island operated by Seaspan Ferries Inc. would also be adversely affected
by a severe earthquake since their load out points are located in the Fraser River Delta, another vulnerable location not
far upstream from Tsawwassen.
AFFECTED POPULATION
There are more than 760,000 people living in and around Vancouver Island and 50,000 people on the Sunshine Coast.2
These people depend on B.C. Ferries for essential goods, including food. Their homes, businesses, schools and
communities all depend on a stable and secure linkage to the mainland. At present, each day an estimated 60 to 100
supply trucks use BC Ferries to deliver essential food stocks. In the absence of a functioning ferry terminal, not only food
supply but the emergency medical and recovery materials would be unable to reach this vulnerable population. Food
security forums suggest that the present reserve food supply on Vancouver Island would only be sufficient to sustain the
population for a maximum of three weeks.
DISCUSSION POINTS
In the event of a major earthquake, the construction industry will be under severe stress to rebuild everything from
marine terminals to city buildings. Demands for repair will be enormous. Alternate means of transportation such as
barges will not be able to maintain the normal supply of vital goods such as food nor will they be able to transport
materials and equipment for rebuilding.
Canada’s only west coast naval base is located at Esquimalt on Vancouver Island. The federal government also operates
an airbase out of Comox. National Defense has a vested interest in maintaining a supply line for all the materials and
goods that currently arrive at the bases by truck from the mainland. Personal transportation between the islands, coastal
communities and the mainland would also be dramatically disrupted.
To construct a new ferry berth takes approximately 18 months. In the absence of functioning berths, it is expected that it
will take two to three years to reconstruct the ferry berths necessary to allow for the resumption of normal transport of
food and essential goods to Vancouver Island and coastal communities after a major earthquake.
1
2
“Alison L. Bird, Earthquakes in Western Canada”.
BC Stats 2011
Page 25 of 34
Public safety is of paramount importance and this issue presents an enormous risk to B.C. residents living on Vancouver
Island and on the Sunshine Coast who are reliant on B.C. Ferries to provide essential services, materials and food. This is
not an issue with the ongoing financial management of B.C. Ferries. It is, however, a critical special needs situation to
address the risks to approximately 10% of the population of B.C. These unique island and coastal populations are at risk
of being cut off from supplies for several years. It is a situation that requires pre-emptive action. It will be extremely
difficult if not impossible to implement an effective plan to respond to this situation after the disaster.
SOLUTION
A mitigation strategy is available. A ferry berth design exists that is ‘post-disaster’ capable. It will not only survive the
anticipated major earthquake but it would be serviceable after the event. A fully floating, concrete pontoon berth at
Swartz Bay Berth 2 constructed in 2006 has the capability to remain functional following a major earthquake and would
provide the access point for ferry traffic to Vancouver Island. An inherent characteristic of the floating berth is the
compliant positional restraint employed. The mass of the berth is essentially isolated from ground motion. A consortium
of B.C. industry professionals is proposing that two similar berths be constructed. One would be located at Langdale on
Howe Sound to ensure there is a working berth to serve the coastal communities that depend on supply by B.C. Ferries.
A second floating berth would be constructed and temporarily located at Duke Point near Nanaimo on Vancouver Island.
It would have the capability to rapidly disconnect it at that site and towed to a prepared site in Burrard Inlet. This would
become the hub to serve Vancouver Island and Sunshine Coast communities following a major earthquake.
REQUESTED ACTION:
It is proposed that the provincial government, as the representative body for citizens of Vancouver Island, the Gulf
Islands and the Sunshine Coast, along with local and federal governments, B.C. Ferries and industry experts, commence a
review of this proposed megathrust earthquake risk mitigation strategy. There are ways of managing the capital cost of
this strategy if all levels of government are willing to focus on resolving this challenge cooperatively. We need to act
together now.
PREPARING FOR A MEGATHRUST EARTHQUAKE IS OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE:
We look forward to hearing from you to ensure that we respond collectively, proactively and
responsibly to protect the lives of B.C. residents living on Vancouver Island and in coastal
communities who are reliant upon ferry services. We welcome your leadership in these important
discussions.
Vancouver Pile Driving Ltd. Wayne Saunders, P. Eng., VP 604-986-5911
Ramsay Group Greg Ramsay, President 250-656-5314
Janox Fluid Power Ltd. Richard Crauford, President 604-952-6666
Hebden Engineering Inc. Ray Hebden, P. Eng., President 250-652-1605
Page 26 of 34
COMMITIEE REPORT
For Planning and Development Committee meeting on October
To:
27th, 2014
Patrick Robins
Chief Administrative Officer
From:
Bruce Greig
Director of Planning & Building Services
Date:
October
Re:
Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations proposed
changes to Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines to
include Sea Level Rise
Priority:
0
0
strategic
operational
20th, 2014
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the Planning and Development Committee recommend that Council:
1)
Provide any comments for input to the Ministry of Forests, Lands and
Natural Resource Operations on the proposed changes to the Flood Hazard
Area Land Use Management Guidelines as a means to address Sea Level
Rise;
2)
Direct
staff
to
prepare
a
supplemental
consultants to prepare mapping of the
2100
budget
request
to
engage
Flood Construction Level for
the District, utilizing the province's recommended methodology (Ausenco
Sandwell,
3)
2011 );
Endorse pursuing opportunities to work with neighbouring municipalities
to ensure consistent mapping results and reduce costs; and,
4)
Refer the issue of regulatory options for land use management in response
to Sea Level Rise to a future tri-municipal Council meeting, to discuss the
options and benefits of a coordinated approach to addressing this issue.
1903
mounl newlon Cro:M Road, Saatiichlon, BC. V8m 2..//9
/?une: 250-652-4444 .2.,._. 250-652-0135
Page 27 of 34
To:
Patrick Robins, Chief Administrative Officer
For:
Re:
October 27, 2014 Planning & Development Committee Meeting
proposed changes to Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines to
October 20, 2014
include Sea Level Rise
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
Changes to provincial legislation in 2003 and 2004 shifted the authority to manage land
use in flood hazard areas from the Province to local governments. Central Saanich does
not have any designated flood hazard areas or ufloodplains".
Currently, the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natl.Ira! Resource Operations (FLNRO) is
in the process o f changing the "Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines"
to also include considerations for land development in areas that will be affected by sea
level rise. New section 3.5 and 3.6 of the guidelines have been drafted, and FLNRO is
currently seeking comments from local governments (see Appendix 'A').
In late September, the CRD hosted a legal seminar presenting preliminary analysis and
discussion of the proposed guidelines. Discussion centred on the potential implications
for those local governments that choose to designate flood hazard areas, as well as the
implications for those not adopting such designations within their land use regulations.
The measures recommended by the province are, at this point, guidelines.
There is
currently no requirement for local governments to identify and adopt regulations for
development in flood hazard areas.
This report is intended to bring the changes being proposed by FLNRO to Council's
attention
DISCUSSION:
Subsequent to the seminar hosted by the CRD, Planning staff met with staff from both
Sidney and North Saanich to discuss and understand where each municipality is at on
this issue. It became clear that if the District is to undertake work in this area, it would
be efficient to take a common approach and, where practical, share resources (e.g. for
analysis and mapping).
Staff have not had an opportunity to fully analyse the proposed changes to the provincial
Page 28 of 34
To:
Patrick Robins, Chief Administrative Officer
For:
October 27, 2014 Planning & Development Committee Meeting
proposed changes to Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines to
Re:
October 20, 2014
include Sea Level Rise
Page 3
guidelines and their implications for the municipality, and are not suggesting specific
changes to the draft guidelines be submitted to FLNRO. Given the request for comment,
however, Council may consider whether it wishes to provide feedback to the province on
the general approach of flood hazard management as a local government responsibility.
Staff see several potential issues, including:
0
lack of resources and expertise at the local government staff level to implement
the guidelines;
0
potential for inconsistent approaches among local governments leading to a
patchwork of regulations - resulting in an uneven field with respect to land use
regulations, degree of public safety and impacts on land values;
0
uncertainty about the appropriate roles and legal responsibilities of the province,
municipalities, professionals and land owners; and,
0
basic questions about whether adopting the flood hazard guidelines is the
appropriate tool to also address sea level rise.
CONCLUSION:
Sea level rise will affect both private properties and municipal infrastructure in the years
to come.
To
better understand the potential
impacts and areas affected, staff
recommend that, as a first step, the District consider developing detailed mapping of the
year 2100 Flood Construction Level as recommended by provincial guidelines.
Staff
further recommend that Council endorse the approach of working with neighbouring
municipalities on this project to ensure consistency and, where possible, save on costs.
Respectfully submitted,
�
-
�I
Bruce Greig, mcip, bcsla
Director of Planning and Building Services
Attachments:
Appendix 'A'
Endorsed by:
-
draft FLNRO guidelines
I
JV"""-
r """'V""VI
'V1
David McAllister, P.Eng. MSc. MBA
Director ofEngineering & Public Works
Page 29 of 34
---
BRITISH
COLUMBIA
AMENDMENT
(DRAFT-MAY 7, 2013)
Section 3.5 and 3.6
3.5
-
Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines
The Sea
3.5.1 Background and Reference Documents
The content for this Amendment is drawn primarily from, " Climate Change Adaptation
Guidelines for Sea Dikes and Coastal Flood Hazard Land Use - Guidelines for Management of
Coastal Flood Hazard Land Use", Ausenco Sandwell, report to BC Ministry of Environment,
January 27, 2011 and the companion reports, "Sea Dike Guidelines" and "Draft Policy
Discussion Paper", also dated January 27, 2011.
These 2011 reports, including terminology, definitions and explanatory figures, supplement this
Amendment to the "Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines". Where there is
any inconsistency between the Ausenco Sandwell (2011) reports and this Amendment
document, the Amendment document shall govern. These reports are referenced in this
Amendment as:
"Draft Policy Discussion Paper" - AS(2011 a)
"Guidelines for Management of Coastal Flood Hazard Land Use" -AS (2011 b)
"Sea Dike Guidelines" -AS (2011c)
These reports are available on the ministry web page:
http://www.env.qov.bc.ca/wsd/public safety/flood/fhm-2012/draw report.html
3.5.2 Design and Planning Time Frame
Requirements for buildings, subdivision, and zoning should allow for sea level rise (SLR) to the
year 2100.
Land use adaptation strategies should allow for sea level rise to the year 2200.
3.5,.3
Recommended Sea Level Rise Scenario for BC
Allow for 0.5 m by 2050, 1.0 m by 2100 and 2.0 m Global Sea Level Rise by 2200 relative to the
year 2000 as per Figure 1.
Adjust for regional uplift and subsidence using the most recent and best information available.
Where no information is available, assume neutral conditions (i.e. no uplift or subsidence).
Ministry of
Forests, Lands, &
Natural Resource
Operations
Flood Safety Section
Resource Stewardship Division
Water Management Branch
Website: www.env.gov,bc.ca/wsd
Mailing Address:
PO Box 9340 Sin Prov Govt
Location:
3rd Floor, 395 Waterfront Crescent
Victoria BC V8W 9M1
Telephone: (250) 387-9962
Victoria BC V8T 5K7
Page 30 of 34
Draft Amendment Sections 3.5 and 3.6 "Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines"
The scenario in Figure 1 is intended to be reviewed in 2015, or sooner if there is significant new
scientific information.
5
CllE
4
Recommended Curve for Sea
Level Rise Policy in BC
-
O> ......
Co
nJ 0
�o
(.) N
- 0
Cl)_
> Cl)
.2!
nJ
Cl) ..rn
(/) �
�
3
2
1
0
.
----o;tS·-----1900
1950
--
2000
2050
2100
2150
2200
2250
2300
Year
Figure 1. Recommended Global Sea Level Rise Curve for Planning and Design in BC
3.5.4 Sea Level
Rise Planning Areas
Local Governments should consider defining SLR Planning Areas and developing land use
planning strategies integrating both flood protection (sea dikes) and flood hazard management
tools. These areas should include inland floodplains adjacent to tidally influenced rivers where
potential flood levels will be increased by sea level rise.
3.5.5 Strait of Georgia
3.5.5.1 Standard FCLS and Setbacks
The Year 2100 FCL should be established for specific coastal areas during the SLR Planning
Area process by a suitably qualified professional. The Year 2100 FCL should be the minimum
elevation for the underside of a wooden floor system or top of concrete slab for habitable
buildings, and should be determined as the sum of:
•
The 1:200 Annual Exceedence Probability (AEP) water level as determined by joint
probability analyses of high tides and storm surge;
•
Allowance for future SLR to the year 2100;
•
Allowance for regional uplift, or subsidence to the year 2100;
•
Estimated wave effects associated with the Designated Storm; and
•
Freeboard.
Note: Alternatively, the Year 2100 FCL can be determined by a simplified but more conservative method
as described in the Ausenco Sandwell (2011) reports. Example calculations of FCLs for specific areas in
coastal BC are provided in Table 3-2 AS(201 1b) where the FCL is determined as the sum of:
2
Page 31 of 34
Draft Amendment Sections 3.5 and 3.6 "Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines"
•
Allowance for future SLR to the year 2100;
•
Allowance for re giona l uplift. or subsidence to the year 2100;
•
H i gher high wa ter lar ge tide (HHWLT);
•
Estimated storm surge for the Designated Storm;
•
Estimated wave effects associated with the Designated Storm; and
•
Freeboard.
The building setback should be at least the greater of 15 m from the future estimated Natural
Boundary of the sea at Year 2100, or landward of the location where the natural ground
elevation contour is equivalent to the Year 2100 FCL (refer to Figure 2-2 in AS (2011b) for a
definition sketch).
The setback may be increased on a site-specific basis such as for exposed erodible beaches
and/or in areas of known erosion hazard.
3.5.5.2 Subdivision
All lots created through subdivision should have viable building sites on natural ground that
comply with the Year 2100 FCL and setback guidelines noted above.
To regulate redevelopment at the end of the building lifespan, the development approving officer
should require a restrictive covenant stipulating that any future reconstruction must meet the
FCL and setbacks requirements in force at thetime of redevelopment, and including a liability
disclaimer if reconstruction does not take place at or before the planned lifespan of the building.
3.5.5.3 Development on Existing Lots
On existing lots, if meeting the setback guidelines noted above would sterilize the lot (i.e., not
allow even one of the land uses or structures permitted under the current zoning). the
development approving official may agree to modify setback requirements as recommended by
a suitably qualified professional, provided that this is augmented through a restrictive covenant
stipulating the hazard, building requirements, and liability disclaimer.
The Year 2100 FCL requirements would still apply to new habitable building construction.
3.5.5.4 Lots with Coastal Bluffs
For lots containing coastal bluffs that are steeper than 3(H):1(V) and susceptible to erosion from
the sea, setbacks should be determined as follows:
1. If the future estimated Natural Boundary is located at least 15 m seaward of the toe of
the bluff, then no action is required and the setback should conform with other guidelines
that adequately address terrestrial cliff and slope stability hazards.
2.
If the future estimated Natural Boundary is located 15m or less seaward of the toe of the
bluff, then the setback from the future estimated Natural Boundary should be located at
a horizontal distance of at least 3 times the height of the bluff, measured from 15 m
landwards from the location of the future estimated Natural Boundary.
In some conditions, setbacks may require site-specific interpretation and could result in
the use of a minimum distance measured back from the crest of the bluff. The setback
may be modified provided the modification is supported by a report, giving consideration
3
Page 32 of 34
Draft Amendment Sections 3.5 and 3.6 "Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines"
to the coastal erosion that may occur over the life of the project, prepared by a suitably
qualified professional.
3.5.6 Outside the Strait of Georgia Area
•
Areas Subject to Signiflicant Tsunami Hazard
For coastal lands subject to tsunami hazards, the tsunami setback and elevation as determined
below will typically exceed the "standard" setbacks and elevations determined for the Year 2100
as described in 3.5.5.1. Where the tsunami hazard is low, the greater FCLs and setbacks shall
apply.
A subdivision application in tsunami prone areas must include a report by a suitably
qualified professional who must formulate safe building conditions for each proposed lot
based on a review of recent Tsunami hazard literature plus the historical report, "Evaluation of
Tsunami Levels Along the British Columbia Coast", by Seaconsult Marine Research Ltd., dated
March 1988.
At a minimum, building conditions should protect improvements from damage from a tsunami of
equal magnitude to the March 28,1964 tsunami that resulted from the Prince William Sound,
Alaska earthquake.
SetbackSetback requirements should be established on a site-specific basis and take into account
tsunami hazards.
The setback must be sufficient to protect buildings and must be at least 30 metres from the Year
2100 estimated natural boundary.
FCLFCL requirements should be established on a site-specific basis and take into account
tsunami hazards.
Reductions to these requirements should only be considered where the building can be
built to the Tsunami FCL on bedrock.
3.6 Areas Protected by Standard Dikes
Residential, commercial and institutional developments in areas protected by standard
dikes are required to comply with full flood proofing requirements for their respective
categories, with a possible exception for development within Sea Level Rise Planning Areas as
noted below.
SetbackBuildings should be located a minimum of 7.5 metres away from any structure for flood
protection or seepage control or any dike right-of-way used for protection works. In
addition, fill for floodproofing should not be placed within 7.5 metres of the inboard toe of
any structure for flood protection or seepage control or the inboard side of any dike right of­
way used for protection works.
4
Page 33 of 34
Draft Amendment Sections 3.5 and 3.6 "Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines"
Additional dike right of way and building set back requirements should be defined for Sea Level
Rise Planning Areas to accommodate upgrading of dikes for sea level rise
Any change to these conditions requires the approval o f the Inspector of Dikes.
FCLBuildings and manufactured homes in areas protected by standard dikes should meet
minimum FCLs prescribed for the primary stream, lake or sea adjacent to the dike and the
FCL requirements for any internal drainage (minimum ponding elevations).
Relaxation of FCL requirements for new development in coastal areas protected by standard
dikes may be appropriate for Sea Level Rise Planning Areas where the long term flood
protection strategy and dike upgrading program has been approved by the Inspector of Dikes.
This relaxation should be augmented through a restrictive covenant stipulating the hazard and
protection strategy, building requirements, and liability disclaimer.
3.6.1 Secondary sources of flooding
Where there are secondary sources of flooding within diked areas, the appropriate
requirements as set out in Clauses 3.1 through 3.5 should be applied. These should
include consideration of minimum ponding elevations behind the dike to protect against
internal drainage.
AMENDED:
,
__
2013
5
Page 34 of 34