Post on 25-May-2020
transcript
GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
Thursday, April 23, 2015 1:00 p.m.
2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia
A G E N D A1 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.1 April 23, 2015 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for April 23, 2015 as circulated.
2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
2.1 April 2, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held April 2, 2015 as circulated.
3. DELEGATIONS 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF
5.1 Status of Reserves
Designated Speaker: Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer
That the Board approve the application of reserves as set out in Schedules 1, 2 and 3
of the report titled “Status of Reserves” dated March 25, 2015.
1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.
I&F - 1
Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda April 23, 2015
Agenda Page 2 of 4
5.2 GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution
Designated Speaker: Dean Rear, Director, Financial Planning & Operations
That the GVS&DD Board:
a) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 is October 1, 2015; and
b) Direct staff to prepare a new amending bylaw to amend GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 to clarify that the Bylaw does not apply to secondary suites.
5.3 Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Designated Speaker: Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer That the GVRD Board refer the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District
Capital Projects to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC to consider and report back on
the issues raised in the report dated April 16, 2015, titled “Capital Projects Protocol –
Policy Update”.
5.4 Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement
Project – Funding Request
Designated Speaker: Greg Smith, Senior Director, Corporate Services
That the GVRD Board approve a capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and
Rescue Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre.
5.5 Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy
Designated Speaker: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations
That the GVRD Board approve the Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy as presented
in the report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”.
5.6 National Zero Waste Council Update
Designated Speaker: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations
That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive for information the report
titled National Zero Waste Council Update dated April 13, 2015.
5.7 Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance
Designated Speaker:
Allan Neilson, General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment
a) That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to send a draft submission to the Chair of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to reiterate Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing objections concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and the rule that prohibits the appointment of local elected officials as local representatives; and
b) That the Board ratify the Metro Vancouver submission.
I&F - 2
Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda April 23, 2015
Agenda Page 3 of 4
5.8 GVRD Nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors
Designated Speaker:
Chris Plagnol, Director Board and Information Services/Corporate Officer,
Legal and Legislative Services
That the GVRD Board designate Raymond Louie as Metro Vancouver nominee to the
E‐Comm Board of Directors for the 2015‐2016 term.
5.9 Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a Standby/Emergency Power Generation Source
That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Province of BC and to BC Hydro requesting
that the decision to close the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant be reconsidered and
that it be maintained as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro
Vancouver.
6. INFORMATION ITEMS
6.1 Intergovernment and Finance Committee 2015 Work Plan
6.2 Intergovernment and Finance Committee Terms of Reference
7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING
That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee close its regular meeting schedule for April 23, 2015 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e), (g) and (k), and 90 (2) (b) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being
considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if
the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district;
(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; (k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of
a regional district service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the board or committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public; and
90 (2) A part of a meeting must be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to one or more of the following:
I&F - 3
Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda April 23, 2015
Agenda Page 4 of 4
(b) the consideration of information received and held in confidence relating to negotiations between the regional district and a provincial government or the federal government or both and a third party.”
10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION
That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of April 23, 2015.
Membership: Louie, Raymond (C) – Vancouver
Moore, Greg (VC) – Port Coquitlam
Brodie, Malcolm – Richmond
Clay, Mike – Port Moody
Corrigan, Derek – Burnaby
Deal, Heather – Vancouver
Mussatto, Darrell – North Vancouver City
Steele, Barbara – Surrey
Stewart, Richard ‐ Coquitlam
Walton, Richard – North Vancouver District
I&F - 4
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Thursday, April 2, 2015 Page 1 of 3
GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Intergovernment and Finance Committee held at 9:03 a.m. on Thursday, April 2, 2015 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Councillor Raymond Louie, Vancouver Vice Chair, Mayor Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Mayor Mike Clay, Port Moody Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Councillor Heather Deal, Vancouver Mayor Darrell Musatto, North Vancouver City Mayor Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Mayor Richard Walton, North Vancouver District MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey STAFF PRESENT: Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer Klara Kutakova, Division Manager, Board and Information Services/Deputy Corporate Officer,
Legal and Legislative Services 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.1 April 2, 2015 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for April 2, 2015 as circulated.
CARRIED 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
2.1 February 19, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held February 19, 2015 as circulated.
CARRIED
2.1
I&F - 5
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Thursday, April 2, 2015 Page 2 of 3
3. DELEGATIONS No items presented.
4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS
No items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF
5.1 Authorization to Attend 2015 International Events
Report dated March 25, 2015, from Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations, seeking input on the attendance and remuneration of Board members to attend events that are within the mandate of Metro Vancouver's international engagement objectives, and on recommendations to the Board Chair. It was MOVED and SECONDED
That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee:
a) supports attendance at the following 2015 international events:
ICLEI World Congress 2015
Resilient Cities 2015
United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) World Council Meeting
2015 Study Tour
Sustainable Innovation 2015
IEDC 2015 Annual Conference b) authorizes the Chair of the Intergovernment and Finance Committee to
forward the names of the recommended attendees to the Board chair for authorization.
CARRIED 6. INFORMATION ITEMS
No items presented.
7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.
8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS
No items presented.
I&F - 6
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Thursday, April 2, 2015 Page 3 of 3
9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for April 2, 2015 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (i) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being
considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor‐client privilege,
including communications necessary for that purpose.” CARRIED
10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adjourn its regular meeting of April 2, 2015.
CARRIED (Time: 9:04 a.m.)
____________________________ ____________________________ Klara Kutakova, Raymond Louie, Chair Deputy Corporate Officer 11120241 FINAL
I&F - 7
11002989
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer Date: March 25, 2015 Meeting date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Status of Reserves
RECOMMENDATION That the Board approve the application of reserves as set out in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the report titled “Status of Reserves” dated March 25, 2015.
PURPOSE To present, for approval, additional reserve applications to those previously approved by the Board in October 2014 and to project the reserve status of operating and designated reserves for 2015. BACKGROUND The 2015 Greater Vancouver Districts’ Final Budget approved in October contained estimates of reserves and their proposed uses. Some of these proposed uses were based on forecasts of year‐end results. With the year‐end accounting process now complete we are able to update this information for the actual results of the year. Detailed information on actual operating results were included in the report “2014 Financial Results Year‐End” presented to the Performance and Procurement Committee on April 15, 2015. ADDITIONAL RESERVE APPLICATIONS Schedules 1, 2 and 3 are additional reserve applications being presented for Board approval. Schedules 4 and 5 present updated operating and designated reserve projections for 2015. Additional Proposed Applications of Reserves in 2015 – Use of Excess Reserves: As outlined in Schedule 1, it is proposed that additional unspecified operating reserves, resulting from 2014 operating surpluses, or the solid waste sustainability reserve funds be applied as follows:
Air Quality – to Air Quality Equipment Reserve to fund future equipment acquisitions
Regional Parks ‐ to Heritage Parkland Acquisition Fund Reserve to fund future parkland acquisitions
General Government – to Regional District Fleet Vehicle Reserve to fund future fleet vehicle replacements
Regional Planning – to Regional Growth Strategy Reserve to fund future requirements should they arise
Water – to reduce future debt requirements
Solid Waste – to fund the future Landfill closure and post closure obligations
Liquid Waste – to reduce future debt requirements and to fund the Lab Equipment Reserve
5.1
I&F - 8
Status of Reserves Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 3
These applications are consistent with Board policy regarding use of reserves. Projects being carried forward from 2014 ‐ Initiatives started in 2014 to be completed in 2015: Several operating program projects were started but not completed within the 2014 fiscal year, thus generating a program surplus. We require Board approval to carry these surpluses forward to complete the projects in 2015. The initiatives presented are those deemed by staff as a high priority and difficult to accommodate within the approved funding in 2015. These applications are listed on Schedule 2. Application of Reserve to Fund 2014 Deficit: The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District’s Solid Waste function incurred a deficit in 2014 due to lower than expected waste flows. The funding of this deficit is required by law and is presented for approval on Schedule 3. The deficit will be funded from GVS&DD (Solid Waste) Sustainability Innovation Fund reserves. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board approve the application of reserves included on Schedules 1, 2 and 3 as
presented. 2. That the Board make changes to the proposed application of reserves as appropriate and
approve the reserve applications as amended.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The approval of the reserve applications as included under alternative 1, which is recommended, has no financial impact on the 2015 levies to member municipalities. These applications enable Metro Vancouver to position surplus funds to avoid future debt requirements and to apply sustainability innovation funds to fund future closure and post closure landfill obligations (Schedule 1), complete planned initiatives already in progress (Schedule 2), and meet the legislated requirement to fund any operating deficits (Schedule 3). Operating reserves in excess of Board established thresholds or unspecified designated reserves, are utilized by policy to avoid future debt or fund future expenditures. These applications as set out in Schedule 1, if not approved, would remain in operating or designated reserves. While these amounts would be available for use in the future, the short term impact would be higher borrowing requirements which would apply upward pressure on the municipal levies. Should any of the items listed in Schedule 2, projects that were started in 2014 but not complete, not be approved, the initiatives, while likely completed, would require that some planned initiatives in 2015 be reprioritized resulting in the lowest priority items not being undertaken or deferred to future years. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The application of reserves as included in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 are recommended for approval. These applications are consistent with legislated requirements and Board policy on the use of reserves and provide the funding necessary to complete operating priorities currently in progress as well as reduce future debt requirements.
I&F - 9
Status of Reserves Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 3 of 3
The unspecified reserves that remain over guidelines will be considered as part of the 2016 budget process and generally will be phased in over future years to offset municipal funding requirements. Attachments Schedule 1 ‐ Proposed Application of Reserves – Additional Items Schedule 2 ‐ Reserve Applications – Projects Carried Forward from 2014 Schedule 3 ‐ Application of Reserves – Required for 2014 Deficit Schedule 4 ‐ Operating Reserves Schedule 5 ‐ Designated Reserves
I&F - 10
GREATER VANCOUVER DISTRICTS
2015 Budget - Proposed Application of Reserves - Additional Items (To Be Approved by the Board in May 2015)
Function Application Operating ReservesDesignated Reserves
GVRD
Air Quality
Contribution to Air Quality Equipment Fund (1) 63,872$
Parks
Contribution to Heritage Parkland Acquisition Fund Reserve (1) 818,374
General Government
Contribution to Regional District Fleet Vehicle Reserve (1) 1,335,320
Regional Planning
Contribution to Regional Growth Strategy Reserve (1) 158,551
GVWD
Fund Future Capital Requirements (1) 1,517,141
GVS & DD
Solid Waste
Fund Landfill Post Closure Fund (2) 5,000,000
Liquid Waste
Fund Future Capital Requirements (1) 4,878,063
Fund Lab Equipment Reserve (1) 100,000
TOTAL RESERVE APPLICATION 8,871,321$ 5,000,000$
(1) Unspecified operating reserves, resulting from 2014 operating surpluses, to be used to fund future capital / equipment / other expenditures.
(2) Unspecified Solid Waste Sustainability Innovation Fund reserve amount set aside for possible future landfill closure and post closure obligations.
SCHEDULE 1
I&F - 11
GREATER VANCOUVER DISTRICTS
2015 Budget - Reserve Applications - Projects Carried Forward from 2014 Year (To be approved by the Board in May 2015)
Function ApplicationOperating Reserves
GVRD
General GovernmentComplete Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management (IPREM) work (1) 78,900$
Air Quality Complete consulting projects for Air Quality Policy and Management collaborative work (2) 80,000
Complete consulting project for Climate Change Policy and Management collaborative work (3) 27,500
Regional Planning
Complete Growth Management consulting projects, cost studies and backgrounders (4) 50,000
Labour Relations
Complete upgrade of software enhancement and information services for the Labour Relations function (5) 60,000
GVS & DD
Liquid Waste
Complete Region-wide Baseline for Municipal On-site Rainwater Management (6) 28,000
Complete Liquid Waste Development Cost Charge review (7) 100,000
Complete Lynn Creek Sanitary Sewer work (8) 150,000
Complete Liquid Waste projects public consultation work (9) 100,000
GVWD
Complete Lower Seymour Conservation Reserve public washroom facility work (10) 230,000
Complete Greenwood Reservoir isolation work (11) 120,000
Complete Vancouver Heights Reservoir modifications work (12) 218,000
Complete Chilco and Alberni Reclorination Station upgrade work (13) 261,000
TOTAL $1,503,400
Note: This schedule represents projects budgeted/planned for but not completed in 2014 and requiring Board approval forthe carryforward of funding to complete the projects in 2015.
(1) Funding to complete deliverables under the Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management program. (2) Funding to complete stakeholder engagement workshops for a broad range of industry and other groups, health impact
assessement framework for reducing exposure to traffic emissions and regulatory and non-regulatory programs and policies to prioritize development of options for reducing volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in the Region as part of deliverables in Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan and Regional Ground Level Ozone Strategy .
(3) Funding to complete restoration work for a degraded area of the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area for the purposes of methane reduction, carbon sequestration along with the development of further greenhouse gas (GHG) carbon offset credits as part of requirements of Metro Vancouver as a signatory to the BC Climate Action Charter.
(4) Funding to complete research and policy analysis regarding Climate Change mitigation and adaption opportunities.
(5) Funding to complete work regarding clarifying, refining and elevating services offered.
(6) Funding to complete work with municipalities via the Stormwater Interagency Liasion Group to identify a region-wide base-line for on-site rainwater management as outlined in Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan.
(7) Funding to complete consulting review work in 2015 regarding the Liquid Waste development cost charge program.
(8) Funding to complete purchase of materials and work crew scheduling due to design amd work permit delays in 2014.
(9) Funding to complete public consultation work in 2015 regarding Liquid Waste projects and initiatives delayed in 2014.
(10) Funding to complete design and construction work in 2015 due to unanticipated 2014 architectural/engineering delays.
(11) Funding to complete design work in 2015 due primarily to delays in securing consulting resource in 2014.
(12) Funding to complete preliminary and detailed design work in 2015 due to delays in securing consulting resource in 2014.
(13) Funding to complete design and construction work in 2015 due to additional electrical design and delays in parts delivery.
SCHEDULE 2
I&F - 12
GREATER VANCOUVER DISTRICTS
Application of Reserves - Required for 2014 Deficit (To Be Approved by the Board in May 2015)
Function ApplicationDesignated Reserves
GVS&DD
Solid Waste Fund deficit from designated reserve (1) ($3,436,190)
TOTAL ($3,436,190)
(1) Lower than expected waste flows in the system.
SCHEDULE 3
I&F - 13
METRO VANCOUVER DISTRICTS2015 BudgetOperating ReservesSummary by District
Actual 2015 Required2014 Projected Under Unspecified
Surplus/(Deficit) Reserves Guideline Reserves
GVRD General Functions
General Government 1,688,688$ 285,599$ 285,599$ -Air Quality 1,032,697 378,840 378,840 -Global Positioning System 220,695 844,581 19,178 825,403 (2)Labour Relations 484,469 1,046,249 104,516 941,733 (1)Regional Parks 1,153,629 1,261,858 1,261,858 -Regional Planning 289,616 138,629 138,629 -West Nile Virus - 319,837 - 319,837911 Telephone 1,962 578,441 197,451 380,990 (2)
Sub-total GVRD 4,871,756$ 4,854,034$ 2,386,071$ 2,467,963$
GVS & DDSolid Waste (3,436,190)$ 9,762,547$ 9,762,547$ -
Liquid WasteFraser Area 2,974,075$ 6,533,585$ 6,533,585$ -
Lulu Island Area 1,560,531 1,399,650 1,399,650 -
North Shore Area 1,506,381 1,502,993 1,502,993 -
Vancouver Area 3,653,614 3,865,960 3,865,960 -
Drainage Areas 271,378 4,238,402 193,870 4,044,532 (2)
Sub-total Liquid Waste 9,965,979$ 17,540,590$ 13,496,058$ 4,044,532$
Sub-total GVS & DD 6,529,789$ 27,303,137$ 23,258,605$ 4,044,532$
GVWD 17,935,118$ 14,478,580$ 14,478,580$ -
TOTAL 29,336,663$ 46,635,751$ 40,123,256$ 6,512,495$
(1)
(2)
future years.
The application of unspecified reserves will be phased in over future years.
Unspecified reserves will be used to fund future capital / equipment purchases as required or will be phased in over
SCHEDULE 4
I&F - 14
METRO VANCOUVER DISTRICTS2015 BudgetDesignated ReservesSummary by District
Projected 2015Reserves
MVHC
Restricted Operating ReservesSection 27 2,978,684$ BCH Consolidated Operating Agreement 1,766,327
Capital Replacement ReservesSection 27 2,511,296 BCH Consolidated Operating Agreement 3,697,030
Other ReservesDevelopment 8,612,568 MVHC 2,499,532
TOTAL MVHC 22,065,437
GVRD
Sasamat Volunteer Fire Dept 1,001,856
Air Quality Equipment Fund 2,684,886
Regional District Sustainability Innovation Fund 17,821,693
Regional Growth Strategy Reserve 228,569
Cultural Grant Reserves 2,348,512
Asset Replacement Reserve 7,242,699
Self Insurance Fund 3,785,230
Other Regional Reserves 3,240,762
Parks ReservesHeritage Parkland Acquisition Fund 5,816,665 Capital Maintenance Reserve 1,069,078 Capital Replacement and Development Reserve 3,162,917 Legacy Fund 2,936,985 Other Parks Reserves 911,036
Fleet Vehicle Reserve 1,654,567
Building Operations and Corporate Programs 13,716,207
TOTAL GVRD 67,621,662
GVS & DD
Solid WasteFlyash Provision 1,190,291 Waste-to-Energy R&D Reserve 5,571,502 Post Closure Fund 7,495,147 Solid Waste Sustainability Innovation Fund 5,187,404
19,444,344
Liquid Waste
Laboratory Equipment 265,757 Lions Gate contingency 1,355,988 Sewerage & Drainage Sustainability Innovation Fund 14,035,489 Biosolids Inventory Reserves 11,615,544 Capital Reserves 50,075,450
77,348,227
GVS & DD Equipment FundSolid Waste Equipment Fund 7,326,246 Liquid Waste Equipment Fund 5,040,681
12,366,927
TOTAL GVS & DD 109,159,498
GVWDOffice Building - Capital 912,567 Water Sustainability Innovation Fund 10,048,661 Laboratory Equipment 355,301 Capital Reserves 7,461,024
TOTAL GVWD 18,777,553
TOTAL 217,624,150$
SCHEDULE 5
I&F - 15
11158752
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Dean Rear, Director, Financial Planning & Operations Date: April 16, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution
RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board:
a) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 is October 1, 2015; and
b) Direct staff to prepare a new amending bylaw to amend GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 to clarify that the Bylaw does not apply to secondary suites.
PURPOSE To seek a resolution addressing concerns from member municipalities arising from the implementation of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014. BACKGROUND At the July 25, 2014 meeting, the GVS&DD Board introduced and gave three readings to the GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw 286, 2014 (“Amending Bylaw 286”), which amended GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 (“GVS&DD DCC Bylaw”). The Inspector of Municipalities approved Amending Bylaw 286 on November 5, 2014, and it was adopted by the Board on November 28, 2014. Amending Bylaw 286 removes the exemption from payment of DCCs for residential developments with fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units, and allows for collection of DCCs at the time building permits are issued. Amending Bylaw 286 also introduced new dwelling unit definitions to clarify residential development types and to facilitate the collection of DCCs. Amending Bylaw 286 was intended to bring the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw into line with municipal DCC bylaws and to ensure that all new development in the region contributes to the cost of GVS&DD’s growth‐related infrastructure.
Amending Bylaw 286 was forwarded to member municipalities in February 2015. Following this, Metro Vancouver staff received a large number of queries regarding the Bylaw’s implementation. One of the key messages received is that member municipalities require much earlier notification when DCC amendments are being implemented in order to provide sufficient notification to residents and businesses of the incoming changes. There was also confusion about whether Amending Bylaw 286 means that DCCs are payable with respect to secondary suites.
5.2
I&F - 16
GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 4
Metro Vancouver staff are undertaking a review of all aspects of the regional DCC program, including the impact of the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw on affordability and suite legalization initiatives. The review of the full DCC program is on the GVS&DD standing committee work plan for this year and will be referred to RAAC later this year for municipal review as policies are being developed. AMENDING BYLAW 286 Effective Date Based on communications with member municipalities, municipalities need advance notification of upcoming changes in order to have sufficient time to notify interested parties of the amendments, adapt administrative procedures and implement other necessary changes in a controlled manner. Metro Vancouver staff believes that the effective date of Amending Bylaw 286 needs to be specified, and, for practical purposes, should be no earlier than June 1, 2015. This will ensure that Amending Bylaw 286 is implemented at the same time across the region. The ‘in‐stream protection’ provisions contained in section 58.2(9) of the GVS&DD Act for building permit and subdivision applications would commence on the effective date. Consistency with Municipal DCC Bylaws Metro Vancouver staff have reviewed municipal bylaws across the region to assess common practice with regard to the application of municipal DCC bylaws at building permit stage to developments containing fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units, and whether secondary suites are defined and exempted from payment of DCCs in municipal bylaws. Attachment 1 summarises the results of this review. Amending Bylaw 286 is intended to apply to residential developments with fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units. It appears that almost half of member municipalities have updated the language in their respective bylaws to collect DCCs at building permit stage on residential developments with fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units. Those municipalities represent a significant portion of the population of the region. With respect to secondary suites, while the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw does not specifically define a secondary suite, “Dwelling Unit” is defined in section 3.1(f) as follows:
one or more rooms comprising a self‐contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of cooking facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash‐basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;
The characteristics of a secondary suite fit the above definition, thus compelling DCCs to be applied and charged for building permits that include a secondary suite, either now or in the future. As noted in Attachment 1, almost no municipalities define secondary suites specifically within their DCC bylaw. However, though the definition of dwelling unit and the approach to application of charges varies significantly between municipalities, most do not specifically apply DCCs to secondary suites. Further, in discussing the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw at the April 10th meeting of the Regional Planning Advisory Committee, the representatives urged the GVS&DD to not apply DCCs to secondary suites due to the potential impact on affordable housing and suite legalization initiatives.
I&F - 17
GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 3 of 4
To address these concerns, staff have developed two alternatives which are described below.
ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board:
c) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 is October 1, 2015; and
d) Direct staff to prepare a new amending bylaw to amend GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 to clarify that the Bylaw does not apply to secondary suites.
2. That the GVS&DD Board: a) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286,
2014 is June 1, 2015; and b) Direct member municipalities to apply GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw
No. 286, 2014 to secondary suites within the municipality in the same manner that the municipality applies its municipal DCC bylaw to secondary suites.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Alternative 1 If the GVS&DD Board approves a resolution as presented in Alternative 1, the implementation of the current Amending Bylaw 286 would be postponed to an effective date of October 1, 2015. This would allow time for the District to obtain the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities for a new amending bylaw with a new definition that creates an exemption to DCCs for secondary suites. This approach would ensure that the application of regional DCCs to secondary suites is consistent across the region, although not necessarily consistent with every municipality’s DCC bylaw. Given the requirement to obtain the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities, it is likely that the effective date of the amendment could not be obtained earlier than October 1, 2015. Alternative 2 If the Board supports proceeding with the resolution as presented in Alternative 2, DCC charges arising from the bylaw amendment would be deferred until the June 1st effective date. Under this alternative, the “in stream” provisions contained in section 58.2(9) of the GVS&DD Act would take effect more quickly than as proposed under alternative 1. The Board would adopt a resolution deeming an effective date of Amending Bylaw 286 as June 1, 2015. The resolution would direct member municipalities to apply GVS&DD DCC Bylaw to secondary suites within their respective jurisdictions in the same manner that the municipality applies for its municipal DCC bylaw.
I&F - 18
GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 4 of 4
SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Amending Bylaw 286 received Inspector of Municipalities approval on November 5, 2014, was adopted by the Board on November 28, 2014 and was forwarded to municipalities earlier this year for implementation. Following the distribution of the Amending Bylaw 286, Metro Vancouver staff received a large number of queries regarding the Bylaw’s implementation. Given this feedback, it is important that the issue of the effective date and the applicability of the Bylaw to secondary suites is resolved. Based on the forgoing analysis staff recommends Alternative 1, that establishes an effective date of October 1, 2015 for the current GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 which will allow time for a new amending bylaw to be prepared to clarify the bylaw’s application to secondary suites, and to ensure that an effective date does not occur until later this year. This alternative will provide certainty to building permit applicants and ensure consistent application across the region. Attachments: 1. Review of GVS&DD Member Municipality Development Cost Charge Bylaws 2. GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 (Orbit # 11172606) 3. GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 – Unofficial Consolidation (Orbit # 11172606)
I&F - 19
11158752
GVS&DD MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE BYLAWS
1 City of Langley has indicated that DCCs are not applied to building permits for secondary suites 2 District of Maple Ridge DCC Bylaw does not specify any exemptions. 3 The City of New Westminster has indicated that the single detached dwellings are charged on a parcel basis, which means that if there is no change to the parcel area, they do not charge DCCs for the parcel. Sewerage and Drainage DCCs are general only charged for subdivision applications. 4 “Secondary Suite” is not defined in the District of North Vancouver’s DCC Bylaw, it specifies to refer to the definition outlined in their Zoning Bylaw 5 The City of Port Coquitlam has indicated that they do not apply DCCs for most circumstances involving under four units. The only circumstance when they may charge DCCs is in the case of one additional unit for a new duplex replacing a single family house. 6 The City of Port Moody has indicated that DCCs apply to all new self‐contained dwelling units as defined in their zoning bylaw. However, the City has not applied DCCs to secondary suites and have not dealt with coach houses. 7 The City of Richmond has indicated that townhouse and apartments are the exception as they are charged on permits containing 4 units or more only. 8 Laneway house is not defined in the City of Vancouver’s Development Cost Levy Bylaw, it specifies to refer to their Zoning and Development Bylaw
Municipality Language to charge DCC for buildings with less than 4 dwelling units at Building Permit?
Define secondary suites, coach house or other infill characteristics?
City of Burnaby No No
City of Coquitlam Yes Carriage houseSecondary suite
Corporation of Delta No No
City of Langley Yes with exceptions1 No
Township of Langley No No
District of Maple Ridge Yes2 No
City of New Westminster Yes with exception3 No
City of North Vancouver No No
District of North Vancouver No Secondary suite4
City of Pitt Meadows Yes No
City of Port Coquitlam No with exception5 No
City of Port Moody Yes with exceptions6 No
City of Richmond Yes with exceptions7 No
City of Surrey Yes No
City of Vancouver Yes Laneway house8
District of West Vancouver No No
City of White Rock No No
5.2Attachment 1
I&F - 20
GVS&DD MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES DWELLING UNIT DEFINITIONS
9 City of Burnaby’s Zoning Bylaw No. 4742 10 Corporation of Delta’s Zoning Bylaw No. 2750 11 Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw No. 2500 12 City of New Westminster Zoning Bylaw 6680 13 City of Pitt Meadows Zoning Bylaw No. 2505
Municipality “Dwelling Unit” Definition
City of Burnaby Means one or more habitable rooms constituting one self‐contained unit with a separate entrance, and used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes for not more than one family and containing not more than one kitchen or one set of cooking facilities.9
City of Coquitlam Means one or more rooms which comprise a self‐contained unit with a separate entrance, used or intended to be used as a domicile by one or more persons and usually containing living, sleeping and sanitary facilities and containing or providing for the installation of only one set of cooking facilities.
Corporation of Delta Means one or more habitable rooms containing ‘Cooking Facilities’, eating, living, sleeping and ‘Bathroom’ facilities, and occupied or constructed to be occupied by one or more persons as a single unit.10
City of Langley Includes one self‐contained unit with living, sleeping, cooking and sanitary facilities which is used or intended to be used for the residential accommodation of one family.
Township of Langley Means one or more habitable rooms occupied as residential accommodation by one family and containing or providing for only one set of cooking and/or laundry facilities located within a single family or multi‐family zone. Excludes hotel or motel units or recreation vehicles. A maximum of two sets of cooking and/or laundry facilities may be permitted within an owner occupied fee simple detached single family principal dwelling unit, except where a coach house has already been legally constructed on a lot.11
District of Maple Ridge Means one or more rooms used for the residential accommodation of only one family when such room or rooms contain or provide for the installation of only one set of cooking facilities.
City of New Westminster Means one or more habitable rooms designed, occupied or intended for use, including occupancy, by one or more persons as an independent and separate residence in which a facility for cooking, sleeping facilities and a bathroom are provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons12
City of North Vancouver Means a self‐contained suite of rooms which provides accommodation for not more than one family and which suite of rooms does not contain more than one set of cooking facilities
District of North Vancouver Includes a room, a suite of rooms or a building that is used or is intended to be used as an individual self‐contained private residence which contains or includes:
a) A sink, a toilet, a washbasin, a shower or bath, or facilities for the installation of same, whether such equipment or facilities are provided to each such room, suite of rooms or building structure or are shared;
b) Not more than one set of cooking facilities; and c) Accessory uses that are customary ancillary uses to such
residences
City of Pitt Meadows Means accommodation providing sleeping, washrooms, and kitchens to be used permanently or semi‐permanently for a household, but does not include a motor home or a room in a hotel13
I&F - 21
14 City of Port Coquitlam Zoning Bylaw No. 3630 15 City of Port Moody Zoning Bylaw No. 1890 16 City of Richmond Zoning Bylaw No 8500 17 City of Vancouver Zoning & Development Bylaw 3575 18 West Vancouver Zoning Bylaw No. 4662 19 City of White Rock Zoning Bylaw No. 2000
City of Port Coquitlam Means a self‐contained suite of rooms used or intended to be used as a residence by one family and containing both cooking and sanitary facilities14
City of Port Moody Means one or more habitable rooms constituting one self‐contained unit with a separate entrance, used or intended to be used for residential purposes and containing only one kitchen equipped with a sink and cooking facilities, and having one electrical service15
City of Richmond Means accommodation providing sleeping, washrooms and kitchens to be used permanently or semi‐permanently for a household, but which does not include a motor home or a room in a hotel or a motel16
City of Surrey Means 1 or more habitable rooms which constitute 1 self‐contained unit used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes for which is provided:
a) cooking equipment or the facilities for the installation of cooking equipment; and
b) one or more bathrooms with a water closet, wash basin and shower or bath
City of Vancouver A self‐contained housekeeping unit17
District of West Vancouver A building or portion of a building having 2 or more rooms used or intended to be used together for the domestic purposes of one or more persons and including at least one living room, one cooking facility and one bathroom and not rented or available for rent or occupation for periods of less than 30 days18
City of White Rock Means one or more habitable rooms used for the residential accommodation of one or more persons as an independent and separate residence containing cooking, living, sleeping and sanitary facilities, consisting of one stove and kitchen sink, and one or more sets of sanitary facilities for the exclusive use of such person or persons, but specifically excludes a recreational vehicle19
I&F - 22
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT AMENDING BYLAW NO. 286,2014
WHEREAS:
A Bylaw to Amend "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010".
A. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District has adopted "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010", a bylaw imposing development cost charges on every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure from a Member Municipality; and
B. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District wishes to amend the "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010".
NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. The "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010" is amended by:
(a) deleting the definitions of "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use" in their entirety from section 3.1, inserting the following definitions each in their correct alphabetical order, and re-lettering the definitions in section 3.1 accordingly:
"Apartment Dwelling Unit" means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that consists or may consist of two or more storeys and contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby the building or structure has a principal exterior entrance used in common for access to the Dwelling Units. Apartment Dwelling Unit does not include Dwelling Units that are Townhouse Dwelling Units;
11Residential Dwelling Unit'' means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that contains or may contain up to three Dwelling Units;
"Townhouse Dwelling Unit'' means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby each Dwelling Unit has a direct exterior entrance;
(b) deleting the definitions of the following terms in section 3.1 in their entirety and replacing them with the following definitions:
11Dwelling Unit'' means one or more rooms comprising a self-contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of cooking
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014
Page 1 of 3 I&F - 23
facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash-basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;
"Subdivision" includes a division of land into two or more Parcels, whether by plan, apt descriptive words or otherwise under the Land Title Act or the Strata Property Act, the consolidation of two or more Parcels of land, and phased strata plans;
(c) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in the definition of "Combination Development" in subsection 3.1(c);
(d) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and ''Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in the definition of "Non-Residential Use" in subsection 3.1(u);
(e) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in the definition of "Residential Use" in subsection 3.1(cc) as renumbered;
(f) adding the following as section 4.1.1 immediately after section 4.1:
No Exemption. Without limiting the generality of section 4.1, a Building Permit in section 4.1(b) includes a permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of any building or structure that will, after the construction, alteration, or extension, contain one or more Dwelling Units and be put to no other use than the Residential Use in those Dwelling Units.
(g) deleting subsection 4.2(e) in its entirety;
(h) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in section 4.5; and
(i) deleting the terms "Single Family Residential Use", "Townhouse Residential Use", and "Apartment Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Residential Dwelling Unit", "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", and "Apartment Dwelling Unit", respectively, under the heading "Description" in section 1 of each of Schedule A, B, C, and D attached to the "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010".
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014
Page 2 of 3 I&F - 24
2. This bylaw shall be cited as "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014".
READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this _25_ day of _July_ 2014.
APPROVED BY THE INSPECTOR OF MUNICIPAliTIES this -=5- day of --'-'N;.;:;.o-'-'ve::..:...m:..;.;;b;;..;:e;.;...r _ 2014.
PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this 2~ day of Nb\f€1!\tei 2014.
Chris Plagnol, Co
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014
Page 3 of 3 I&F - 25
* BRITLSH COWMBIA
Statutory Approval
Under the provisions of section 58.5
of the Greater Vancouver Sewera e and Draina e District Act
I hereby approve Bylaw No. 286
of the Greater Vancouver Sewera e and Draina e District ,
a copy of which is attached hereto.
Dated this day
of , 2014
I&F - 26
THIS IS A CONSOLIDATION, FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES, OF:
“Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010” (Adopted April 23, 2010)
“Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending
Bylaw No. 286, 2014” (Adopted November 28, 2014)
As of November 28, 2014
COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL BYLAWS MAY BE INSPECTED AT
BOARD AND INFORMATION SERVICES METRO VANCOUVER
DEVELOPMENTCOST CHARGE (DCC)
CONSOLIDATED
I&F - 27
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 1 of 17
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE BYLAW NO. 254, 2010
WHEREAS: A. Pursuant to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act, the Greater
Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (“the GVS&DD”) may, by bylaw, impose development cost charges on every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure from a Member Municipality;
B. Development cost charges provide funds to assist the GVS&DD in paying capital costs
incurred to provide, construct, alter or expand sewerage facilities to service development within the area of the GVS&DD, excluding the portion of capital costs charged by the GVS&DD to Member Municipalities under section 54 of the Act;
C. Pursuant to the Act, development cost charges are not payable in certain circumstance and
the GVS&DD may waive or reduce development cost charges for eligible developments; D. Member Municipalities collect the development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw and
remit them to the GVSⅅ E. The GVS&DD and a Member Municipality may enter into an agreement under section 58.3
of the Act under which all, some or some portion of the development cost charges under this Bylaw that would otherwise apply are not required to be collected and remitted by the Member Municipality and the Member Municipality agrees to pay to the GVS&DD an amount equal to the development cost charges that the Member Municipality would have collected under this Bylaw but for such an agreement; and
F. In setting development cost charges under this Bylaw, the GVS&DD has considered:
a. future land use patterns and development and the phasing of works and services; and
b. how development designed to result in a low environmental impact may affect the
capital costs of infrastructure referred to in section 58.2(2) of the Act.
NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District in open meeting assembled enacts as follows:
1.0 REPEAL OF BYLAW
1.1 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 187, 1996 is hereby repealed.
I&F - 28
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 2 of 17
2.0 CITATION
2.1 The official citation for this Bylaw is “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010”.
2.2 This Bylaw may be cited as the “Development Cost Charge Bylaw”.
3.0 INTERPRETATION 3.1 Definitions. In this Bylaw:
(a) “Apartment Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that consists or may consist of two or more storeys and contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby the building or structure has a principal exterior entrance used in common for access to the Dwelling Units. Apartment Dwelling Unit does not include Dwelling Units that are Townhouse Dwelling Units;
(b) “Building Permit” means any permit required by a Member Municipality that
authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure; (c) “Combination Development” means any Development that comprises two or more
of the following uses:
(i) Apartment Dwelling Unit; (ii) Residential Dwelling Unit; (iii) Townhouse Dwelling Unit; and (iv) Non‐Residential Use;
(d) “Community Charter” means the Community Charter, SBC 2003, c. 26; (e) “Development” means:
(i) a Subdivision; or (ii) the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure for
which a Building Permit is obtained;
(f) “Dwelling Unit” means one or more rooms comprising a self‐contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are
Amended by Bylaw 286, 2014
Replaced by Bylaw 286, 2014
Added by Bylaw 286, 2014
I&F - 29
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 3 of 17
provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of cooking facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash‐basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;
(g) “Effective Date” means the date this bylaw comes into force and takes effect;
(h) “Floor Area” means:
(i) the floor area of the building or structure (measured from the outside edge of all exterior walls of the building or structure), less the number of square feet of the floor area of the building or structure that is used or is intended to be used for the parking of motor vehicles and the storage of bicycles; or
(ii) in the case of an alteration or extension of less than the entire building
or structure, the portion of the building or structure to which the Building Permit applies (measured from the outside edge of any exterior walls in such portion of the building or structure), less the number of square feet of the floor area of the building or structure that is used or is intended to be used for the parking of motor vehicles and the storage of bicycles;
(i) “For Profit Affordable Rental Housing” means Dwelling Units in a Development
comprising Residential Use or Combination Development that will be rented or sublet;
(i) at below market rental rates so that the Rent charged does not exceed
the lesser of: (1) 80% of the average market rent for the Member
Municipality where the Dwelling Unit is located; or (2) 80% of the average market rent for all of the Member
Municipalities
as identified or reported in Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation’s most recent rental market survey;
(ii) to persons who have an annual household income that falls:
(1) at or below 80% of the Median Household Income if the
Dwelling Unit has 3 or more bedrooms; (2) at or below 70% of the Median Household Income if the
Dwelling Unit has 2 bedrooms;
I&F - 30
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 4 of 17
(3) at or below 60% of the Median Household Income if the Dwelling Unit has 1 bedroom;
(4) at or below 50% of the Median Household Income if the
Dwelling Unit is a bachelor suite.
(j) “Fraser Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by the GVS&DD under the Act as the Fraser Sewerage Area;
(k) “GVS&DD” means the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District; (l) “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act” or “Act” means the
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act, SBC 1956, c. 59; (m) “Land Title Act” means the Land Title Act, RSBC 1996, c.250; (n) “Local Government Act” means the Local Government Act, RSBC 1996, c. 323;
(o) “Lulu Island West Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by
the GVS&DD under the Act as the Lulu Island West Sewerage Area;
(p) “Median Household Income” means the median household income for the Greater Vancouver Regional District or Vancouver Census Metropolitan Area as reported by Statistics Canada in its most recent census;
(q) “Member Municipality” means a municipality that is a member of the GVSⅅ
(r) “Minister” means the member of the Executive Council appointed under the
Constitution Act charged by order of the Lieutenant Governor in Council with the administration of the Local Government Act;
(s) “Municipal Charges” means development cost charges imposed by a Member
Municipality under either the Local Government Act, Community Charter or the Vancouver Charter;
(t) “Not For Profit Rental Housing” means those Dwelling Units in a Development
comprising a Residential Use or Combination Development that are or will be:
(i) operated as rental housing for tenants who meet eligibility criteria related to income, number of occupants, health or other similar criteria; and
(ii) owned, leased or otherwise held by a Public Housing Body; but does not include:
I&F - 31
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 5 of 17
(iii) a community care facility under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act, SBC 2002, c. 75;
(iv) a continuing care facility under the Continuing Care Act, RSBC 1996, c.
70; (v) a public or private hospital under the Hospital Act, RSBC 1996, c. 200; (vi) a Provincial mental health facility, an observation unit or a psychiatric
unit designated under the Mental Health Act, RSBC 1996, c. 288; or (vii) a housing based health facility that provides hospitality support services
and personal health care; (u) “Non‐Residential Use” means any building or structure or any portion of any
building or structure that is not Apartment Dwelling Unit, Residential Dwelling Unit or Townhouse Dwelling Unity but for greater certainty, does not include any portion of any Residential Use building or structure that is not part of a Dwelling Unit and is used or is intended to be used solely for the purpose of gaining access to and from Dwelling Units, solely for the maintenance of the building or structure or solely by the occupants of the Dwelling Units in the building or structure;
(v) “North Shore Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by the
GVS&DD under the Act as the North Shore Sewerage Area; (w) “Parcel” means any lot, block or other area in which land is held or into which it is
legally subdivided and for greater certainty, without limiting the foregoing, including a strata lot under the Strata Property Act;
(x) “Public Housing Body” means the British Columbia Housing Management
Commission, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the City of Vancouver, the City of Vancouver Public Housing Corporation, the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation, any housing society or not‐for‐profit municipal housing corporation that has an agreement regarding the operation of residential property with:
(i) the government of British Columbia; (ii) the British Columbia Housing Management Commission; (iii) the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation;
(y) “Rate Schedules” means the schedules of development cost charge rates for each
Sewerage Area that are attached as Schedules A, B, C and D to this Bylaw; (z) “Rent” means money paid or agreed to be paid, or value or a right given or agreed
to be given, by or on behalf of a tenant to a landlord in return for the right to rent a
Amended by Bylaw 286, 2014
I&F - 32
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 6 of 17
Dwelling Unit, for the use of common areas and for services or facilities and includes any and all strata fees, regardless of whether such fees are paid directly to the landlord, but does not include any of the following:
(i) a security deposit;
(ii) a pet damage deposit;
(iii) a fee prescribed under section 97 (2) (k) of the Residential Tenancy Act;
(aa) “Residential Tenancy Act” means the Residential Tenancy Act, SBC 2002, c. 78;
(bb) “Residential Use” means Apartment Dwelling Unit, Residential Dwelling Unit,
Townhouse Dwelling Unit and Townhouse Residential Use; (cc) “Residential Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that
contains or may contain up to three Dwelling Units;
(dd) “Sewerage Area” means any of the GVS&DD’s four sewerage areas, being the Vancouver Sewerage Area, the North Shore Sewerage Area, the Lulu Island West Sewerage Area and the Fraser Sewerage Area;
(ee) “Sewage Facility” means any work, service or plant of the GVS&DD for conveying,
disposing of or treating sewage or waste water; (ff) “Strata Property Act” means the Strata Property Act, SBC 1998, c. 43;
(gg) “Subdivision” includes a division of land into two or more Parcels, whether by plan,
apt descriptive words or otherwise under the Land Title Act or the Strata Property Act, the consolidation of two or more Parcels of land, and phased strata plans;
(hh) “Townhouse Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that
contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby each Dwelling Unit has a direct exterior entrance;
(ii) “Vancouver Charter” means the Vancouver Charter, SBC 1953, c. 55; (jj) “Vancouver Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by the
GVS&DD under the Act as the Vancouver Sewerage Area;
4.0 DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 4.1 Application of Development Cost Charges. Subject to sections 4.2 and 4.3, every person
who obtains:
Added by Bylaw 286, 2014
Replaced by Bylaw 286, 2014
Added by Bylaw 286, 2014
I&F - 33
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 7 of 17
(a) approval of a Subdivision from a Member Municipality; or (b) a Building Permit from a Member Municipality; must pay the applicable development cost charges set out in this Bylaw to that Member Municipality on behalf of the GVS&DD prior to the approval of the Subdivision or the issuance of the Building Permit.
4.1.1 No Exemption. Without limiting the generality of section 4.1, a Building Permit in section
4.1(b) includes a permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of any building or structure that will, after the construction, alteration, or extension, contain one or more Dwelling Units and be put to no other use than the Residential Use in those Dwelling Units.
4.2 Exemptions from Development Cost Charges. Development cost charges are not payable under this Bylaw if:
(a) the Development is not and will not be capable of being serviced by a Sewerage
Facility of the GVS&DD or by a Sewerage Facility of a Member Municipality that is connected to a Sewerage Facility of the GVSⅅ
(b) the Development will not impose new capital cost burdens on the GVSⅅ
(c) a development cost charge has previously been paid for the same Development
unless, as a result of further Development, new capital cost burdens will be imposed on the GVSⅅ
(d) the Building Permit authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of a building
or structure or part of a building or structure that is, or will be, after the construction, alteration or extension, exempt from taxation under subsection 220(1)(h) of the Community Charter;
(e) deleted
(f) the value of the work authorized by the Building Permit does not exceed $50,000 or
such other amount which the Minister may prescribe by regulation; or (g) the Building Permit authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of self‐
contained Dwelling Units in a building in which:
(i) each Dwelling Unit is no larger in area than 29 square metres [312.153 square feet]; and
(ii) each Dwelling Unit is to be put to no use other than Residential Use in
those Dwelling Units.
Deleted by Bylaw 286, 2014
Added by Bylaw 286, 2014
I&F - 34
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 8 of 17
4.3 Waiver of Development Cost Charges. The GVS&DD will waive or refund to the applicable Member Municipality on behalf of the registered owner, development cost charges that are otherwise payable under this Bylaw for:
(a) Dwelling Units that meet the definition of For Profit Affordable Rental Housing if the
following conditions are satisfied before an occupancy permit is issued for them:
(i) occupancy of the Dwelling Units is subsequent to the Effective Date; and
(1) the owner covenants with the GVS&DD to use the Dwelling Units as For Profit Affordable Rental Housing for at least 20 years and the covenant is registered under section 219 of the Land Title Act; or
(2) the owner, if the Development is subject to the Strata
Property Act, has filed a Rental Disclosure Statement pursuant to section 139 of that Act that sets out a rental period of at least 20 years and the owner covenants with the GVS&DD to use the Dwelling Units as For Profit Affordable Rental Housing for at least 20 years and the covenant is registered under section 219 of the Land Title Act; or
(3) the owner enters into a lease agreement with a Public
Housing Body pursuant to which the Public Housing Body agrees to sublet and operate the Dwelling Units as Not For Profit Rental Housing for at least 20 years;
(b) Dwelling Units that meet the definition of Not For Profit Rental Housing before an
occupancy permit is issued for them and whose occupancy is subsequent to the Effective Date.
4.4 Calculation of Development Cost Charges. Development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw will be calculated in accordance with the rates set out in the Rate Schedules. The rates set out in the Rate Schedules may be different in relation to one or more of the following:
(a) different Sewerage Areas;
(b) different classes of Sewerage Facilities;
(c) different areas within a Sewerage Area;
(d) different uses;
I&F - 35
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 9 of 17
(e) different capital costs as they relate to different classes of Development; or
(f) different sizes or different numbers of lots or units in a Development.
4.5 Combination Development. Without restricting the generality of section 4.4, the development cost charges for a Combination Development will be calculated separately for the portion of the Combination Development attributable to each of Apartment Dwelling Unit, Residential Dwelling Unit, Townhouse Dwelling Unit and Non‐Residential Use and will be the sum of the development cost charges for each such use, calculated according to the Rate Schedules.
4.6 Payment, Collection and Remittance of Development Cost Charges. Development cost
charges imposed under this Bylaw must be paid to the Member Municipality of the GVS&DD approving the Subdivision or issuing the Building Permit, as the case may be, as follows:
(a) at the same time as any Municipal Charges as may be levied on the Development
under a bylaw of the Member Municipality are payable to the Member Municipality; or
(b) if no Municipal Charges will be levied on the Development under a bylaw of the
Member Municipality, as follows:
(i) where an application is made only for Subdivision, prior to the issuance of the approval of the Subdivision by the Member Municipality; or
(ii) where an application is made only for a Building Permit or for both
Subdivision and for a Building Permit, prior to the issuance of the Building Permit by the Member Municipality.
4.7 Payment of Development Cost Charges by Instalments. The development cost charges
imposed under this Bylaw may not be paid by instalments unless a regulation under either subsection 58.2(6) of the Act or subsection 933(6) of the Local Government Act applies to the Development and authorizes the payment of development cost charges in instalments.
5.0 COLLECTION AND REMITTANCE OF DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 5.1 Collection of Development Cost Charges by Member Municipalities. Subject to section 6.1,
each Member Municipality must:
(a) collect the development cost charges imposed on a Development under this Bylaw; and
Amended by Bylaw 286, 2014
I&F - 36
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 10 of 17
(b) not issue approval of a Subdivision or issue a Building Permit for any Development unless the development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw have been paid
in accordance with Part 4.0.
5.2 Separate Account. Subject to section 6.1, each Member Municipality must establish and
maintain a separate account for the development cost charge monies collected under this Bylaw and deposit and hold these monies in that separate account, in trust for the GVS&DD, until the monies are remitted to the GVS&DD under section 5.4.
5.3 Remittance of Development Cost Charges by Municipalities. Each Member Municipality,
within 30 days after June 30 and December 31 of each year, must remit to the GVS&DD the total amount of development cost charges collected by the Member Municipality under this Bylaw during the six month period previous to such date, or an amount equal to such development cost charges if the Member Municipality did not collect development cost charges under this Bylaw, together with the statement referred to in section 5.4.
5.4 Statements. Each Member Municipality must provide statements to the GVS&DD, in
respect of each Sewerage Area within the Member Municipality, pursuant to section 5.3, for every six month period comprising January 1 to June 30 and July 1 to December 31, setting out:
(a) the number and type of use of all Residential Use Parcels or Dwelling Units on which
development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw; (b) the aggregate floor area of all Non‐Residential Use buildings or structures on which
development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw (calculated in accordance with the Rate Schedules);
(c) the legal description and civic address of each Parcel on which development cost
charges were levied by it under this Bylaw, whether such development cost charges were levied in respect of a Subdivision or a Building Permit;
(d) the date and amount of each payment of development cost charges levied by it
under this Bylaw and where section 4.7 applies to permit development cost charges levied under this Bylaw to be paid by instalments, the amount of instalment payments remaining to be paid to it and the dates for payment of such remaining instalments;
(e) the total amount of all development cost charges levied by it under this Bylaw and
the total amount of all remaining instalment payments;
I&F - 37
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 11 of 17
(f) the number, legal description, civic address and type of use of all Parcels in respect of which Subdivisions were approved where no development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw; and
(g) the number and type of use of all Dwelling Units and the aggregate floor area of all
Non‐Residential Use buildings or structures (calculated in accordance with the Rate Schedules) in respect of which Building Permits were required where no development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw.
5.5 Records. Each Member Municipality shall retain, for a period of four years, sufficient records to support the statements and payments referred to in sections 5.3 and 5.4.
5.6 Inspection and Review of Municipal Records. The GVS&DD may, at any time, subject to
first giving reasonable notice to any Member Municipality, inspect any and all records of the Member Municipality relating to the information required under section 5.4, the calculation, collection and remittance by the Member Municipality of development cost charges levied under this Bylaw, and the calculation and remittance by the Member Municipality of any payments required under Part 6.0. Each Member Municipality shall permit any employee or agent of the GVS&DD to inspect the records referred to above and to make and take away copies of those records.
6.0 REPLACEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 6.1 Municipal Agreements. Despite any other provision of this Bylaw, the GVS&DD may enter
into an agreement or agreements with any Member Municipality under which:
(a) all, some or some portion of the development cost charges under this Bylaw that would otherwise apply are not required to be collected and remitted by the Member Municipality; and
(b) the Member Municipality agrees to pay to the GVS&DD an amount equal to the
development cost charges that the Member Municipality would have collected under this Bylaw but for such an agreement, in the manner and at the times set out in the agreement, or otherwise in the same manner and at the same times that development cost charges would otherwise have been payable.
6.2 Failure to Remit Development Cost Charges. If a Member Municipality fails, for any reason,
other than under an agreement under section 6.1, to collect any development cost charges payable under this Bylaw or to remit to the GVS&DD any development cost charges collected by it, the Member Municipality must pay to the GVS&DD on demand an amount equal to the development cost charges that the Member Municipality should have collected or remitted under this Bylaw.
I&F - 38
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 12 of 17
7.0 INTERPRETATION 7.1 Severability. If a portion of this Bylaw is held to be invalid it shall be severed and the
remainder of the Bylaw shall remain in effect. 7.2 Schedules. Schedules “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” are attached to and form part of this Bylaw. 8.0 EFFECTIVE DATE 8.1 The effective date of this Bylaw is [date of adoption].
I&F - 39
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 13 of 17
SCHEDULE A
FRASER SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description
1. Residential Dwelling Unit 2. Townhouse Dwelling Unit 3. Apartment Dwelling Unit 4. Non‐Residential Use
Rate
$1,731 per Dwelling Unit $1,515 per Dwelling Unit $1,082 per Dwelling Unit $0.811 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
I&F - 40
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 14 of 17
SCHEDULE B
LULU ISLAND WEST SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description
1. Residential Dwelling Unit 2. Townhouse Dwelling Unit 3. Apartment Dwelling Unit 4. Non‐Residential Use
Rate
$1,077 per Dwelling Unit $942 per Dwelling Unit $673 per Dwelling Unit $0.505 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
I&F - 41
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 15 of 17
SCHEDULE C
NORTH SHORE SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description
1. Residential Dwelling Unit 2. Townhouse Dwelling Unit 3. Apartment Dwelling Unit 4. Non‐Residential Use
Rate
$1,291 per Dwelling Unit $1,129 per Dwelling Unit $807 per Dwelling Unit $0.605 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
I&F - 42
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 16 of 17
SCHEDULE D
VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description 1. Residential Dwelling Unit 2. Townhouse Dwelling Unit 3. Apartment Dwelling Unit 4. Non‐Residential Use
Rate
$944 per Dwelling Unit $826 per Dwelling Unit $590 per Dwelling Unit $0.443 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
I&F - 43
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Carol Mason, Commissioner/CAO Date: April 16, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update
RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board refer the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC to consider and report back on the issues raised in the report dated April 16, 2015, titled “Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update”.
PURPOSE To consider the referral of the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects to staff and to RAAC to explore and report back on whether options may be available for improving and clarifying the language in the Protocol and address some inconsistencies in its application to ensure the equitable application of this Protocol. BACKGROUND On November 22, 2000 the Regional Administrative Advisory Committee (RAAC) endorsed a report that recommended to the GVRD Board that it approve the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects and refer the Protocol to its member municipalities for formal endorsement. The Protocol had been developed by the GVRD CAO and a sub‐committee of RAAC to respond to long‐standing issues that existed regarding both the process and the fees paid to municipalities with respect to building permits, development permits, development cost charges, and other miscellaneous fees. In the absence of a Protocol, RAAC advised that consistency was lacking and there was significant potential for legal disputes to arise between municipalities and the GVRD. On December 15, 2000 the GVRD Board received the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects and circulated the Protocol to member municipalities for their review and to the GVRD Finance Committee for its review of retroactive payments of municipal charges. Over the course of the next year, most municipalities considered and endorsed the Protocol. On January 25, 2002 the GVRD Board endorsed the following resolution:
That the GVRD Board of Directors approve the Capital Protocol Agreement (as attached to the report dated January 15, 2002 titled “Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects”), and approve payment to those member municipalities who enter into the Capital Protocol Agreement of the equivalent amount of municipal charges on regional structures, in accordance with the municipal bylaws in effect at the time, exclusive of interest and with appropriate adjustments for payments already made or for where services were not provided; and further that such payments be considered part of the capital project.
In a subsequent report dated February 8, 2002, the GVRD CAO brought back additional information as requested by the Board relating to the background of the proposed payment of monies equivalent
5.3
I&F - 44
Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Intergovernment & Finance Committee: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 5
to the municipal development cost charges and permit fees to various municipalities for regional works dating back to 1995. In the staff report it noted that a sub‐committee of RAAC reviewed a variety of options with respect to the method of calculating payments and concluded that the rates in place in the individual host municipalities would be the most appropriate for retroactive payment. The rationale for this conclusion was that regional projects should be treated, for fee calculation purposes like any other major development. The possibility of a municipality levying an excessive rate for regional facilities was considered an unlikely occurrence and was considered best dealt with through a dispute resolution process. PROTOCOL FOR GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECTS (2002) The Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects has been in place since 2002 and establishes the process that the GVRD will follow when initiating a capital project within municipal boundaries. The Protocol includes a number of key elements that are expected to be followed when a capital project is initiated and provides guidance for regional staff to work collaboratively with municipal staff on capital projects. The key elements of the Protocol are identified below (see Attachment 1):
1. Process 1) Planning Stage 2) Design Stage 3) Construction Stage 4) Voluntary Permit Fee System
2. Agreement Voluntary Permit Fee System. Section 4 of Part 1 of the Protocol acknowledges that the GVRD will apply for ‘voluntary permits’ and pay a fee equivalent to regular permits, “as per the established fee schedule of the specific municipality.” The Protocol includes a dispute resolution process that involves a ‘peer review panel’ should the GVRD wish to dispute the application of fees to a specific facility. Decisions of the peer review panel are non‐binding and decisions of the GVRD Board may also be appealed by the Inspector of Municipalities. Protocol Agreement. With respect to Part 2 of the Protocol, it sets out that the GVRD and the local municipalities shall formally agree that the voluntary permit fee system will constitute the full discharge of any responsibilities that may exist for permits or fees and charges. It further notes that the implementation of this Protocol shall be conditional on its endorsement by the regional Board and local municipalities and shall go into effect as soon as both the Board and a particular municipality endorse the Protocol. A table is included in Attachment 1 that identifies the municipalities that endorsed the Protocol. Fourteen municipalities submitted letters of endorsement with Council resolutions supporting the Protocol. The City of North Vancouver and the City of Langley did not obtain Council resolutions. The City of Vancouver only endorsed the Protocol Agreement for a five year period which terminated on November 21, 2006. Metro Vancouver Capital Project DCC Payments. In reviewing the history of DCCs payment by Metro Vancouver, it appears that DCC payments have only been applied to a small number of Metro Vancouver capital works since the Protocol was introduced in 2002. Much of Metro Vancouver’s
I&F - 45
Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Intergovernment & Finance Committee: April 23, 2015
Page 3 of 5
infrastructure consists of underground works and while Metro Vancouver pays municipal permits and fees and charges related to these works, in accordance with the Protocol, there have been very few instances of DCC charges being applied. The most recent example of a DCC payment that has been made to a municipality was initiated in the fall of 2014 following the completion of the Coquitlam UV Facility capital project. Based on Coquitlam’s municipal policy of applying DCCs on a city‐wide basis, the City submitted an invoice to Metro Vancouver to apply DCCs on the construction of new works (UV plant and 3 ancillary buildings) under the category of ‘civic use’. Municipal calculations of total floor area for the 4 structures and resulted in the following amount being submitted to Metro Vancouver (GVWD) for payment:
Transportation ($41.57) $163,286 Drainage ($11.79) $46,311 Water ($5.15) $20,229 Sewer ($1.64) ___$6,441
City DCC’s 3928 sq. m. x 60.15 $236,267 GVS&DD 42285 sq. ft. x 0.881 __$34,293 Total DCC chargeable $270,560
In subsequent discussions, the City of Coquitlam acknowledged that the UV facility did not reside within the GVS&DD sewer area and removed the GVS&DD charge from the invoice; however, it maintained that the remaining charges (including sewer and water charges) were reasonable as its municipal policy is to apply DCCs on a ‘municipal‐wide basis’ regardless of a development’s proximity to municipal services. In accordance with section 4 (6) of the Protocol, it states that “The GVRD would voluntarily pay DCCs and other fees according to local municipal schedules and this cost would form part of the capital project costs.” As such, given the municipal policy of applying DCCs on a city‐wide basis and given the terms of the Protocol Agreement, the GVWD has paid this invoice. Future Capital Project Protocol Considerations The Province’s Best Practices Guide advises that while DCCs are permitted to be applied on a ‘municipal‐
wide basis’, DCCs are not payable if it can be proven that the development does not impose a new capital cost burden on the municipality. When factoring in the potential capital cost burden, consideration should be given to future servicing plans that are linked directly to a municipality’s OCP and Financial Plan. On the example noted above, the location of the Coquitlam UV plant is well within the GVWD watershed and a significant distance from the municipal sanitary and water service area (4 km south of the watershed gate) – the facility is not imposing nor is it anticipated to impose a capital cost burden on the municipality for municipal water and sewer services. This example highlights the potential for conflict between a municipality with a ‘city‐wide’ DCC policy and the best practices guidelines that require DCC collection to align with future servicing plans. Consequently, the current Protocol language is likely to be applied inconsistently within municipalities in the future. Furthermore, the current Protocol is not all encompassing, as the municipalities of Vancouver, North Vancouver and Langley are not signatories to the Protocol
I&F - 46
Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Intergovernment & Finance Committee: April 23, 2015
Page 4 of 5
Agreement and therefore, the provisions of this Agreement would not apply to capital projects that occurred within those boundaries. Given the inconsistencies noted above, the Board may wish to refer the Protocol to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC for further consideration on the options that may be available for improving and clarifying the language in the Protocol to address these potential concerns. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board refer the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects
to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC to consider and report back on the issues raised in the report dated April 16, 2015, titled “Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update”.
2. That the GVRD Board receive the report for information. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications related to referring the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects to Metro Vancouver staff to review with RAAC. The financial implications of any changes to the application of DCCs will likely be minor in scale on a regional basis but could have an impact on individual municipal members who are paying towards municipal DCCs for services that are not contemplated to be provided to a regional facility within a municipal long range plan. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION In response to long‐standing issues that existed between the Regional District and its member municipalities regarding both the process and the fees paid to municipalities with respect to building permits, development permits, development cost charges, and other miscellaneous fees, on January 25, 2002 the GVRD Board approved the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects. The Protocol has existed for a number of years and recognizes that the GVRD will voluntarily apply for municipal permits and pay a fee equivalent to regular permits, “as per the established fee schedule of the specific municipality.” The Protocol includes a dispute resolution process and further states that the voluntary permit fee system will constitute the full discharge of any responsibilities that may exist for permits or fees and charges. The implementation of this Protocol was conditional on its endorsement by the regional Board and local municipalities. Fourteen municipalities submitted letters of endorsement with Council resolutions supporting the Protocol. The City of North Vancouver and the City of Langley did not obtain Council resolutions and the City of Vancouver only endorsed the Protocol Agreement for a five year period which terminated on November 21, 2006. While the Protocol has helped to clarify the process by which Metro Vancouver undertakes capital works within its member municipalities, over time it appears that the Protocol has been applied inconsistently to capital projects. Some municipalities have applied a policy of ‘city‐wide’ DCCs regardless of alignment with long range servicing plans, while others have applied DCCs that align with their municipal policies on future servicing. In addition, three GVS&DD member municipalities do not have resolutions that apply the Protocol to development within their boundaries.
I&F - 47
Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Intergovernment & Finance Committee: April 23, 2015
Page 5 of 5
Given the varied interpretations outlined above, the Board may wish to refer the Protocol to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC for further consideration to explore whether options may be available for improving and clarifying the language in the Protocol to address these concerns and to ensure the equitable application of this Protocol. Staff recommend that the Board approve alternative one. Attachments and References: 1. Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects
I&F - 48
Dated: November 10, 2000
Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects
1. Process
1. Planning Stage
1) At the earliest practical opportunity in the planning stage of any project, the GVRD (staff) will communicate with the area municipality(s) in which the project is to be located, advising of the general nature and purpose of the proposed project.
2) The area municipality (staff) will respond by advising of any issues that may be of
concern to the municipality in carrying out the proposed project.
3) The GVRD will strive to ensure the project complies with municipal land use bylaws and official plan provisions.
4) Based on the information generated at this stage, the municipality will advise the
GVRD whether there is a need for a public consultation process at the planning stage.
5) If a public consultation process is to be undertaken at the planning stage, the GVRD will consult with local area municipality staff in the design and scope of this process. Where appropriate, as determined by local area municipal staff, GVRD staff will meet with the local area municipal council to provide information and receive advice on the need for, scope and design of a local public consultation process.
6) As necessary, the GVRD will conduct the public consultation process. Local area
municipality staff will provide assistance and advice, as appropriate.
2. Design Stage
1) At the earliest practical opportunity, in the design stage of any project, the GVRD will transmit draft designs to the local area municipality in which the project is to be located.
2) The area municipality (staff) will respond by advising of any concerns the design poses
for the local municipality/community and of any further information/analysis that may be needed to allow the municipality to satisfy itself with regard to the proposed design.
3) Based on the information generated at this stage, the GVRD, in consultation with the
municipality will determine whether there is a need for a public consultation process at the design stage. This will follow a similar procedure as 1(d).
4) GVRD staff will make their best efforts to respond to concerns raised by local
municipal staff. In the event that GVRD staff decide it cannot or is inappropriate, to make design changes requested by local area staff, the GVRD will provide a reasoned account for this decision to the local municipality.
5) If local municipal staff deem it appropriate, the final agreed upon design or any
disagreement between the GVRD and local area staff shall be presented to the local
5.3Attachment
I&F - 49
area council or development review committee for their comment. 6) If the local municipal council or development review committee deem it appropriate,
any outstanding disagreement on design shall be referred to the dispute resolution process outlined in the Voluntary Permit Fee System of this Policy (Section 4).
3. Construction Stage
1) At the earliest practical opportunity in the design stage, of any project, the GVRD will
transmit, to the local municipality in which the project is located, an outline construction plan, describing how construction of the project is envisaged to take place and how local impacts are expected to be mitigated/communicated to the public.
2) A parallel process to the design stage will then follow, following steps 2.b) through
2.f). 3) Where it is possible to combine the processes for design and construction, this should
be done. 4. Voluntary Permit Fee System
A critical part of this policy involves a voluntary permit fee system which would parallel the regular permit system. It includes the following elements: 1) The GVRD would apply for ‘voluntary permits’ and pay a fee equivalent to the fee
paid for regular permits, as per the established fee schedule of the specific municipality.
2) In the event of a dispute that is not resolved during this application/municipal review
process, the item would be referred to a ‘peer review panel’ by either the affected municipality or the GVRD. An example of when the GVRD might wish to use this review panel process would be if they dispute the application of fees to a specific facility. This panel would comprise of 3 members and would be appointed by the GVRD and the municipality disputing the permit but would be at arms length from both. Present or past municipal officials, or similarly qualified people would be likely panel members. Any costs which are incurred by the panel are not expected to be large and would be shared by both the GVRD and the affected municipality.
3) The peer review panel’s non binding recommendations would be presented to the
GVRD Board, which would then rule on the dispute. 4) Municipalities could appeal GVRD Board decisions to the Inspector of
Municipalities. The GVRD and Municipalities would agree that prior to entering into this process the decision of the Inspector of Municipalities would be binding and would not be pursued further in the courts.
5) Where the GVRD and the municipality agree that the local municipality will not apply
any formal building permit process, the GVRD would execute a liability waiver to the member municipality saving them harmless from consequences of the absence of such a process;
I&F - 50
6) The GVRD would voluntarily pay DCCs and other fees according to local municipal
schedules and this cost would form part of the capital project costs. 7) In the case of permits where the municipalities are exercising delegated Provincial
responsibilities e.g. electrical permits, the GVRD would follow the normal prescribed procedures.
8) In the case where the GVRD already seeks and receives Provincial permits, e.g. tree-
cutting permits, local municipal requirements would not apply.
2. Agreement
a) The GVRD and the local municipalities shall formally agree that this voluntary permit fee system will constitute the full discharge of any responsibilities that may exist for permits or fees and charges.
b) The implementation of this policy shall be conditional on its endorsement by the
regional Board and local municipalities and shall go into effect as soon as both the Board and a particular municipality endorses this policy.
I&F - 51
Municipalities that have endorsed the Capital Project Policy
Updated: September 3, 2003
* 5 – year trial period
Municipality Adopted Date of Letter Endorsement
Anmore, Village of ‐ Resolution did not go to Council
Bowen Island NO (not in Utility Districts) February 27, 2001 Burnaby, City of Yes March 19, 2001 Coquitlam, City of Yes May 20, 2003 Delta, Corporation of Yes January 10, 2001 Langley, City of ‐ Resolution did not go
to Council
Langley, Township of Yes November 2, 2001 Maple Ridge, District of Yes February 23, 2001 New Westminster Yes October 4, 2001 North Vancouver, City of ‐ Resolution did not go
to Council
North Vancouver, District of Yes January 16, 2001 Pitt Meadows, District of Yes October 6, 2001 Port Coquitlam, City of Yes May 31, 2001 Port Moody, City of Yes November 27, 2001 Richmond, City of Yes March 14, 2001 Surrey, City of Yes May 26, 2003 Vancouver Yes* November 21, 2001 West Vancouver, District of Yes April 22, 2003 White Rock, City of Yes March 14, 2001
I&F - 52
11063932
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Greg Smith, Senior Director, Corporate Services Date: March 31, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement
Project – Funding Request
RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board approve a capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre.
PURPOSE To consider a request from the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society for a capital grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre (Attachment 1). BACKGROUND On December 3, 2014, the Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society sent correspondence to Metro Vancouver requesting a grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. Coquitlam Search and Rescue provides services to the Metro Vancouver municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, and their area of responsibility includes in excess of half of Metro Vancouver’s Electoral Area A. FUNDING REQUEST Coquitlam Search and Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre, in which search and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed, is 20 years old and due for retirement. Although the team is reimbursed by Emergency Management BC for its operating costs, it is dependent upon fundraising for the capital cost of new vehicles and equipment. In addition to providing command centre capability for the next 20 years, a new Mobile Command Centre will provide a more robust vehicle to meet the needs of one of the fastest growing areas of the Lower Mainland. It will have the capability to travel on more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency, transport additional field equipment, and enhance search and rescue management through new technology and additional floor space for work stations and briefings. Ordering of command centre components will begin in January 2015, with an in service date for the new Mobile Command Centre of December 2015, at a total estimated cost of $407,300, including sales taxes and a 5% contingency. Annually, Metro Vancouver offers operating grants of $1,000 to each of Lions Bay Search and Rescue, North Shore Search and Rescue, Coquitlam Search and Rescue, Ridge Meadows Search and Rescue and Surrey Search and Rescue.
5.4
I&F - 53
Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement Project Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 2
A detailed review of the command center, its costs, benefits and capabilities are included in Attachment 2. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board approve a capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and Rescue
Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. 2. That the GVRD Board receive this report for information and take no further action. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board supports alternative one, funds would be allocated from within the 2015 General Government budget to provide a one‐time capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. As noted above, the total cost of the Mobile Command Centre including components is estimated at $407,300. This funding request can be accommodated in the General Government budget as a one‐time capital cost and for a specific piece of equipment. Additionally, Metro Vancouver provides annual operating grants of $1,000 to Lions Bay Search and Rescue, North Shore Search and Rescue, Coquitlam Search and Rescue, Ridge Meadows Search and Rescue and Surrey Search and Rescue. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION On December 3, 2014, the Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society sent correspondence to Metro Vancouver requesting a grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. Coquitlam Search and Rescue provides search and rescue services to the Metro Vancouver municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, and their area of responsibility includes in excess of half of Metro Vancouver’s Electoral Area A. The funding request can be accommodated in the 2015 General Government budget as a one‐time capital cost and would be in addition to annual operating grants of $1,000 provided to Coquitlam Search and Rescue, Lions Bay Search and Rescue, North Shore Search and Rescue, Ridge Meadows Search and Rescue and Surrey Search and Rescue. A financial contribution towards the financing of Coquitlam Search and Rescue’s Mobile Command Centre Replacement Project will assist in enabling enhanced up‐to‐date command centre capability for the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society that will service the broader region for the next 20 years. Staff recommend that the Board support the funding request as presented under alternative one. Attachments (Orbit #11157803) 1. Letter from Coquitlam Search and Rescue dated December 3, 2014 re: Request for Funding 2. Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement Prospectus
I&F - 54
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
COQUITLAM SEARCH AND RESCUE SOCIETY
1300 Pinetree Way, Coquitlam B.C. V3B 7S4
December 3, 2014
Metro Vancouver Corporate Services 4330 Kingsway Ave. Burnaby BC V5H 4G8 Attention: Greg Smith Senior Director Dear Greg, The Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society is requesting a grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. In addition to providing search & rescue services to the Metro Vancouver municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s area of responsibility includes in excess of half of Metro Vancouver’s electoral area “A”. Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre, in which search and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed, is 20 years old and due for retirement. Although the team is reimbursed by Emergency Management BC for its operating costs, it is dependent upon fundraising for the capital cost of new vehicles and equipment. In addition to providing command centre capability for the next 20 years, a new Mobile Command Centre will provide a more robust vehicle to meet the needs of one of the fastest growing areas of the Lower Mainland. It will have the capability to travel on more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency, transport additional field equipment, and enhance search and rescue management through new technology and additional floor space for work stations and briefings. Ordering of command centre components will begin in January 2015, with an in service date for the new Mobile Command Centre of December 2015, at a total estimated cost of $407,300, including sales taxes and a 5% contingency. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Yours truly, Sandy Burpee, Coquitlam Search & Rescue
I&F - 55
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
COQUITLAM SEARCH AND RESCUE SOCIETY
MOBILE COMMAND CENTRE REPLACEMENT
PROSPECTUS
I&F - 56
2.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
TOPIC Page #
About Coquitlam Search & Rescue 3
The Role of the Mobile Command Centre 5
Why is the Mobile Command Centre being Replaced? 6
Mobile Command Centre Components 7
4.1 Cab and Chassis 9
4.2 Command Centre Module 9
4.3 Command Centre Technology 10
Project Timeline 10
Project Budget 10
Funding strategy 11
Sustainability 11
Project Outcomes 11
Conclusion 12
Appendix A: Project Management
Appendix B: Letters of Recommendation
Appendix C: Project Timeline
Appendix D: Specification & Estimate: Cab & Chassis
Appendix E: Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Module
Appendix F: Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Technology
Coquitlam Search and Rescue (SAR) serving the communities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody
Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, BC has been providing emergency services in both
urban and wilderness settings since 1972. The team’s current Mobile Command Centre, in which search
and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed, is 20 years old and due for replacement.
In addition to providing command centre capability for the next 20 years, a new Mobile Command
Centre will provide a more robust vehicle to meet the needs of one of the fastest growing areas of the
Lower Mainland, with the capability to travel on more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency,
transport additional field equipment, and enhance search and rescue management capability through
new technology and additional floor space for work stations and briefings. With the successful
completion of fundraising, ordering of command centre components will begin in January 2015, with an
in service date for the new Mobile Command Centre of December 2015, at a total estimated cost of
$407,300, including sales taxes and a 5% contingency.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
I&F - 57
3.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Coquitlam Search and Rescue (SAR) serving the communities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody
Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, BC has been providing emergency services in both
urban and wilderness settings since 1972.
The services provided by Coquitlam Search and Rescue include:
Wilderness search and rescue
Wilderness medical rescue
Swiftwater rescue
Mountain rescue
Rope (high angle and slope) rescue
Avalanche rescue
Inland waters rescue
Helicopter External Transport System (HETS or “long line”) rescue
Missing children and adults with dementia searches
Police evidence searches
Animal rescue
Disaster assistance
Evacuation due to flooding earthquake, landslide and interface forest fire
Tracking
Community education
The team, based at Coquitlam’s Town Centre Fire Hall, operates under the provincial Emergency
Management BC (EMBC) and performs inland water, wilderness and urban search and rescue in an area
bounded by Indian Arm on the west, Pitt Lake on the east, Garibaldi Park to the north, and the Fraser
River to the south. This primary area is over 1000km² and includes some of the most rugged and
inaccessible terrain in the southwest region of the Province of British Columbia. The team also assists
About Coquitlam Search and Rescue
I&F - 58
4.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
the RCMP with evidence searches and searches for missing persons, responds to requests for mutual aid
from other SAR teams in the province, and can provide assistance during natural disasters such as
floods, forest fires, and earthquakes. In addition to emergency response, members of the team also
provide wilderness public safety education in the community.
Coquitlam SAR currently has 54 active members, all volunteers. Team members are on call 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week, on a year-round basis and are often called to work in darkness and inclement
weather. Team members frequently take time off from their jobs to attend searches, and pay for much
of their own gear. Professional emergency service providers – police, BC ambulance and the provincial
Coroner’s Office – and the community have come to rely upon Coquitlam SAR for the essential services
it provides. In 2013, Coquitlam SAR responded to 38 operations for a total of 3,044 volunteer hours
resulting in the rescue or recovery of 29 persons. In addition, each member commits to a minimum of
200 hours per year for training and community education. At $25/hour, the total time volunteered by
Coquitlam SAR members amounts to an “in kind” contribution of almost $350,000 a year, a significant
cost benefit to both professional emergency service providers and the communities we serve.
The team contributes to public education through free outdoor education programs and participating in
community fairs and events. Coquitlam SAR delivers the Hug-a-Tree program (how to survive if you get
lost) to about 200 to 300 children per year, including school groups, Scout or Girl Guide groups, and
organized youth camps.
Members of Coquitlam SAR are committed to maintaining the skills necessary to perform to a
professional standard. Team members are constantly training for eventualities they hope will never
occur. The team maintains a rigorous training program which includes navigation, technical (rope)
rescue, swift water rescue, boat operations, advanced first aid, mountain travel, avalanche rescue and
helicopter long line rescue. Specific search and rescue training is developed and administered through
the Emergency Management Division at the Justice Institute of BC, including course curriculum
development and evaluation standards. Other courses such as avalanche skills training, first aid and
HETS are delivered to standards established by other professional organizations. Training is conducted
every Tuesday evening at Town Centre Fire Hall or in the field, and augmented with a full day field
training session typically one weekend a month. Team members also bring skills to the team from their
own professional and recreational pursuits which include firefighting, policing, medical and first aid,
mountaineering, rock climbing, mountain biking, kayaking, snowshoeing and backcountry skiing.
Underlying individual member’s skills and training is the teamwork which is essential to the safe and
efficient completion of search and rescue tasks. Team members depend on each other to act with
integrity, respect, accountability and professionalism. Teamwork is fostered through training and
recreation with other team members, and team members are selected with this attribute in mind.
The members of Coquitlam SAR are proud of the team’s history and look forward to continuing to play
an important role in community safety.
I&F - 59
5.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Search and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed in the Mobile Command Centre.
The Mobile Command Centre allows the team to deploy where needed with the aid of pre-plans, maps,
radio and satellite communications, internet access and search and rescue equipment for the team’s full
range of technical rescue skills. Command centre activities include all aspects of the provincial Incident
Command System:
INCIDENT COMMANDER
FINANCE/ADMINLOGISTICSPLANNINGOPERATIONS
SAFETY
LIAISON
PUBLIC INFORMATION
Specific activities include:
Planning:
Creating the initial plan for a SAR operation, including areas to be searched and search methods to be
employed
Interviewing persons with knowledge of the subject(s) of a search
Updating the SAR plan as the operation progresses and new information becomes available
Operations:
Assigning team leaders and personnel for specific tasks within a SAR operation
Briefing team leaders prior to start of assignments
Communicating with and directing field teams
Maintaining a log of all radio communications
Debriefing team leaders at the completion of assignments
Interviewing subject(s) at completion of a SAR operation
Logistics:
Coordinating rescue activities and providing resources (e.g. long line extraction) once the subject(s) of a
SAR operation have been located
Finance/Administration
Recording task assignments, preparing task reports and submitting claims for equipment damaged or lost
Safety:
Ensuring that all activities in a SAR operation are carried out with safety as the top priority
Liaison:
Liaising with other agencies including the police, BC Ambulance Service and local fire departments
Public Information
Briefing media at key points in a SAR operation
The Role of the Mobile Command Centre
I&F - 60
6.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
To perform these activities, the following Command Vehicle features and equipment are required:
Work stations to plan SAR operation strategy
Counter space to lay out maps
Meeting space to facilitate briefing team leaders, police and media, and to interview persons with
knowledge of the subject(s), and the subjects themselves once evacuated from the field
Computers to run software programs which aid development of the search strategy, and to access digital
maps and track search progress.
VHF and UHF radio console to communicate with field teams and aircraft assisting in a search
Cellular phones to access the public telephone network
Internet access for search aids such as Google Earth
Video monitors and a smart board
Large scale colour plotter to print out maps for operations planning and field team assignments
Electric generator to power Mobile Command Centre technology, lighting, air conditioning and heating
Wiring for 12 VDC and 120 VAC electrical distribution
Batteries, chargers and UPS (uninterruptable power supply) to power Mobile Command Centre
electronics
Air conditioning and space heating systems
Emergency lights and siren
Exterior (scene) lighting and awnings for protection from weather
Storage for reference manuals, maps and stationery
Storage for equipment to support field teams, such as stretchers, ropes and rope rescue kits, HETS kits,
first aid kits, hypothermia kits and oxygen and nitrous oxide cylinders as well as consumables such as
batteries, glow sticks, flares, water and energy bars.
Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre, a Grumman panel truck, has a chassis
that is commonly used for delivery of bulky - but light - goods. While adequate for cargo such as bakery
products or parcels, SAR operations require a vehicle which can not only support command centre
operations but also transport heavier cargo such as stretchers, ropes, generators, fuel, batteries, rescue
equipment and an array of computer equipment.
The current Mobile Command Centre, which is maintained by the City of Coquitlam’s Vehicle Services,
was ordered in 1994 and scheduled for replacement in 2014. Although the mechanical condition is
consistent with a vehicle of this age, the vehicle does have serious limitations:
Weight:
Over time as the team has responded to an increasing call volume and tasks have become more
complex, additional equipment has become necessary to support rescue operations. Also, as
technology has been adopted to improve search efficiency, the Mobile Command Centre has been fitted
with multiple computers, routers, wireless access points, satellite phones and printers. All of this
Why is the Mobile Command Centre being Replaced?
I&F - 61
7.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
equipment adds weight to the vehicle and it is now operating close to the gross vehicle weight (GVW)
for the chassis. It has often been necessary to remove gear in the past to remain underweight. Mobile
Command Centre weight limitations compromise the team’s response capability.
Performance:
The engine and transmission were not designed for the manner in which the team uses the Mobile
Command Centre today. Hills are a challenge, both ascending (engine power) and descending
(transmission and brake capability). The Mobile Command Centre is not suitable for “off-pavement”
travel and therefore limited in the locations to which it can travel to set up command.
Space:
The interior space has been filled to capacity with computers, printers, video screens, mapping and so
on. Limited work space presents an ongoing challenge for command centre operation. Typically, 2 to 3
managers plus a radio operator are required to manage a SAR operation. At best, the current interior
space and layout is small and awkward to work in, and there is inadequate space for search team,
police, family and media briefings. On larger operations it has many times become necessary to use
other team’s Mobile Command Centres to provide additional space.
Technology:
The Command Centre wiring has been modified by different technicians over the years as required to
power new technology. The result has been a loss in wiring consistency such that correcting problems is
now time consuming and expensive. The electrical system also doesn’t adequately support the
technology now being used – for instance, the auxiliary generator marginally carries the electrical load
placed on it.
The Mobile Command Centre consists of 3 major components:
Cab & Chassis
Command Centre Module
Command Centre Technology
See Figure 1, following, for a photo gallery of the Mobile Command Centre components.
Mobile Command Centre Components
I&F - 62
8.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Figure 1
Photo Gallery: Mobile Command Centre Components
I&F - 63
9.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Cab & Chassis
A Freightliner M2-106 Extended Cab with a Cummins 6.7L turbo diesel engine or equivalent cab &
chassis has been determined to meet the needs of the new Mobile Command Centre and address
the shortcomings of the current vehicle.
Although more expensive, a diesel-fuelled engine was selected over a gasoline-fuelled engine for the
following reasons:
Only a single fuel source will be required for both the vehicle and the diesel-powered
auxiliary generator (gasoline-driven generators of the required capacity are not
manufactured)
Diesel fuel is one of the most efficient and energy dense fuels available today. Diesel
engines typically deliver 25% - 35% better fuel economy than similarly performing gas
engines
Diesel engines typically deliver longer engine life and are more reliable. They have no spark
plugs or distributors, and therefore never need ignition tune-ups.
A diesel engine provides far more drive shaft torque than does a gasoline engine
The supplier estimate for the Freightliner M2-106 Extended Cab plus chassis is $82,100 plus sales
taxes.
The supplier specification and detailed estimate are included as Appendix D
Command Centre Module
The Command Centre Module is the heart of the Mobile Command Centre, containing the
infrastructure and equipment necessary to support the effective management of all phases of a SAR
operation. The Command Centre Module includes:
Metal enclosure
Access doors
Flooring
Desks, cabinets and shelves
Wiring
Lighting
Auxiliary generator
UPS (uninterruptable power supply)
Air conditioning and space heating systems
The estimate for the Command Centre Module is $159,355 plus sales taxes.
The Module specification and cost estimates are included as Appendix E
I&F - 64
10.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Command Centre Technology
The Command Centre Technology comprises the electronic technology which directly supports
search and rescue management. Replacement of the current Mobile Command Centre provides an
opportunity to upgrade the current aging technology systems to “state of the art” with enhanced
capabilities and effectiveness, and includes:
Computer hardware
Video monitors and a smart board
Colour printer and plotter
Software
Batteries
Communications systems, including VHF and UHF radios, cell and satellite phones, and internet
connectivity
The estimate for the Command Centre Technology is $106,715 plus sales taxes.
The equipment list, specifications and cost estimates are included as Appendix F
With fundraising complete by December of this year, the Mobile Command Centre Cab & Chassis and
the Command Centre Module will be ordered in January 2015 following the completion of a tendering
process. Delivery of the Cab & Chassis is expected mid-April 2015, while the Command Centre Module
with the interior layout, wiring and auxiliaries is anticipated by November 2015. Command Centre
Technology will be purchased to coordinate with the Command Centre Module construction schedule.
The new Mobile Command Centre is scheduled to be in service 31 December 2015.
For the full project timeline, see Appendix C.
Item Supplier
Estimate
Sales Tax
(12%)
Total
Estimate
Cab & Chassis $82,100 $9,850 $91,950
Command Centre Module $159,355 $19,120 $178,475
Command Centre Technology $106,715 $12,800 $119,515
Sub-Total $348,170 $41,770 $389,940
Contingency @ 5% $17,400 $17,400
Total Project Budget $365,570 $41,770 $407,300
Project Timeline
Project Budget
I&F - 65
11.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Funding in the amount of $100,000 has been already committed to the replacement of the Mobile
Command Centre:
Source Amount
CSAR Endowment Fund 35,000
City of Coquitlam 65,000
Total $100,000
Funding sufficient to complete the Mobile Command Centre Replacement project is being solicited from
the following sources:
Source Amount
Spirit of Coquitlam Grant $50,000
BC Gaming Grant $150,000
City of Port Moody $10,000
City of Port Coquitlam $10,000
City of Burnaby $10,000
Metro Vancouver $5,000
Corporate Sponsors $72,300
The projected life span for the new Mobile Command Centre is 20 years, commensurate with the
command centre that is to be replaced. The City of Coquitlam will maintain and repair as necessary the
Cab and Chassis over the life span of the Mobile Command Centre as an “in kind” donation, while
Coquitlam Search & Rescue will maintain, repair and upgrade as necessary the Command Centre
Technology as part of its operating budget and from future grant applications.
Replacement of Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre with the command
centre proposed in this prospectus will deliver the following benefits:
Funding Strategy
Sustainability
Project Outcomes
I&F - 66
12.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
A Mobile Command Centre to plan, implement, and manage search & rescue operations for the next 20
years
Enhanced reliability for the expected increase in call volume with population growth in the region
Improved vehicle fuel efficiency
Increased engine power and a more robust transmission and chassis to provide for limited off-pavement
travel, allowing the command centre to be set up closer to search & rescue operations
Increased vehicle Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) capacity, allowing the transport of additional equipment
for use by field teams – for example, a HETS kit.
Increased reliability of the command centre electrical system
Increased auxiliary generator capacity, allowing the use of additional electronic technology while
increasing the margin between generator capacity and load
Air conditioning and space heating
Upgraded and new technology to more effectively manage search & rescue operations
Increased command centre floor space and volume, allowing an increase in workstations for search
managers and supporting staff, an increase in reference material storage capacity and additional briefing
space for search teams, police, family and media
Attainment of these benefits will be determined using the measures listed in Table 1, following.
In addition to providing command centre capability for Coquitlam Search & Rescue for the next 20 years,
the new Mobile Command Centre will provide a more robust vehicle with the capability to travel on
more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency, transport additional field equipment, and
enhance search and rescue management capability through new technology and additional floor space
for work stations and briefings. With the successful completion of fundraising, ordering of command
centre components will begin in January 2015, with an in service date for the new Mobile Command
Centre of December 2015.
Conclusion
I&F - 67
13.
15 August ‘14
www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca
Benefit Old MCC New MCC Notes
Fuel efficiency 35 TBD Liters per 100 Km
Command Centre Module
volume
588 cubic feet 1,536 cubic feet
Command Centre Module
open floor area
30 square feet 111 square feet
Command Centre Module
work stations
3 6
Field equipment storage
volume
198 cubic feet 293 cubic feet
New Command Centre
Technology
N/A Upgraded
communications
capability (phone
and radio)
Enhanced AV
capability including
multiple flat screen
video monitors and
smart board
Wide format colour
plotter for maps
30’ pneumatic radio
mast
Generator capacity margin
(% of max. load)
0% TBD
SAR Manager satisfaction TBD Testimonials:
Enhancement of
SAR management
capability
Efficiency of layout
Stress reduction
Table 1
Measurable Project Outcomes
I&F - 68
Appendix A
Project Management
Mobile Command Centre Replacement Project
Project Manager Liz Clyne
Cab & Chassis Lead Liz Clyne
Command Centre Module Lead Kelly Yates
Command Centre Technology Lead Mike Coyle
Fundraising Lead Sandy Burpee
Project Management Liaison Mike Coyle
Executive
Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society
President Bob Hetherington
Vice-President Darren Timmer
Past President Garry Mancell
Treasurer Mechthild Kellas-Dicks
Cabin Jordan Wycherley
Community Education Al Thomas
Equipment Garry Lum
First Aid Thomas Zajac
Membership Karen Woo
Safety Tai McLavy
SAR Management Mike Coyle
Social Shakuntla Sharma
Technology Robert Sell
Training John Simpson
Truck & Transport Liz Clyne
I&F - 69
Appendix B
Letters of Recommendation
I&F - 70
Appendix C
Project Timeline
2014 2015
Activity Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Prelim Layout & Specification
Develop Cost Estimates
Finalize Spec & Estimates
Fundraising
Final Layout & Specification
Issue Module Tender
Evaluate Module Tenders
Issue Cab & Chassis Tender
Evaluate Cab & Chassis Tenders
Order Cab & Chassis
Cab & Chassis Delivery
Order Module
Module Delivery
Order Technology
Technology Delivery
Command Vehicle In-Service
I&F - 71
Appendix D Specification & Estimate: Cab & Chassis
I&F - 72
Appendix E Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Module
I&F - 73
Appendix E
Proposed Command Centre Module Layout
I&F - 74
Appendix E
Proposed Command Centre Module Layout
I&F - 75
Appendix E
Note: Specifications and estimates based on comparable units built by Intercontinental Truck Body
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
Module
Frame Construction
All aluminum frame with 4x3 tube long sills, 3" channel cross members, 3x2 side angles, and rubber frame rails spacers 3"x4" aluminum tube full-width rear bumper
1 $4,200 $4,200
Wall Construction
Extruded aluminum Snap-Lock panel construction with .100" thick skin and integrated ribs @ 12" on center. Extruded aluminum rub rail on all sides with large-radius aerodynamic extruded front corners and 24" skirt (integral part of sidewalls).
$1,800
Doors and Stairs
32"Wx84"H side doors with 2" insulation; lined same as unit. 2 $1,400 $2,800
c/w 18"x36" tinted fixed windows, key lockable stainless steel freezer handles with push-releases & rubber sweeps.
2 $475 $950
c/w fold-out aluminum staircase w/safety channel treads 2 $1,500 $3,000
c/w flip-out Stromberg-Carlson AC-544 commercial hand-rails (stainless steel rail with milled aluminum mounting blocks)
2 $375 $750
stainless steel grab horizontal grab handle on inside of door 2 $75 $150
Exterior Work Surface / Awning
93"W x 42"H x 8"D PS monitor compartment Passenger side. with double doors, top PVC Centraflex waterproof continuous hinge & (4) bottom 5" SS hinges. 2-point SS D-handle with (2) gas shocks for top "awning" door and (2) HD 90-degree retention chains for bottom "work surface" door (removable to allow work surface to fold down flat) including rubber stoppers. (see EXTERIOR COMPARTMENTS section for fabrication details) - compartment to be above floor, insulated & lined as interior
$2,300
Flooring / Insulation / Lining
Heavy-duty 1-piece Lonseal Lonplate II Gunpowder Grey (424TX)
$3,325
Over 3/4" marine grade plywood subfloor.
$525
Molded 2-3" vinyl cove base in dark gray to match flooring
$1,500
2" urethane insulation walls/ceiling.
$3,800
3" urethane insulation under floor, covering cross members.
$1,200
Complete interior lined in 3/8" plywood (backer board)
$2,350
Overlaid in white Kemlite glued to backer; no rivets.
$4,750
All butt-seams and corners to be trimmed with painted aluminum trim
5" drop false ceiling w/5 sections;
$3,750
I&F - 76
Appendix E
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
(1) center HVAC section, with fixed panels and 18 adjust. vents (2) middle lighting sections, with fixed panels and removable opaque lenses. (2) outer wiring sections, with nutserted removable panels for access to wiring. Fixed panels over cabinets with cable pass-throughs as required. Includes ladder-style support straps for tying down all wiring in plenums. (2) cross-trailer plenums (one at very rear, one in middle between A/C units)
$400
NOTE: false ceiling will be painted white after plywood is installed & before glass-board lining & cabinetry.
Exterior Compartments
All compartments fabricated of 1/8" aluminum, with sweep-out-style bottoms (except generator compartment), doors fabricated of extruded aluminum edge and frame with rubber automotive seals. door faces to be 10ga aluminum, with 1.5" styrofoam insulation, & 14ga interior skins. With rubber-gasketed SS 5" strap hinges, aluminum 180-degree holdups & SS 2-point deadbolt D-handles.
Above frame 90"W x 28"H x 26"D compartment 2 $1,400 $2,800
Exterior Compartments
Compartment to be through-frame
$300
2" Roxul mineral wool insulation lining w/perf. galv. steel to be insulate and lined on the interior of the body- houses QD12 diesel generator
$980
Below frame 15"W x 30"H x 7.5' D full-through compartment w/side-hinged door 2 $1,250 $2,500
Exterior Compartments
Compartment to be through-frame To be insulated and lined on the interior of the body. - for long item storage (up to 8'L x 30"W)
$600
69"W x 28"H x 26"D compartment 4 $1,250 $5,000
Passenger Side Exterior Compartments
14"W x 14"H x 4"D patch panel into communications equipment rack area. Top-hinged door includes exterior latch brackets which allow D-handle to be locked either in closed position or in slightly opened position.
1 $1,400
48"W x 22"H x 24"D compartments (2) for misc. storage (1) for HWH hydraulic pump & pneumatic pump for mast
4 $1,200 $4,800
(1) for batteries includes vent in rear wall
$125
500# capacity aluminum battery slide-out tray
$575
Interior Divider Walls
insulated partition wall w/double 16"W lacquer birch pocket (to match cabinetry) by Vander Bros, w/bungee retention cord.
1 $1,200 $1,200
Windows 36"Wx24"Hx2.5"D light tint T-slider Thermopane windows. 1 $700 $700
DS to include emergency exit hardware 2 $5,150 $10,300
24"Wx24"Hx2.5"D light tint fixed Thermopane windows. 2 $450 $900
See door section for (2) 18"Wx24"Hx2.5"D light tint fixed windows
Roof and Accessories
Extruded roof edge walk-on roof (roof bows @ 12" o.c. with 12ga aluminum overlapping sheeting).
$750
I&F - 77
Appendix E
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
Zico Quic-Ladder swing-out fold-down angled rooftop access ladder with 15"W useable width. Includes high-traction side handrails.
$2,250
Framing in roof for (2) A/C units
$300
Reinforce roof edge for Apex roof-mounted awning with (8) 3/16" alum plates welded between roof bows.
$600
Reinforce roof for Auto-Track satellite dish, with 24"L 3/16" aluminum plate fastened to roof bows, w/(2) 3" channels welded legs-down to plate with pre-drilled bolt holes to suit VR7b dish.
$850
Thin UHMW reflector touch-down protection plate
$250
Traction tape on lower section of roof with 1/3 coverage pattern
$400
(24) Hammond 1590Z120GY flanged die cast aluminum weatherproof junction boxes, installed on roof, for customer-installed antennae. (1) Blue Sea #1002 Medium Cable Clam from each junction box down into electrical cabling plenum are included.
$6,000
120 / 240V AC Electrical
Supply Onan CMQD diesel 120/240V 12000W Generator (HDKCD2209)
$14,250
installed in driver side insulated compartment.
$1,500
Includes 7" exhaust extension (155-2424)
Includes EC30 remote control panel (018-02030) with 10' harness; features auto-start to maintain batteries, service & diagnostic messages, start/stop, hour meter, battery condition gauge & DC voltage gauge.
$675
Tap diesel genset into chassis fuel tank
$650
Reroute diesel genset exhaust over to driver side
Blue Sea VSM 422 Vessel Systems Monitor; monitors the following: - primary battery charge level (DC current shunt 8255 included) - primary battery temperature (temp. sensor 1820 included) - DC voltage (two battery banks) - AC voltage (AC current transformer 8256 included)
$1,800
NOTE: 360 panel mounting kit module 1325 included w/custom panel
50A 120/240V rack-mount primary panel wired to generator with (2) 50A 120/240V subpanel breakers, wired to transfer switches.
$3,100
(2) 50A 120/240V rack-mount subpanels; wired to transfer switches NOTE: Subpanels to be powered by 50A automatic transfer switches fed by 30A shore power plugs and 50A main panel breakers. * includes full rear protective enclosure for all panels * NOTE: all loads to be evenly distributed between (2) subpanels, and all outlets to be labelled with pane l# and breaker #. NOTE: (3) 15A "UPS" rack outlets will be powered by inverter.
2 $1,200 $2,400
I&F - 78
Appendix E
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
(1) Rack-mount blank panel for EC30 genset control panel, inverter on/off switch & sub-panel digital amp meters.
1 $100
Blue Sea digital AC ammeters for subpanels (8238) with 360 panel system mount (1476 for 2 meters or 2x 1475)
2 $150 $300
50A 120/240V automatic transfer switches wired to 50A 120/240 breakers in main panel and to 30A 120/240V shore power plugs.
2 $638 $1,275
30A 120/240V exterior shore power plugs w/weatherproof covers 2 $450 $900
30A 120/240V 50' weatherproof shore power cables 2 $200 $400
30A 120/240V to 15A 120V adaptor plugs 2 $100 $200
Samlex SA-2000K-112 2000W PSW Inverter with optional remote on/off switch with battery voltage and output meters (S-R6-12)
1 $1,250
Remote ammeter (BS#8238) with 360 panel system mount (1475) - includes CFB2-400 400A class "T" fuse & holder - located inside communications rack (above battery compt.) - provides power to (3) "UPS" outlets; one per rack.
$250
Samlex SEC-1280A converter/2 or 3-stage selectable chargers with remote control panels (#900-EC-30; includes 30' cable)
$1,800
Air Conditioning
8"H Low-Profile High Capacity air conditioning units (15000 BTU) with ducted ceiling packages wired to (2) wall-mounted heat/cool thermostats.
$4,000
750W 120V Stelpro forced-air wall-mount heaters, wired to (2) A/C units, controlled by wall-mounted A/C unit thermostats.
$1,000
Mid Atlantic 4" exhaust fan (FAN) w/95CFM & 39dBA & 2000 RPM
$350
- 1 in battery compartment with metal finger guard (GUARD) and exterior splash cover.
$100
(1) 20'Lx10"W Carefree Apex 120V roof-mount awning for passenger side with Direct Response Electronics control panel installed near front side door. R127 MoonRock acrylic fabric; black case painted white same as body.
$6,750
120V/240V Scene Lights
ROM Corporation Magnafire 5000 900W 240V scene lights on exterior-mount deluxe 1100 Series Kwik-Raze poles with pan/tilt/turn control handle (KR-SBP-1139-W7) custom-ordered with 36" extra pole length and 24" extra travel.
4 $1,725 $6,900
Bottom 7" pole supports (KR-7-SB-R-P) 4 $150 $600
OPTION: upgrade to Command Light KL465 120/240V Knitgh Halogen folding light tower with 6x 650W scene lights with backlight option, green beacon & hand-held controller - add $5000
Lighting 6" LED dome lights (300 lumens; Grote 61411) w/built-in motion sensors; 1 per compartment. 10 $175 $1,750
4'x2' recessed high-output LED light panels- mounted in drop ceiling throughout module for complete low- voltage dimmable lighting system.
12 $400 $4,800
Switches for LED ceiling lights. 3 $110 $330
I&F - 79
Appendix E
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
18" LED strip lights (500 lumens; Grote 61F01) w/built-in switches; below upper cabinets for workstation task lighting.
9 $225 $2,025
12V Whelen M9ZLC surface-mount LED scene lights (6500 lumens) with chrome bezels (M9FC); 3 per side.
8 $413 $3,300
Switches for scene lights at side door. 3 $110 $330
Switches for scene lights in Cen-Com 3 $110 $330
Rear scene lights to be activated by backup signal
$110
(1) Whelen L31HGF GREEN LED 360-degree Beacon with optional cast aluminum branch guard kit, on rear PS corner, switched @ CenCom
$975
Zone Defence Night Vision heated shutter backup camera with (18)iInfra-red LED's, wired to plug at front of module.
$750
Backup alarm installed at the rear of the trailer (Grote #73080 - Smart backup alarm 87-112dB), wired to backup signal from tow vehicle through secondary module plug.
$225
Interior Cabinetry (by Vander Bros):
All cabinetry to be lacquer birch ply, with Lexan inserts in all cabinet doors, hidden hinges & non-locking trigger latches. All Pewter Brush Swirl countertops trimmed with oak. (20) 2" plastic cable pass-throughs (2 per flip-up workstation)
$400
Desks L-shaped desk; 4"Lx4'Wx22"Dx30"H
$1,250
Fixed desks; 4'Lx30"Dx30"H 3 $300 $900
Cabinets 6 $250 $1,500
Mid-back Safeco Soft-Tough Workbench Chairs with adjustable backrest, pneumatic height-adjustment, 5-foot spider base, black polyurethane seat and back & chrome foot ring.
4 $300 $1,200
3'x2' magnetic white board (in monitor compartment) 4 $175 $700
Sliding Map Boards
6'x4' magnetic white board attached to rear wall
$450
NOTE: build-out rear wall behind white board to suit video/SMART monitor size/location/wall-mount bracket.
$800
6'x4' magnetic white boards attached to 1/2" lacquer birch plywood sliding bypass boards trimmed with 1"x1"x1/8" channel & UHMW bottom guide tracks & extruded aluminum top track with low-profile roller trolleys & retention pin for storage.
2 $900 $1,800
Briefing Area 6'x4' magnetic white board attached to rear wall
$150
NOTE: build-out rear wall behind white board to suit video/SMART monitor size/location/wall-mount bracket.
$800
Fold down table
$800
Bench / storage
$2,000
Under storage compartment
TOTAL
$159,355
I&F - 80
Appendix F Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Technology
I&F - 81
Appendix F
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
Computer Hardware
Computer workstations
Computer workstation, mouse, keyboard, dual 20" monitors 2 $1,500 $3,000
Computer Server
Rack mount server with DVI/HDMI video 1 $2,500 $2,500
Dual 20" monitors, mouse, keyboard 1 $400 $400
NEC MultiSync P461-AVT 46" LCD Display w/Digital TV tuner 1 $3,300 $3,300
SMART BOARD PX346 46" Interactive Display Overlay 1 $ 4,450 $4,450
heavy-duty low-profile wall-mount (w/in-wall reinforcements) 1 $750 $750
Server Rack Middle Atlantic equipment rack; full-height with (2) hinged smoked lexan doors 1 $2,000 $2,000
Colour Laser Printer
HP Color LaserJet Enterprise M750n Colour Large Format (11x17) Two drawers allows 8x10 and 11x17 printing
1 $2,700 $2,700
Plotter HP Designjet T120 ePrinter For printing large maps, status, and field mapping support 1 $4,000 $4,000
Electrical
12 Volt DC DC rack mount power supply - 50 Amps, 12 VDC, 1 $1,020
DC fuse distribution, main battery breaker, relays, connectors & lugs 1 $1,500
Auxiliary batteries, wiring and accessories 2 $1,200
Battery charger - smart type dual bank; & accessories 1 $800
DC equipment and wiring installation (hours) 70 $85 $5,950
Installation supplies 1 $500
120 Volt AC AC distribution panels for primary, secondary, night plug, genset - with circuit breakers 4 $600 $2,400
AC shore/genset selection and protection panel 1 $700 $700
Installation supplies: conduit; electrical boxes; etc. 1 $1,200
AC wiring and equipment installation (hours) 70 $85 $5,950
Networking Infrastructure
Workstation Outlets
With AC Power, Cat 6 cabling for 5x RJ45 jack, 1x HDMI 9 $230 $2,070
Cat 6 Patch Panels
48 port cat 6 patch panel 1 $200
I&F - 82
Appendix F
Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total
Cat 6 Patch Panels
12 port cat 6 patch panel 1 $125
Installation supplies: conduit; electrical boxes; etc. 1 $1,000
Wiring installation (hours) 70 $85 $5,950
Audio/Visual
HDMI Cabling
Incl.
HDMI Controller Patch Panel
Rack-mounted HDMI switch for (16) outlets from (4) sources including (13) HDMI jumper cables from switch to rack-mounted distribution panel.
1 $2,200 $2,200
Communications
VHF Radios Vertex EVX-5400 512 channel VHF; digital/analog; display 4 $600 $2,400
UHF Radios Vertex VX-2200 512 channel UHF; analog; display 1 $600 $600
HAM Vertex EVX-5400 512 channel VHF; digital/analog; display 1 $600 $600
Air Band Icom IC-A210 1 $1,200
Main Radio Console
Zetron radio console with channel boards; telephone interface; programming kit and related accessories. Includes 7 tone remote adapters for radios
1 $19,000
Antennas Antennas: radios, cellular, avionics, amateur, wireless data, WiFi with mounts cabling and connectors 13 $200 $2,600
Auxiliary radio consoles
Gaitronics single-line tone remote console 4 $1,100 $4,400
Radio matrix switch for remote consoles 1 $1,500
Rack mounting shelves and hardware 1 $1,000
Radio system wiring and installation (hours) 100 $85 $8,500
Telular Cell to Landline Interface
Telular unit to provide landline via cellular network. 2 $900 $1,800
Iridium Satellite Phone
RST-100 1 $1,500
V-SAT Satellite Dish System
Reinforce roof for Auto-Track satellite dish, with 24"L 3/16" aluminum plate fastened to roof bows, w/(2) 3" channels welded legs-down to plate with pre-drilled bolt holes to suit VR7b dish.
1 $850 $ 850
Wireless data Cellular Wireless LTE Router 1 $500 $500
Wireless N Router 1 $400 $400
Internet
$400
I&F - 83
Appendix F
Pneumatic Mast
Mast Will-Burt Hurry-up mast 1 $1,800 $1,800
Conduit for Mast Cabling
50'L Nycoil 1"ID flexible conduit with (2) 90-degree end connectors. Customer to supply and install communications equipment on top of mast, and install cabling inside Nycoil.
1 $1,800 $1,800
Software
Radio control software
To control radio from remote workstations 1
$1,000
Total
$106,715
I&F - 84
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations Date: April 7 2015 Meeting Date: April 23 2015 Subject: Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy
RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board approve the Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy as presented in the report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”.
PURPOSE To provide the Board with a Metro Vancouver sponsorship policy for its consideration. BACKGROUND At its regular meeting of November 30 2012, the GVRD Board of Directors endorsed the following resolution directing staff to develop a policy that provides guidance on sponsorship requests:
…to develop a policy for Metro Vancouver to fund or support municipally hosted events that have a regional benefit and report back to the Intergovernmental and Administration Committee.
The attached Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy (Attachment 1) responds to the Board’s direction; however, the policy extends beyond municipally hosted events to include any event or program being hosted by external organizations or by a Metro Vancouver member municipality. An overview of the policy is presented below. METRO VANCOUVER SPONSORSHIP POLICY The Sponsorship Policy provides specific criteria for determining the circumstances under which Metro Vancouver sponsorship support, either direct or in‐kind, is appropriate for events and programs. Its intent is to facilitate Metro Vancouver support for events and programs that achieve one or more of the following broad objectives:
(1) Provide a clear, positive community benefit to the Metro Vancouver region overall; (2) Build community capacity and social cohesion; (3) Promote dialogue and community participation; (4) Contribute to the long‐term livability and sustainability of the Metro Vancouver region; (5) Clearly advance Metro Vancouver’s corporate goals and objectives.
The policy applies to all sponsorships regardless of their value or the type of contribution (i.e., cash or any in‐kind contributions), and includes separate review procedures for sponsorships with a total value of under $10,000 and $10,000 or more. It does not apply to grants or the provision of other forms of assistance, which are referenced in other Metro Vancouver policies.
5.5
I&F - 85
Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 3
The policy establishes that for consideration, a sponsorship proposal must meet ALL of the following criteria:
(1) It must offer specific benefits to Metro Vancouver or its members and must clearly outline the specific roles and responsibilities of each party in a formal agreement.
(2) The event or program for which sponsorship is being sought must: a) have an overall community objective and purpose that is consistent with Metro
Vancouver’s vision, mission and roles; and b) have operating guidelines and procedures that are consistent with Metro Vancouver’s
Sustainability Framework and Board Strategic Plan. (3) Metro Vancouver must receive benefits having a fair value that is consistent with the cost
of the sponsorship to be provided. The sponsorship policy also stipulates that sponsorship opportunities which involve or promote four or more Metro Vancouver members will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver, and states that Metro Vancouver will not consider any sponsorship proposals for events or programs that:
(1) Primarily promote a private or commercial interest; (2) Promote or support political or religious organizations; (3) Exclude or marginalize minority community groups; (4) Pose potential environmental hazards; (5) Involve the taking of unnecessary risks, or that put the general public at risk.
While the Policy, if approved, would delegate to staff the authority to consider proposals within the criteria with a total value less than $10,000, such applications may be brought to the Board for review. All applications over $10,000 would be brought to the Board through the appropriate standing committee for consideration. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board endorse the Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy as presented in the
report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”. 2. That the GVRD Board refer the sponsorship policy outlined in the report dated April 7, 2015,
titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy” back to staff for further review. 3. That the GVRD Board receive for information the report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro
Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no immediate financial implications for Metro Vancouver related to the endorsement of a sponsorship policy. Individual sponsorship submissions will be considered in future on a case‐by‐case basis within existing departmental budgets. Funds allocated for sponsorship requests will be included in the individual department budgets for consideration by the appropriate standing committees at the time that the annual budgets are presented. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Metro Vancouver is periodically presented with opportunities to build awareness of Metro Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver brand “Services and Solutions for a Livable Region” and to showcase specific Metro Vancouver projects, programs and initiatives and those of its members
I&F - 86
Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 3 of 3
through sponsorship of local and regional events. However, at the current time, specific criteria does not exist to guide decision making with respect to external funding requests. The attached Sponsorship Policy is intended to provide clear guidelines as to the type of sponsorship opportunities that will be considered and how they will be given that consideration. The Sponsorship Policy as presented will address this gap; therefore, staff recommend that the Board endorse the Sponsorship Policy as presented in Alternative 1. Attachment: Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy
I&F - 87
BOARD POLICY
Sponsorship Policy Page 1 of 4
SPONSORSHIP POLICY
Effective Date: May 1, 2015
Approved By:
PURPOSE
This policy provides specific criteria for determining the circumstances under which Metro Vancouver sponsorship support, either direct or in‐kind, is appropriate for events and programs being hosted by external organizations or by Metro Vancouver’s members. DEFINITIONS
“Metro Vancouver” refers to any of the four legal entities that comprise the organization: the GVRD, GVS&DD, GVWD, and MVHC. “Sponsorship” refers to the provision of cash or in‐kind contributions by Metro Vancouver in exchange for a defined set of benefits, such as logo placement, speaking opportunities by Metro Vancouver directors or senior staff, advertising in event publications or on event websites, etc., for any local or regional events. “In‐kind contributions” are specific contributions that Metro Vancouver may provide in lieu of a cash contribution to an event or program, including:
a) Goods, such as: supplies (printed promotional materials); use of Metro Vancouver facilities (waived fees for hosting events at Metro Vancouver venues/facilities); use of Metro Vancouver proprietary supplies or materials (e.g., water for event participants supplied via the Metro Vancouver water wagon) and food/catering;
b) Services, such as: staff support (assignment of Metro Vancouver staff to provide expert advice or professional services in support of the sponsored event or program, e.g., event web casting/live streaming, etc.).
POLICY
Overview: Metro Vancouver is periodically presented with opportunities to build awareness of Metro Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver brand “Services and Solutions for a Livable Region” and to showcase specific Metro Vancouver projects, programs and initiatives and those of its members through sponsorship of local and regional events. This policy is intended to provide clear guidelines as to what sort of sponsorship opportunities will be considered and how they will be given consideration.
5.5 Attachment
I&F - 88
BOARD POLICY
Sponsorship Policy Page 2 of 4
Overall, Metro Vancouver seeks to support events and programs that achieve one or more of the following broad objectives:
(1) Provide a clear, positive community benefit to the Metro Vancouver region overall; (2) Build community capacity and social cohesion; (3) Promote dialogue and community participation; (4) Contribute to the long‐term livability and sustainability of the Metro Vancouver region; (5) Clearly advance Metro Vancouver’s corporate goals and objectives.
This policy applies to all sponsorship proposals regardless of their cost or the type of contribution (i.e., cash or any in‐kind contributions), although a separate review procedure has been put in place for sponsorships with a total value of $10,000 or more. In addition to the eligibility criteria set out below, sponsorship opportunities associated with Metro Vancouver’s members and events and programs that recognize and uphold positive and inclusive community values, and that provide opportunities for Metro Vancouver to promote its brand, projects, programs and initiatives will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver. Sponsorship opportunities that involve or promote four or more Metro Vancouver members will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver. This policy does not apply to grants or the provision of other forms of assistance. Eligibility Criteria: To be considered, a sponsorship proposal must meet ALL of the following criteria:
(1) It must offer specific benefits to Metro Vancouver or its members and must clearly outline the specific roles and responsibilities of each party in a formal agreement.
(2) The event or program for which sponsorship is being sought must: a) have an overall community objective and purpose that is consistent with Metro
Vancouver’s vision, mission and roles; and b) have operating guidelines and procedures that are consistent with Metro
Vancouver’s Sustainability Framework and Board Strategic Plan. (3) Metro Vancouver must receive benefits having a fair value that is consistent with the cost of
the sponsorship to be provided. Sponsorship opportunities that involve or promote four or more Metro Vancouver members will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver. Metro Vancouver will not consider any sponsorship proposals for events or programs that:
(1) Primarily promote a private or commercial interest; (2) Promote or support political or religious organizations; (3) Exclude or marginalize minority community groups; (4) Pose potential environmental hazards; (5) Involve the taking of unnecessary risks, or that put the general public at risk.
I&F - 89
BOARD POLICY
Sponsorship Policy Page 3 of 4
Notwithstanding any of the criteria or procedures outlined in this policy, Metro Vancouver has no obligation to provide sponsorship and may, at its sole discretion, decline to sponsor any event or program for any reason, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing:
(1) The stated purpose of the event or program for which sponsorship is being sought; (2) Metro Vancouver budgetary or financial considerations at the time of the sponsorship
request; (3) The projected reach of the event or program and its visibility in communities that make up
the Metro Vancouver region. Sponsorship Budgets The annual budgets for the Metro Vancouver sponsorship program are included within the individual department budgets and are approved annually by the designated Standing Committee that has oversight of these budgets. Application and Review Procedure: 1. Funding Requests Greater than $10,000
Organizations seeking a sponsorship with a total value of $10,000 or more must submit their request to Metro Vancouver in writing and must provide the following details with respect to the event or program for which sponsorship is being sought:
a) The official name of the event or program; b) The date(s) and times(s) of the event or program, as applicable; c) A general description of the event or program, including its overall objective(s); d) The overall budget for the event or program and the total cash or cash equivalent
amount of sponsorship being sought; e) An accounting of how event organizers plan to allocate the cash or in‐kind contributions
provided by Metro Vancouver should the sponsorship application be approved; f) A listing of other stakeholders that will be approached to provide sponsorships for the
event or program; g) A listing of the specific benefits that will accrue to Metro Vancouver should it proceed
with the sponsorship being sought; h) A detailed description of how and to what degree Metro Vancouver’s members will be
involved in the event or program; i) A description of the anticipated outcomes of the event or program and how this will be
measured and reported. For proposals seeking sponsorship with a total value of $10,000 or more, Metro Vancouver staff will prepare a Committee report for consideration by the appropriate standing committee (including a recommendation on the proposal), which will assess the proposal based on the criteria included in this policy. If endorsed by the standing committee, the report and attached sponsorship proposal will be forwarded to the relevent Metro Vancouver Board for its consideration.
I&F - 90
BOARD POLICY
Sponsorship Policy Page 4 of 4
2. Funding Requests Less than $10,000
Organizations seeking a sponsorship with a total value of less than $10,000 must submit their request to Metro Vancouver in writing and must provide the following details with respect to the event or program for which sponsorship is being sought:
a) The official name of the event or program; b) The date(s) and times(s) of the event/program, as applicable; c) A general description of the event or program, including its overall objective(s); d) The overall budget for the event or program and the total cash or cash equivalent
amount of sponsorship being sought; e) A listing of the specific benefits that will accrue to Metro Vancouver should it proceed
with the sponsorship being sought. For proposals seeking sponsorship with a total value of less than $10,000, the proposal will initially be assessed by Metro Vancouver’s Senior Management Committee based on the criteria included in this policy. On behalf of Metro Vancouver, the Committee may either approve the sponsorship proposal, reject the sponsorship proposal, or refer it to the appropriate Metro Vancouver standing for further consideration.
I&F - 91
11182334
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations Department Date: April 13, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: National Zero Waste Council Update
RECOMMENDATION That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive for information the report titled National Zero Waste Council Update dated April 13, 2015.
PURPOSE To provide the Intergovernment and Finance Committee with an update on National Zero Waste Council activities and initiatives. BACKGROUND As part of its approved Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP), Metro Vancouver set aggressive waste reduction and diversion targets, some of which require advocacy beyond local jurisdictions to influence the design of products toward “cradle‐to‐cradle” approaches, and to create greater public awareness of the need to reduce and prevent waste. The ISWRMP commits Metro Vancouver to: “Developing a national zero waste marketing council so that cities across Canada can pool resources and develop common messaging, with national impact, on the need to reduce waste, resulting in informed and educated citizens on waste reduction opportunities”. At its regular meeting of July 26, 2013 the Metro Vancouver Board adopted a recommendation approving additional funds of $110,000 in 2014 and $110,000 in 2015 for a total of $220,000 to supplement existing in kind support for the National Zero Waste Council. NATIONAL ZERO WASTE COUNCIL Founded by Metro Vancouver in collaboration with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Council was launched at the 2013 Metro Vancouver Zero Waste Conference. In its first year of operation, the Council established a governance structure, four working groups and an administrative Secretariat housed within the External Relations Department at Metro Vancouver. In 2014 regular updates were provided to the Committee and focused on the Council’s first year priorities: recruitment, working group advancements, and ongoing organizational and business development. The Council hosted its first AGM on September 17, 2014. The Committee last received an update on the Council at its regularly scheduled meeting on November 6, 2014. Since the last update to the Committee, the Council has had three regularly‐scheduled Board meetings: November 26, 2014, December 4, 2014, March 3, 2014 with a special meeting hosted on March 25, 2014. This report summarizes the key directions and actions arising from these Board meetings.
5.6
I&F - 92
National Zero Waste Council Update Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 5
Governance and Organizational Development Changes At its March 3, 2015 meeting, the Council approved collapsing the Management and Collaboration Boards into one executive leadership board – the National Zero Waste Council Management Board (Attachment 1) with oversight of all Council activities. Streamlining the board structure is intended to maximize efficiency, and simplify administration, while also maintaining accountability. The operating guidelines for the new Management Board reflect additional guidance on composition to ensure a balanced ratio of business/industry associations/government and not‐for‐profits at the board level. 2015 Budget Allocation The Council, at its March 3, 2015 meeting (and subsequent special meeting on March 25), approved the allocation of funds to various projects against its 2015 operating budget (see Attachment 2). The 2015 budget operating budget totals: $388,274 including unspent funds from 2014 of $13,624; revenue from the BC Ministry of Environment in the amount of $7,800; salary and administrative costs associated with the management and implementation of the Council and Secretariat $256,850 (supported by in‐kind resources from Metro Vancouver); and project development support of $131,424. Included in the project development budget allocation are two strategic initiatives. These strategic projects, as well as working group projects are outlined in greater detail below. Strategic Projects National Roundtable on Waste Prevention: The Council is co‐hosting with the City of Toronto and the Packaging Association of Canada (PAC), a national roundtable on waste prevention and reduction on the shoulder of PAC EX – the Canadian Packaging Summit June 16‐17. This event will leverage leading industry stakeholders from government, industry and the not‐for‐profit community who are attending PAC EX. Such industry stakeholders include, for example, senior leaders from Canadian Tire, Loblaws, Tim Hortons, Unilever, etc. The national event will feature a focused roundtable discussion on developing and implementing strategies for enhancing collaboration and coordination between industry stakeholders and government in reducing waste at source, through both improved communication and harmonization of regulation. Three specific streams – packaging, food waste, and the circular economy ‐ will be the focus of break‐out discussions. The national roundtable aligns with the Council’s goal to convene national conversations on critical waste prevention issues. The Council is also exploring hosting a networking recruitment session alongside FCM’s AGM, June 5, 2015 in collaboration with the cities of Edmonton, Calgary and Metro Vancouver. This event would work in tandem with the national roundtable two weeks later. Strategic Planner: The Council has approved terms of reference for hiring a strategic planner, or similar, to work with the Management Board in 2015. The scope of work for this contract is to:
1. Help the NZWC understand the environment within which it is operating, and identify the strategic and unique ways in which the Council can contribute to and effect systems‐change around waste prevention and reduction across Canada.
2. Identify a business model, including specific financing strategies, that help evolve and strengthen the NZWC‘s organizational structure, and that supports the Council in becoming a self‐sustaining national entity capable of effecting change and bringing governments, businesses and non‐governmental organizations together.
I&F - 93
National Zero Waste Council Update Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2014
Page 3 of 5
3. Develop a Strategic Five Year Plan Implementation Plan (i.e. a concrete action plan) that will allow the National Zero Waste Council to identify and more deeply engage with a network of influential and collaborative partners, and that will secure the financial and other resources needed to enable the Council to pursue its mission and vision.
Working Group Updates and 2015 Projects Working groups continue to be the key mechanism to advance priority projects to deliver on the Council’s mandate – first projects are now completed, and near completion, and will be the focus of a website re‐launch in April.
1. National Communication Campaigns Working Group A key priority in 2014 was the creation of a web‐based sharing platform for successful communication campaigns focused on waste prevention. Two campaigns are currently featured on the site – Metro Vancouver’s Christmas Campaign, and City of Edmonton’s Go Bagless campaign. A contractor was secured to promote the sharing platform to municipalities and NGO’s across the country, and identify additional campaigns to place on the website. Work to date has discovered that while there are many recycling campaigns, there are very few reduce campaigns. Final results from this nation‐wide search are pending. The working group also completed a number of small research projects, including a literature review of behavioral change campaigns related to food waste; conducting analysis of how food scraps are disposed of, and how much of that food waste was avoidable (final analysis will be available spring 2015); and initial research through a collaboration with UBC’s Department of Psychology to determine current behavior related to dairy products with Best Before dates.
Work in 2015 includes populating and then promoting the web‐based sharing platform with appropriate campaigns, supporting the communication needs of other working groups as they complete/proceed with knowledge transfer/best practice/advocacy projects, and completing a best practices guide for municipalities around waste reduction and behavior change.
2. Food Working Group
Since its formation in 2014, the Food Working Group has been positioning to advance a policy that re‐positions and supports a tax incentive plan for businesses wishing to donate food. To this end, the working group secured the Conference Board of Canada to prepare a business case analysis of tax incentives, and additional supporting strategies. This report is complete and forms the foundation for the development of a policy platform to be presented to the Federal Finance Committee in 2015 in addition to building institutional and public support for the incentive. The Working Group is currently seeking a policy writer to prepare this policy platform, which includes collating a number of additional supporting documents including waste audits prepared by other Council member local governments. Once the policy platform has been prepared, an advocacy campaign will be crafted and implemented that will include FCM federal meetings in November 2015.
3. Product Design and Packaging Working Group
The Product Design and Packaging Working Group undertook a knowledge‐sharing initiative in 2014 that included a series of webinars focusing on lifecycle assessment and waste prevention, and the development of an on‐line portfolio featuring product and packaging
I&F - 94
National Zero Waste Council Update Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 4 of 5
design that delivers on waste prevention: Celebrating Canadian Design for Waste Prevention and Systems‐thinking. Guest speakers in the webinars ranged from the University of Calgary’s Athena Chair in Lifecycle Assessment in the Faculty of Environment Design, to DuPont’s Global Marketing Manager, Steelcase’s Manager of Design for the Environment, C2C’s Director of Technical Development, and more.
The online portfolio is almost completed, and is part of the NZWC’s new web presence. It features products ranging from Nature’s Path to Steelcase.
For 2015, the Working Group will continue to maintain and grow the current web portfolio of businesses, products and packaging from Canada, working with external reviewers from Emily Carr University of Art and Design, University of Calgary, UL Environment, etc.; conduct a scan of Awards programs that the Council might support/participate in/partner with to highlight and further recognize excellent design for waste prevention; and establish a compostable packaging design and assessment program. The latter will entail identifying best practices in compostable packaging design, and clarifying what constitutes compostable, and/or biodegradable packaging. The working group will share best information, create a common ground of knowledge around the possibilities and limitations of different materials, and what considerations and claims could/should be made when designing products and packaging.
The working group will also deliver a set of webinars, a white paper, and build out the online design portfolio.
4. Circular Economy Working Group
The Circular Economy Working Group completed a series of business case studies set within a North American context. These will be available shortly on the website and supported by an outreach initiative. With this core research completed, focus is now on business engagement – to identify key business challenges and opportunities at the industry‐level. A first event is planned for April 14, profiling Steve Creed, Director of Business Development for WRAP UK. Other public engagement events with a circular economy focus are listed in outreach and engagement.
Council Outreach and Engagement The Council continues to host events to facilitate knowledge sharing as well as publishing a bulletin (see Attachment 3). Recent activities include:
Webinar, December 4, 2014 LifeCycle Designs that Work in the Marketplace. Featuring guest speakers from Mother Park's Tea & Coffee, Solegear Bioplastics Inc., and Steelcase Inc.
Webinar, January 30, 2015 The Business Case for the Circular Economy, showcasing recently completed circular economy case study findings.
Webinar, April 13, 2015 Innovation and the Circular Economy, hosted in collaboration with the Conference Board of Canada and featuring Dell, Accenture and sharing economy expert David Van Seters.
Sustainability Dialogue, April 29, Advancing the Circular Economy – Innovations from Canada and the Netherlands, featuring the National Zero Waste Council, two Dutch subject matter experts and Luke Smeaton for Lighthouse Sustainable Centre and the National Industrial Symbiosis Program.
I&F - 95
National Zero Waste Council Update Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2014
Page 5 of 5
In addition to these events, a spring bulletin is planned and the Council is looking at opportunities to develop and implement a broad social media strategy. The Council now has a fully developed LinkedN page and twitter account: @nzwcouncil. The Council’s new website will go live in April. Next Steps The Council has Board meetings scheduled for May and July. The focus for the next six months is on delivering on the strategic projects identified above, as well as continuing working group delivery and identifying key milestones to be achieved for the Council’s second AGM, to be hosted in conjunction with Metro Vancouver’s fifth annual Zero Waste Conference scheduled for October 29, 2015. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS At its regular meeting of July 26, 2013 the Metro Vancouver Board adopted a recommendation approving additional funds of $110,000 in 2014 and $110,000 in 2015 for a total of $220,000 to supplement existing in kind support to cover project delivery and meeting/Annual General Meeting costs for the establishment of the National Zero Waste Council. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Since the fall of 2012, Metro Vancouver, in collaboration with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, has taken a leadership role in the development, launch and now implementation of the National Zero Waste Council. Formally launched at Metro Vancouver’s 2013 Zero Waste Conference, the Council’s membership base and partners’ network continues to grow. The Council’s governance structure also continues to evolve as the organization matures – and the Council’s strategic delivery on its mission will be enhanced in 2015 with the assistance of a strategic planner. Important work continues to be accomplished through the leadership of the Council’s working groups. Projects such as national communication campaigns, a policy to support a tax incentive plan for businesses wishing to donate food, prominent webinars, a Canadian design portfolio, and a series of business case studies are significant in scope, goals and objectives, with members active in project development and delivery and the potential to place the Council in a strong, national position to advocate for and support design and behavior change. Membership continues to grow with a national roundtable to be hosted with the City of Toronto and the Packaging Association of Canada. Council efforts for 2015 will focus on strategic development; cross‐sector, industry‐level collaboration; knowledge‐sharing and harmonized understanding of waste prevention strategies and approaches; and project delivery. Attachments: (Orbit #11182644) 1. National Zero Waste Council Management Board 2. 2015 Council Budget 3. National Zero Waste Council Membership 4. National Zero Waste Council Fall Bulletin
I&F - 96
ATTACHMENT 1
National Zero Waste Council Management Board GOVERNMENT and GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATIONS
Malcolm Brodie, Mayor, City of Richmond, Chair, Metro Vancouver Zero Waste Committee
Dan Casselman, Senior Policy Advisor, Federation of Canadian Municipalities Shelley Carroll, City Councillor ‐ Ward 33, City of Toronto Bill Karsten, Councillor, Halifax Regional Municipality and Vice‐chair of FCM’s
Standing Committee on Environmental Issues and Sustainable Development TBC, BC Ministry of Environment
BUSINESS and BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS
Corinne Atwood, Executive Director, BC Bottle and Recycling Depot Association Alan Blake, Executive Director, PAC NEXT Nancy Coulas, Director, Environment & Energy Policy, Canadian Manufacturers and
Exporters David Lawes, EPR Business Consultant Maury McCausland, Retail Operations Sustainability Specialist, London Drugs Nathalie St‐Pierre, Vice‐President ‐ Sustainability and Quebec, Retail Council of
Canada
NON PROFIT Frank Came, Senior Advisor, Globe Foundation Renee Gratton, Founding President, Construction Resource Initiatives Council Allen Lynch, Representative, International Board of Directors, Solid Waste
Association of North America
Brock Macdonald, Chief Executive Officer, Recycling Council of British Columbia Christina Seidel, Executive Director, Recycling Council of Alberta Vanessa Timmer, Executive Director, One Earth
I&F - 97
ATTACHMENT 2
REVENUES
Metro Vancouver Revenue ‐ External Relations $ 110,000
External Revenues ‐ MOE 7,800
Metro Vancouver Corporate Support (In Kind) 256,850
Surplus Carryforward ‐ 2014 13,624
TOTAL REVENUES $ 388,274
EXPENDITURES
Management Board $ 43,000
Food Waste 30,000
Circular Economy 15,000
Product Design and Packaging 15,000
National Communication Campaigns 14,500
Outreach and Support 4,000
Administration Department Support (In‐Kind) 256,850
Unallocated 9,924
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 388,274
NATIONAL ZERO WASTE COUNCIL
2015 BUDGET
2015
BUDGET
I&F - 98
MEMBERS GOVERNMENT BC Ministry of Environment City of Burnaby City of New Westminster City of North Vancouver City of Port Coquitlam City of Richmond City of Toronto
City of Vancouver Granville Island Office, CMHC Metro Vancouver Town of Cochrane Township of Langley Vancouver Board of Education Ville de Gatineau
BUSINESS AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS BC Bottle and Recycling Depot Association BSI Biodegradable Solutions ECODAS Ecoinspire Green Chair Recycling Green Spark Group
Immacutec Systems Technologies Inc. London Drugs One Earth SymbiAudit Inc. West Coast Reduction Ltd.
NON PROFIT/ACADEMIA Catalyst Agri‐Innovations Society Construction Resource Initiatives Council Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM)Food Banks Canada Globe Group Kwantlen Student Association Light House PAC NEXT Retail Council of Canada
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Control Strathcona Business Improvement Association Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) Recycling Council of Alberta Recycling Council of British Columbia Thompson River University
ADVISORS Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
Canadian Stewardship Services Alliance Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM)
ATTACHMENT 3
I&F - 99
CHAIR’S NOTESeptember 17th, 2014, marked a significant milestone in the evolution of the National Zero Waste Council (NZWC) – our inaugural Annual General Meeting, where we welcomed the new Vice Chair of the National Zero Waste Council, Brock Macdonald, the CEO of the Recycling Council of British Columbia. Brock brings with him over 14 years of valuable waste management, Extended Producer Responsibility and recycling experience. We also welcomed Corinne Atwood, BC Bottle and Recycling Depot Association; Maury McCausland, London Drugs; and, Vanessa Timmer, One Earth to
their new positions on the Collaboration and Management Boards.
In the Council’s first year, we have seen remarkable progress in the maturation of the Council, and in the development of some concrete strategies for helping reduce the amount of waste produced in Canada.
One aspect of the Council that I am extremely proud of is attracting national attention, with the active involvement on our two Boards and among our advisory group organizations from across the country – from Winnipeg to Toronto to Ottawa and on to Halifax.
And as our membership continues to grow, the Council has also gained national, international and federal recognition thanks in part to the ongoing NZWC webinar series and to appearances at numerous events (see Council Calendar), including presentations to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development and the Australian Zero Waste Conference.
Having initially established a strong foundation through its membership and governance, work is now well underway on the important projects being developed by the Council’s four working groups to champion waste prevention and promote changes in the design, production and use of products in Canada (see Working Groups).
As the end of the year rapidly approaches, I look forward with anticipation to 2015, and the achievements the Council is on course to deliver, as we work together to address waste generation in Canada.
Sincerely,
Malcolm Brodie Chair, National Zero Waste Council
COUNCIL BULLETIN
NEW MEMBERS We are pleased to welcome the following organizations to the Council:
Catalyst Agri-Innovations Society www.aces-bc.ca
City of Burnaby www.burnaby.ca
City of Port Coquitlam www.portcoquitlam.ca
City of North Vancouver www.cnv.org
City of Vancouver www.vancouver.ca
ECODAS www.ecodas.com
Immacutec Systems Technologies Inc. www.immacutec.com
Kwantlen Student Association www.kusa.ca
Light House Sustainable Building Centre www.sustainablebuildingcentre.com
London Drugs www.londondrugs.com
One Earth www.oneearthweb.org
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society rmrecycling.org
Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Council www.saskwastereduction.ca
Thompson Rivers University www.tru.ca
WE
LCO
ME
FALL 2014Canada united in the achievement of zero waste, now and for future generations
continues next page
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 100
COUNCIL WORKING GROUPS – GET INVOLVED!
PRODUCT DESIGN AND PACKAGING WORKING GROUPThe Product Design and Packaging Working Group is advancing a project titled Celebrating Canadian Design for Waste Prevention and Systems-thinking to influence behavior change and product design. Using an internally developed assessment criteria for designs that deliver on waste prevention and reduction, the working group is creating a portfolio of case studies and success stories. Experts in the fields of lifecycle thinking, sustainability assessment and accreditation, and leading edge businesses already designing with waste prevention in mind have also been recruited to assist with criteria, portfolio development, and webinar-based knowledge transfer. This web-based portfolio will be launched in early 2015.
Webinars can be viewed here and here, and feature experts ranging from Louis St. Pierre, Emily Carr University of Art and Design to Yasmin Siddiqi, Dupont Packaging.
CIRCULAR ECONOMY WORKING GROUPThe Circular Economy Working Group is undertaking exploratory research and engagement to better understand business needs, and to demonstrate the business case, for a circular economy. As part of this work, five case studies are being completed in the areas of: circular supplies; resource recovery; product life extension; sharing platforms; and product as a service. An additional set of cases studies along the theme of textiles are also being completed by the SFU Beedie School of Business, and business engagement is underway to build support for a cross-Canada network of businesses and organizations interested in furthering circular approaches. The outcome of this work will form part of an online platform of information on the circular economy, early in 2015.
NATIONAL COMMUNICATION CAMPAIGNS WORKING GROUPThe National Communication Campaigns Working Group is focused on sharing proven, replicable waste prevention campaigns with governments, NGO’s and businesses across Canada who share the goal of fostering a new social norm where citizens are increasingly mindful of how their choices and behaviours can reduce waste. The Working Group is about to launch an interactive web portal that will feature waste reduction campaigns proven to be effective and aligned with Council objectives. Members will be able to repurpose the campaigns and communication collateral for their own use, taking advantage of work others have done and saving valuable internal resources. Metro Vancouver’s Create Memories – Not Garbage (see right) and Edmonton’s Go Bagless campaigns will be amongst the first campaigns shared.
In 2015, the Working Group will begin exploring opportunities to develop a truly national waste prevention campaign.
WO
RK
ING
GR
OU
PS
NEW MEMBERS Town of Cochrane www.cochrane.ca
Township of Langley www.tol.ca
Vancouver Board of Education (Vancouver School Board) www.vsb.bc.ca
Ville de Gatineau www.gatineau.ca
SHARING CAMPAIGNS: CELEBRATING THE HOLIDAY SEASON For the past five years Metro Vancouver’s popular holiday campaign – Create Memories Not Garbage – has successfully encouraged residents to reduce waste during the festive period. Create Memories Not Garbage is now available for others from across Canada to adopt for their own use.
Resources and artwork range from bus shelter ads and posters to radio, television and print campaign materials. Create Memories, Not Garbage is easy to scale according to time and budget.
All of the creative work associated with the campaign, including videos, are now available to download and can be re-branded with your logo.
For more information, contact Lena.Zordan@metrovancouver.org.
CREATE MEMORIES, NOT GARBAGE.
RYAN artwork, Black Press = 4 5/16” x 8”h
You can be a #GreenAngel too. For ideas, go to www.metrovancouver.org
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 101
FOOD WORKING GROUPThe Food Working Group is undertaking policy development that focuses on removing organics from the waste stream and bringing them to food communities in need, with one tool being a tax incentive plan for businesses wishing to donate food. Initial research is being undertaken by the Conference Board of Canada, with the intention of preparing a policy proposal in the new year, and a policy change campaign to commence later in 2015.
The Group is also pleased to report a significant increase in its active membership, which now includes Metro Richelieu Inc., Food Banks Canada, Halifax Regional Municipality, Canadian Councils of Ministers for the Environment, Solid Waste Association of North America, City of Toronto, BC Ministry of Environment, and Metro Vancouver.
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE GROUP – FORMING Renée Gratton, Collaboration Board Member, is leading efforts to establish a working group on construction and building waste. If interested in participating as a co-lead, or as member, of this working group please contact the Secretariat.
The Working Groups welcome input from other businesses, local governments and community organizations from across the country. If your organization has a campaign or circular economy case study to share or an excellent Canadian product or packaging design to recommend, contact the Secretariat at admin@nzwc.ca.
INSIGHT AND COMMENTARY
DESIGNING FOR WASTE PREVENTION With the rapidity of advances in resource efficiency, deciding which path to follow in the pursuit of sustainability is not always obvious. But, both eco-efficiency and/or circular economy-based strategies can offer benefits, in terms of financial and environmental performance.
Recent Developments Include:
• Four key considerations for developing a sustainable packaging strategy, suggested by the Sustainable Packaging Coalition and PE International, around the themes of leadership, lifecycle, stakeholder expectation and sales impact.
• An in-depth report from Australia The Role of Packaging in Minimising Food Waste in the Supply Chain includes discussion of balancing the trade-offs which exist in relation to packaging and food waste.
• The growth of design for disassembly and the commitment of businesses to facilitating perpetual as opposed to single use. For example, the Steelcase chair, as presented by Matteo Kausch of the Cradle-to-Cradle Product Innovations Institute and as discussed by Joseph Chiodo, at the Zero Waste Conference.
WO
RK
ING
GR
OU
PS
COUNCIL NEWS
NZWC KEY IN DELIVERY OF UPSTREAM WASTE PREVENTION AND REDUCTIONThe report State of Waste Management in Canada, recently prepared for the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment makes several recommendations for furthering waste prevention and reduction in Canada, including industry and government collaboration through the NZWC.
ZERO WASTE CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 16, 2014Last month, the National Zero Waste Council presented at Metro Vancouver’s Fourth Annual Zero Waste Conference in Vancouver. More than 500 delegates heard inspiring keynote and panel presentations, including:
• Jeremy Rifkin, author of The Zero Marginal Cost Society
• Dayna Baumeister, Biomimicry 3.8,
• Tim Brooks, The LEGO Group,
• Markus Laubscher, Philips
• Nadine Gudz, Interface
• Mike Biddle, MBA Polymers Inc.
All presentations now available online.
CBC RADIO FEATURE In August, the Council was featured on CBC Radio podcast series “What a Waste”.
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 102
SPO
TLIGH
THOUSE OF COMMONS STANDING COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT JUNE 12, 2014Raymond Louie, Vice Chair, Metro Vancouver Board, and First Vice-President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities, presented to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development as part of their study of the management of municipal solid waste and industrial materials. Further dialogue with the federal government is anticipated as the Council continues to advocate nationally.
JOIN US ON LINKEDIN – NEW COUNCIL GROUP DISCUSSION PAGE The Council has a new LinkedIn group discussion page. Please invite your colleagues and networks to join along with you.
COUNCIL NEWS
MEMBER SPOTLIGHT
LONDON DRUGS Started in 1945 as a single pharmacy store, London Drugs now comprises 78 stores across four provinces, selling everything from MP3 players to shampoo, greetings cards and cameras. Since introducing expanded recycling programs in 2006, London Drugs has experienced a 90 percent reduction in waste chain wide, with a goal to reach 95 percent in 2015.
Today, London Drugs is tackling waste in their own supply chains. They are working with suppliers and manufacturers at the design stage to reduce packaging while maintaining functionality and product protection and specifically finding alternatives to Styrofoam. For example, Styrofoam packaging for their glass watering bulb product was redesigned out of recyclable cardboard, providing a more sustainable solution from the factory itself. London Drugs’ home brand Certified Data Computers has replaced Styrofoam packaging with molded blown fibre. Styrofoam has also been eliminated as a packaging material from their imported furniture.
London Drugs is also committed to closing-the-loop with their suppliers. They currently have a partnership with Cascades Recovery where the company processes cardboard from warehouses, stores and customers, and uses the material to manufacture Cascades brand toilet tissue and antibacterial towels which are in turn, sold on London Drugs shelves.
http://www.londondrugs.com/
CONSTRUCTION RESOURCE INITIATIVES COUNCILLed by the building industry, the Construction Resource Initiatives Council (CRI Council) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization, which was founded in 2011 as a platform for knowledge sharing and to drive change in the way that building resources are used and perceived.
A partner of the United Nation Environment Programme Global Partnership on Waste Management, the CRI Council seeks to support, develop and implement initiatives which will ultimately eliminate building waste. This mission has given rise to the CRI Council International Summit, which this year will focus on ‘Creating Zero Waste and Living Communities’, and to the CRI Council’s pioneering, Mission 2030, which aims to end construction, renovation and demolition waste to landfill by 2030. This ambitious goal is intended as a call to action for the global building industry; making tackling waste and improving resource efficiency a matter of priority.
As part of Mission 2030, the CRI Council is launching its ‘Integration Project’, an initiative designed to foster collaboration throughout the building and construction value chain, as well as a development stewardship program and protocol to motivate and support waste reduction in the sector.
http://www.cricouncil.com/
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 103
NEW AND NOTEWORTHY
THE CIRCULAR ECONOMYA recent report from JWT Intelligence explores the trend of corporations shifting away from traditional business models to alternative and more circular approaches to generating profits. The Circular Economy “…examines how brands from Puma and Ford to Ikea and Starbucks are upending various elements of the status quo: leasing rather than selling products, remanufacturing goods, seeking ways to extend the life of products or their components, finding more value in waste, or designing for circular use…”
Accenture’s strategy report The Circular Advantage, was also published in June. Based on the analysis of 120 companies which have innovatively addressed resource efficiency, the report identifies five new business models and the technologies which support them, and how businesses can make the move to more circular models.
FOODA multi-million dollar, cross-sectoral, research project, NOSHAN, is currently being conducted in the EU to identify “…the process and technologies needed to use food waste for [animal] feed production at low cost, low energy and with maximal valorization of starting wastes”. If successful the NOSHAN project, which is expected to conclude in 2016, will facilitate the efficient substitution of feed with food waste; reducing not only waste but also the cost of feed and the competition between food and feed production – both of which need land and water. A Canadian example of this work is Enterra, which has developed a method which uses insects to upcycle the nutrients contained within surplus food sourced collected from grocery stores and food distributors into sustainable protein and oils, to feed fish and livestock.
Provision Coalition recently released a report on Developing an Industry-Led Approach to Addressing Food Waste in Canada. The report, based on a mapping-exercise of food waste in the context of Ontario’s and Canada’s agri-food industry, identifies opportunities for businesses in the food supply chain to streamline their operations, reduce food waste and environmental impact, whilst increasing profit. However, the research highlights that tackling food waste is hampered by the lack of an agreed definition and metrics to measure scale and impact. A follow up report that quantifies the value of waste generated in the commercial sector is anticipated in November 2014.
Launched in France earlier this year, the Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables Campaign, is a private-sector led initiative which aims to challenge consumers’ shopping habits by making purchasing “differently beautiful” produce more acceptable and affordable. Offering a 30 percent discount on atypical fruits and vegetables, Intermarché (the third largest supermarket chain in France) hopes to reduce the waste of perfectly edible food from its stores. Watch Canadian Food Retailers for any signs of following this lead.
NE
W A
ND
NO
TEW
OR
THY
RE
CYCLING SECTOR
PRODUCTION
DISTRIBUTIO
N
CONSUMPTION
RE-USE
/REP
AIR
/REC
YCLE
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 104
PRODUCT DESIGN AND PACKAGINGInnovation around packaging, or rather to get around packaging, has been taken to a new level with the release of products in edible packaging. Examples include WikiPearls, a range of foods contained within edible ‘skins’ such as frozen yoghurt in an edible fruit skin and Loliware biodegradable, edible cups. However, whilst these may function as well as more traditional packaging, the challenge remains in convincing consumers and retailers.
INDUSTRY AND NEW BUSINESS MODELSThe sharing economy, where individuals and organizations share human and/or physical resources, is on the rise. The latest example, Stuffstr, is a retailer-branded app designed to help consumers maximize the lifetime of everything they buy through repair, recirculation and reuse.
THE COUNCIL CALENDAR
Our profile continues to grow following a summer of successful events including presentations by Council Chair Malcolm Brodie at the Recycling Council of British Columbia 40th Annual Zero Waste Conference, in Whistler, on May 29 and by the Chair of the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors and Port Coquitlam Mayor, Greg Moore, at the Australian Waste & Recycle 2014 Conference, as well as the previously mentioned presentation to the House of Commons Standing Committee and at the annual Zero Waste Conference in Vancouver.
Malcolm Brodie and Vice Chair Brock Macdonald, were also keynote presenters speaking on the topic of Circular Economy at the Simon Fraser University Public Square Event on October 21.
UPCOMING EVENTS INCLUDE:
• Construction Resource Initiatives Council 2014 Summit - Creating Zero Waste and Living Communities, Ottawa, ON, November 17 – 19
• Canadian Waste to Resources Conference, Mississauga, ON, November 18 – 21
• NZWC Joint Board Meeting, November 26
• Circular Economy Business and Industry Roundtable, December 3
• Product Design and Packaging Working Group Webinar, December 4 (see over)
CA
LEN
DA
R
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 105
MEMBER SERVICES:
NZWC is pleased to announce an upcoming webinar, hosted by the Product Design and Packaging Working Group. Council webinars support dialogue, knowledge transfer, and collaboration toward a waste prevention agenda in Canada.
UPCOMING WEBINAR - DESIGNS THAT WORK IN THE MARKETPLACEDecember 4, 9:00AM – 10:00AM PST
• Paul Yang, Manager of Packaging Development and Sustainability, Mother Parkers
• Additional speakers TBC
This is the third and final webinar from the Product and Packaging series. To participate please register at www.nzwc.ca. Members of the NZWC can view webinar details, including speaker bios on the NZWC Extranet. If you are not already a member, please contact the Secretariat at admin@nzwc.ca
The two previous webinars, described below, can be viewed on the NZWC website www.nzwc.ca.
PAST WEBINAR – LIFECYCLE THINKING FOR WASTE PREVENTION: WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW?October 29, 2014 The use of lifecycle thinking and assessment tools (LCAs) to define a ‘sustainable’ product or package can be challenging, especially when looking for specific outcomes like solid waste prevention. Experts in business and from certifying bodies who apply lifecycle thinking presented what they believe are the possibilities, limitations, and considerations for applying lifecycle thinking to zero waste.
• Yasmin Siddiqi, Global Marketing Director, DuPont Packaging
• Matteo Kausch, Director of Technical Development, Cradle-to-Cradle Product Innovations Institute
• Bill Hoffmann, Senior Scientist - Sustainability Standards, UL Environment
PAST WEBINAR – MAKING THE MOST OF DESIGN FOR WASTE PREVENTION AND REDUCTIONOctober 8, 2014 Giving a broad-stroke introduction to considerations in applying Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), the webinar not only introduced the concept of LCA but also discussed how the results of an LCA might be realized within an organization and/or across a supply chain. From highlighting the major role that executives and designers have in determining the environmental impact of a product and its production, to reducing the risk of unintended consequences and the need for a whole-system approach.
• Getachew Asefa Wondimagegnehu, Associate Professor and Athena Chair in Life Cycle Assessment in Design, Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary
• Wendy Jedlička, President, Jedlička Design and founding faculty member, Sustainable Design Program, MCAD
• Louise St. Pierre, Associate Professor, Emily Carr University of Art and Design
This news bulletin is developed by the National Zero Waste Council Secretariat. Contact us at admin@nzwc.ca
ME
MB
ER
SER
VIC
ES
ATTACHMENT 4
I&F - 106
11168826
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Allan Neilson, General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment
Ann Rowan, Sustainability Strategist, Planning, Policy and Environment Date: April 9, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance
RECOMMENDATION a) That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to send a draft submission to the
Chair of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to reiterate Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing objections concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and the rule that prohibits the appointment of local elected officials as local representatives; and
b) That the Board ratify the Metro Vancouver submission.
PURPOSE This report summarizes the elements of the Canada Transportation Act Review and identifies an opportunity for Metro Vancouver to provide input on the governance of port authorities through the review process. Submissions related to governance must be received by April 30, 2015; however, a draft submission will be accepted by the Review Panel. BACKGROUND On June 25, 2014, the Minister of Transport launched a statutory review of the Canada Transport Act. The Act is the umbrella economic legislation for Canada’s national transportation system. The review was triggered by the backlog in grain deliveries from the 2013‐14 crop year, but was structured to include an examination of the Act’s broad goal of a “commercially based, market‐driven, multi‐modal transportation system that delivers the best possible service in support of economic growth and prosperity.” The Review Panel leading the review is chaired by David Emerson and includes five advisors, one of whom is Marcella Szel, Chair of the TransLink Board. The review was brought to the attention of the Regional Planning Committee on February 27, 2015, in a presentation by Port Metro Vancouver. In her comments to the Committee, Penny Priddy, the sole municipal representative on the Port’s Board of Directors, drew attention to the scope of the review and to the review process. Staff met with officials from the Review Secretariat on March 20, 2015, to better understand the purpose of the exercise, and the opportunity to make a submission to the Review Panel.
5.7
I&F - 107
Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 4
CANADA TRANSPORTATION ACT REVIEW Scope The review will examine whether the national transportation system has the capacity and adaptability to allow it and its users to respond effectively to changing conditions and markets at the domestic and global levels. In keeping with this scope, the Panel is expected to provide advice to the federal Minister of Transportation on “steps to help ensure that the national transportation system has the capacity and nimbleness to support economic activity across all sectors over the medium‐ and long‐term.” In performing its work, the Panel has been asked to consider a number of specific issues, including:
how strategic transportation gateways can be developed and leveraged to support Canadian prosperity through linkages to global markets;
how the improved alignment of transportation policies, regulations and/or use of innovative financing mechanisms can be used to optimize the quality and utilization of transportation infrastructure capacity;
whether adjustments to transportation safety and environmental regimes are need to continue to achieving high standards for safe and sustainable transportation, given increasing system volumes/demands;
how safety and well‐being concerns related to rail transportation (including the movement of dangerous goods) through communities can be addressed; and
whether current governance and service delivery models for key federal operations, assets and agencies – including port authorities – can be improved.
A link to the review website can be found at the end of this report. Governance in the Context of the Review As set out in a federal discussion paper that was prepared for the review, it is important to “assess existing governance frameworks and practices of the transportation network in order to determine whether they continue to meet the evolving needs of Canadians and businesses.” The paper comments on the governance structure of federal transportation agencies by noting that, “recognizing the importance of these entities for the oversight of diverse aspects of transportation in Canada, from resolving competition complaints, to overseeing safe shipping, to operating billions of dollars’ worth of infrastructure, it is important to ensure they are structured to enable rigorous oversight, and balanced, timely decisions.” Timeline The launch date for the review was June 25, 2014; the Chair of the Review Panel is responsible for submitting the final report to the Minister on December 24, 2015. A review website has been set up to receive submissions from interested parties. Submissions continue to be accepted despite a posted deadline that has already passed. Submissions will be incorporated into the Review Panel’s analysis, which is also being informed by contracted research and on‐going stakeholder consultations. According to officials from the review secretariat, input from industry associations, think tanks and the public continues to be received. Metro Vancouver staff have learned that input on the topic of governance will be accepted only until April 30, 2015, a deadline that falls before the next Metro Vancouver Board meeting. Staff have confirmed with the review secretariat that a draft submission reflecting the ideas and concerns of
I&F - 108
Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 3 of 4
Metro Vancouver will be accepted if received by the end of April, 2015. Ratification of the draft submission by the Board can follow in May, 2015. PORT METRO VANCOUVER GOVERNANCE There are eleven members on the Port Metro Vancouver Board of Directors: seven appointed by the federal government based on the recommendations of industry; one appointed by the federal government without industry input; one appointed by the BC government; one appointed by the other Western Provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba); and one appointed by the sixteen port municipalities within Metro Vancouver. The sole municipal representative is not allowed to be a local elected official. When Port Metro Vancouver’s governance structure was being established in 2007 and 2008, Metro Vancouver raised strong objections with the Minister of Transport, concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port’s Board, and the rule that prohibited the appointment of local elected officials. Metro Vancouver requested that the structure be amended to allow for three local government appointees, and to eliminate the restriction on elected official participation. Metro Vancouver requested, specifically, that the federal government amend the legislation to state that “three locally elected officials, selected by the Minister from a list submitted by the Chair of Metro Vancouver, be appointed as voting members of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Board”. Metro Vancouver’s requested amendments were not endorsed by the Minister. The current Canada Transportation Act Review provides an opportunity to reassert Metro Vancouver’s original concerns, all of which remain valid today. The inclusion of a greater local representation on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and of local elected officials as Board members, is appropriate given that sixteen of Metro Vancouver’s member municipalities are port cities – a unique situation in Canadian centres with federal port authorities. Greater representation would allow, most importantly, for a balance of perspectives at the decision‐making table. Under the current structure, local government and community interests are too easily eclipsed by national economic considerations, efforts to promote international trade, and the interests of industry. These considerations and interests are important, but should not be given disproportionate weight in decisions made on the expansion of port activities, on changes to the variety of commodities and products handled, on the acquisition and use of lands in the region, and on other Port matters. Decisions on these matters have implications for the region’s quality of life, its growth management efforts, the safety of local communities and the natural environment across Metro Vancouver. Additional local government representation at the Board table, and the inclusion of local elected officials, would help to ensure that these implications received proper consideration. A draft submission expressing Metro Vancouver’s ongoing concerns with Port Metro Vancouver’s current governance model is attached to this report.
I&F - 109
Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 4 of 4
ALTERNATIVES 1. a) That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to send a draft submission to
the Chair of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to reiterate Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing objections concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and the rule that prohibits the appointment of local elected officials as local representatives; and b) That the Board ratify the Metro Vancouver submission.
2. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee provide alternative direction to the staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications to this recommendation. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION On June 25, 2014, the Minister of Transport launched a statutory review of the Canada Transport Act. The Act is the umbrella economic legislation for Canada’s national transportation system. The review was triggered by the backlog in grain deliveries from the 2013‐14 crop year, but was structured to include an examination of the Act’s broad goal of a “commercially based, market‐driven, multi‐modal transportation system that delivers the best possible service in support of economic growth and prosperity.” The Review Panel leading the review is chaired by David Emerson and includes five advisors, one of whom is Marcella Szel, Chair of the TransLink Board. The review will include an assessment of whether current governance and service delivery models of key federal agencies, including port authorities, can be improved. When Port Metro Vancouver’s governance structure was being established in 2007, Metro Vancouver raised strong objections with the Minister concerning the inadequate number of municipal representatives on the Port’s Board, and the rule which prohibited the appointment of local elected officials. The current Canada Transportation Act Review provides an opportunity to reassert Metro Vancouver’s original concerns, all of which remain valid today. The window for providing input is limited. Input on the topic of governance will be accepted only until April 30, 2015, a deadline that falls before the next Metro Vancouver Board meeting. Staff have confirmed with the review secretariat that a draft submission reflecting the ideas and concerns of Metro Vancouver will be accepted if received by the end of April, 2015. Ratification of the draft submission by the Board can follow in May, 2015. Attachment: Letter to David Emerson, Chair of the Canadian Transportation Act Review Reference: Canadian Transportation Act Review
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/ctareview2014/canada‐transportation‐act‐review.html
I&F - 110
Executive Offices
Tel. 604 432‐6215 Fax 604 451‐6614
File: CR‐07‐04‐TRA The Honourable David L. Emerson, Chair Canada Transportation Act Review Panel secretariat@reviewcta‐examenltc.gc.ca Dear Chair Emerson: Re: Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance Please accept this submission by Metro Vancouver to the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel. The Panel, we understand, has been asked to examine a range of issues as part of the Canada Transportation Act Review, including models of governance for key federal operations, assets and agencies such as port authorities. Metro Vancouver’s submission to the Review Panel focuses on the issue of governance. The submission, more specifically, reiterates Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing concerns with the governance structure of Port Metro Vancouver. When Port Metro Vancouver’s governance structure was being established in 2007 and 2008, Metro Vancouver raised strong objections with the federal Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port’s Board, and the rule that prohibited the appointment of local elected officials. Metro Vancouver asked that the structure be amended to allow for additional local government appointees, and to eliminate the restriction on elected official participation. Metro Vancouver requested, in particular, that the federal government amend the legislation to state that “three locally elected officials, selected by the Minister from a list submitted by the Chair of Metro Vancouver, be appointed as voting members of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Board”. Metro Vancouver’s objections raised in 2007 and 2008 were not addressed at the time. They remain valid today. The inclusion of a greater local representation on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and of local elected officials as Board members, is appropriate given that sixteen of Metro Vancouver’s member municipalities are port cities – a unique situation in Canadian centres with federal port authorities. Greater representation would allow, most importantly, for a balance of perspectives at the decision‐making table. Under the current structure, local government and community interests are too easily eclipsed by national economic considerations, efforts to promote international trade, and the interests of industry. These considerations and interests are important, but should not be given disproportionate weight in decisions made on the expansion of port activities, on changes to the variety of commodities and products handled, on the acquisition and use of lands in the region, and on other Port matters. Decisions on these matters have implications for the region’s quality of life, its growth management efforts, the safety of local communities and the natural environment across Metro Vancouver. Additional local government representation at the Board table, and the inclusion of local elected officials, would help to ensure that these implications received proper consideration.
5.7Attachment
I&F - 111
Canada Transportation Act Review Team Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance
Page 2 of 2
Metro Vancouver urges the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to recommend that the federal government change the governance structure of Port Metro Vancouver to allow for an increase in the number of local government representatives on Port Metro Vancouver’s Board of Directors, and to allow for the appointment of local elected officials to those positions. Please accept this submission in its draft form, as adopted by Metro Vancouver’s Intergovernment and Finance Committee at its April 23, 2015 meeting. The submission will be considered and ratified by the Metro Vancouver Board at its next meeting on May 15, 2015. Confirmation of the Board’s ratification will be sent to you after that meeting. Sincerely, Greg Moore, Chair Metro Vancouver GM/AN/ar
I&F - 112
11171595
To: GVRD Board of Directors From: Chris Plagnol, Director Board and Information Services/Corporate Officer, Legal and
Legislative Services Date: April 13, 2015 Meeting Date: May 15, 2015 Subject: GVRD Nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors
RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board designate Raymond Louie as Metro Vancouver nominee to the E‐Comm Board of Directors for the 2015‐2016 term.
PURPOSE To seek a Board designate as Metro Vancouver’s nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors pursuant to the provisions of the E‐Comm Members’ Agreement. BACKGROUND On November 30, 2012 the Board adopted Greater Vancouver Regional District E‐Comm Members’ Agreement Authorization Bylaw No. 1181, 2012 to authorize the subscription by GVRD for a Class B1 Share (for public works) of E‐Comm and entry into the E‐Comm Emergency Communications for Southwest British Columbia Incorporated Members’ Agreement. E‐Comm is a non‐profit agency that supplies emergency communications and related services to emergency service organizations, municipalities, regional districts, provincial government, federal government, and government agencies. The main responsibilities of E‐Comm are to maintain the wide‐area radio system for police, fire and ambulance services; operate the regional 9‐1‐1 call centre, and provide dispatch services for various police and fire departments. A 19 member Board of Directors, elected annually by the E‐Comm shareholders, provides governance to E‐Comm and is responsible for overseeing the Corporation’s strategic direction, finances and operating results. The E‐Comm Board of Directors meets five times a year in addition to two strategic planning and education sessions. METRO VANCOUVER NOMINEE E‐Comm has requested GVRD (Metro Vancouver) to designate its nominee to the E‐Comm Board of Directors for the 2015‐2016 year by May 28, 2015. Under section 4.2.1.6 of the E‐Comm Members’ Agreement, GVRD is the lone shareholder in the Class B group at this time. Pursuant to the Members’ Agreement, GVRD is entitled to designate one individual for election to the E‐Comm Board of Directors annually. The 2015‐2016 Board will be elected by the shareholders at the Annual General Meeting in June. E‐Comm has advised while shareholders are required to elect directors every year, there is no limit on the number of terms any
1 Class B shares are issued for each service that intends to use the radio system but is not participating at the present time.
5.8
I&F - 113
GVRD Nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015
Page 2 of 2
one director can serve, and E‐Comm believes it is in all shareholders’ best interest when a director can serve multiple terms. Director Gayle Martin is currently the Board’s designated nominee. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board designate Raymond Louie as its nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of
Directors. 2. That the Board designate an alternative nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications to Metro Vancouver as E‐Comm remunerates its board members for meeting attendance. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION Under the E‐Comm Members’ Agreement, GVRD is the lone shareholder in the Class B Public Works group at this time. E‐Comm will be holding its Annual General Meeting in June and, in preparation, has requested Metro Vancouver to nominate one individual to the E‐Comm Board of Directors. Alternative 1 is recommended by the Metro Vancouver Board Chair. Attachment: Correspondence dated March 30, 2015 from Jody Robertson, E‐Comm Corporate
Secretary, regarding E‐Comm Board of Directors Designate for the 2015‐2016 term
I&F - 114
5.8ATTACHMENT
I&F - 115
I&F - 116
11193744
To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Utilities Committee Date: April 16, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a Standby/Emergency Power Generation Source
RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Province of BC and to BC Hydro requesting that the decision to close the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant be reconsidered and that it be maintained as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver.
PURPOSE To forward for consideration the concerns raised by the City of Port Moody regarding the closure of the Burrard Thermal power plant. BACKGROUND At the April 1, 2015 Utilities Committee meeting, members were informed about the City of Port Moody’s concerns related to the decision by BC Hydro and the Province to close the power generating facility at the Burrard Thermal Plant leaving the Lower Mainland reliant upon power from outside of the area. The City of Port Moody requested that Metro Vancouver encourage BC Hydro and the Province to keep the plant open and capable of generating power to 750,000 homes, based on its current capacity. Staff was directed to:
refer to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee for consideration the City of Port Moody’s concerns, and request that the GVRD Board encourage the Province and BC Hydro to preserve the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver.
The attached correspondence provides additional information regarding the City of Port Moody Council’s request for support in this matter. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Province of BC and to BC Hydro requesting that the
decision to close the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant be reconsidered and that it be maintained as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver.
2. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee provide alternate direction. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION
5.9
I&F - 117
Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a Standby/Emergency Power Generation Source Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2014
Page 2 of 2
At the April 1, 2015 Utilities Committee meeting, members were informed about the City of Port Moody’s concerns related to the decision by BC Hydro and the Province to close the power generating facility at the Burrard Thermal Plant. The matter was referred to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee for consideration. It was requested that the GVRD Board support Port Moody Council’s petition to preserve the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver. Alternative 1 is recommended. Attachment: Correspondence from the City of Port Moody dated March 31, 2015 re: Preservation
of Burrard Thermal as a standby/emergency power generation source. (Orbit # 11193847)
I&F - 118
March 31, 2015 File No. 303198 Mayor Mussatto Chair, Metro Vancouver Utilities Committee c/o Metro Vancouver 4330 Kingsway Burnaby, BC V3H4G8 Dear Mayor Mussatto; Re: Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a standby/emergency power generation source As we discussed, please find attached information in regards to Port Moody City Council seeking support for preserving BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver. As you will see, BC Hydro and the Provincial Government are moving to close the power generating facility at the Burrard Thermal Plant, and relying 100% for power to the Lower Mainland to come from far outside of our area. In fact, the reports indicate they will be relying on power coming from the Interior or further away, through hundreds of kilometers of transmission lines. We don’t feel that this gives residents of the Lower Mainland the power security that we currently have, with Burrard capable of providing power to up to 700,000 homes, relatively ‘clean’ and efficiently. BC Hydro’s own Integrated Resource Plan (2013) shows a shortage of generating capacity on the grid as imminent as 2018 – we should not be taking existing power generation offline when we know we will be needing to increase generation in the near future. You will also notice that the operating costs of Burrard Thermal are much lower than one of the proposed alternatives, currently operating at Campbell River. Attached is a copy of our motions to petition Hydro and the Provincial Government to keep the plant operatonal, and we would like to put before the Metro Board a resolution : THAT the Board , in support of the petition from the City of Port Moody, respectfully requests that BC Hydro and the Province commit to maintaining the generating function of Burrard Thermal as a backup/emergency power source for the Greater Vancouver area.
I&F - 119
Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a standby/emergency power generation source March 31, 2015
2
Appreciating that this is a draft I am preparing very much last minute in an attempt to have this item on table at tomorrow’s Utility Committee meeting, I would welcome any feeback or amendment to the motion for clarity. I understand that this may need to be considered a Notice of Motion, but wonder alternately if a motion to refer to staff to bring back to the next meeting could instead be made, to avoid an extra month of delay in the process. My apologies for the late preparation of this document, and I appreciate your kind attention. Yours truly, Mike Clay Mayor & Metro Director CC: Attached: Letter, LMLGA re motion and supporting documents
I&F - 120
I&F - 121
I&F - 122
I&F - 123
I&F - 124
I&F - 125
I&F - 126
11151083 April 7, 2015
Intergovernment and Finance Committee
2015 Work Plan The Intergovernment and Finance Committee is the standing committee of the Metro Vancouver Board that provides advice and recommendations on policies, bylaws, plans, programs, budgets and issues related to general government and corporate activities for the governing bodies of Metro Vancouver. In addition, it serves as the Board Executive Committee and provides guidance and oversight on all personnel matters. While the activities of the Committee will vary throughout the year depending upon issues that arise, an overview of some of the key actions in the 2015 work plan for the Committee are described below:
External Relations
International Program and Event Authorizations
University of British Columbia – MOU
Finance
Regional District Service Area, General Government and Corporate Support Annual Budgets Oversight
Overall Annual Budget and Five Year Financial Plan approval for all legal entities
Long term financial plan policy direction Human Resources
Exempt Employee Annual Performance Review Policy Legal & Legislative
Legal Updates and Advice as required
Board Policy Development – ongoing Utilities Services
Impact of Provincial and Federal Transportation Projects on utilities’ existing infrastructure and long‐term capital plan
Given the broad scope of this Committee, it is expected that the work plan will be amended throughout the year to respond to intergovernment and finance issues as they arise.
6.1
I&F - 127
10595471 January 7, 2015
Intergovernment and Finance Committee
Terms of Reference The Intergovernment and Finance Committee is the standing committee of the Metro Vancouver Board that provides advice and recommendations on the annual and long‐term budgets for Metro Vancouver’s Districts, the financial policies for the Districts, and Metro Vancouver’s strategic relationships with other governments, with agencies and communities. Committee Responsibilities Within the scope of the Board Strategic Plan, Metro Vancouver management plans, and Board policies, the Committee provides guidance and oversight to staff in the development of annual and long‐term budgets, development and application of financial policies, and development of strategies and positions to manage inter‐governmental relations and address specific initiatives that are undertaken by other agencies. Specific Committee responsibilities include the following:
Guide and monitor the development of annual and long‐term financial plans for consideration by the Board;
Guide the development of financial policies for consideration by the Board;
Oversee the development and implementation of communications strategies and other strategies to manage relations with other orders of governments, and with other agencies;
Develop, for consideration by the Board, Metro Vancouver’s positions on initiatives taken by other governments and agencies;
Review senior government policy and legislative initiatives that affect, or that may affect, governance of the region;
Review and recommend action to address initiatives that do not fall within the purview of another Metro Vancouver standing committee; and
Oversee revisions to and implementation of Metro Vancouver’s International Engagement Program.
Committee Membership and Meetings The Chair, Vice Chair and members are appointed annually by the Chair of the Metro Vancouver Board. The Committee meets monthly, except for August and December, and holds special meetings as required. A quorum of 50% plus one of the Committee membership is required to conduct Committee business.
6.2
I&F - 128
Committee Management The Committee Chair, or in the absence of the Chair the Vice‐Chair, is the chief spokesperson on matters of public interest within the Committee’s purview. For high profile issues the role of spokesperson rests with the Metro Vancouver Board Chair or Vice Chair. On technical matters or in cases where an initiative is still at the staff proposal level, the Chief Administrative Officer or a senior staff member is the appropriate spokesperson. Where necessary and practical, the Board Chair, Committee Chair and Chief Administrative Officer confer to determine the most appropriate representative to speak. The Chief Administrative Officer serves, or assigns a General Manager to serve, as Committee Manager for the Committee. The Committee Manager is responsible for coordinating agendas and is the principal point of contact for Committee members.
I&F - 129