M D IS T R I CT F - ON THE FRAS o E n R Regular Council Agenda August 15, 2011 — 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC 1. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS (a) Kristin Parsons Page 3 Re: Adopt-A-Block 2. ADOPTION OF INFORMATIONAL ITEMS (a) Minutes of the Cultural Resource Commission Meeting held on March 17, 2011 (b) Minutes of the Cultural Resource Commission Meeting held on April 21, 2011 (c) Minutes of the Cultural Resource Commission Meeting held on May 19, 2011 (d) Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee held on May 26, 2011 (e) Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee held on June 23, 2011 (f) Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission held on July 14, 2011 3. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 4. PLANNING Page 4 Page 7 Page 10 Page 13 Page 17 Page 21 (a) Agricultural Land Reserve Non-Farm Use Application ALR 11-001 for Page 24 31042 Silverdale Avenue 5. ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS (a) Fraser River Sewer Crossing Project Page 30 6. ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE (a) Investment Holdings — Quarterly Report Page 61 (b) Clarification of Interest on Overdue Accounts Page 62
Transcript
M D IS T R I CT F
-ON THE FRASoEnRRegular Council AgendaAugust 15, 2011 — 6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC
1. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
(a) Kristin Parsons Page 3Re: Adopt-A-Block
2. ADOPTION OF INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
(a) Minutes of the Cultural Resource Commission Meeting held on March17, 2011
(b) Minutes of the Cultural Resource Commission Meeting held on April21, 2011
(c) Minutes of the Cultural Resource Commission Meeting held on May19, 2011
(d) Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee held on May 26,2011
(e) Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee held on June23, 2011
(f) Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission heldon July 14, 2011
3. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
4. PLANNING
Page 4
Page 7
Page 10
Page 13
Page 17
Page 21
(a) Agricultural Land Reserve Non-Farm Use Application ALR 11-001 for Page 2431042 Silverdale Avenue
(b) Clarification of Interest on Overdue Accounts Page 62
Regular Council AgendaAugust 15, 2011
(c) Letter from Fraser House Society re: 4th Avenue Lane Page 69
7 PUBLIC SAFETY AND HEALTH
(a) PSIT - Update Page 70
8. PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE
(a) Cultural Resources Commission Resignation Page 71
(b) Mural Policy LAN.43 Page 73
(c) Photo Mural at the Leisure Centre Page 74
(d) Transit and Recreation Passes for Canada World Youth Page 78Exchange Program
(e) New Horizons for Seniors Program Grant Page 79
9. RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT
10. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT
11. BYLAWS
MOTION: That the readings of all bylaws included in the Bylaws section of theAugust 15, 2011 regular council agenda be approved as listed.
(a) District of Mission False Alarm Amending Bylaw5233-2011-2929(5) — a bylaw to amend Section 2(b) byadding "(iii) circumstances beyond the control of the ownerof the real property" and adding the words "in the calendaryear" to Section 3
(b) District of Mission Subdivision Control Amending Bylaw5234-2010-1500(36) — a bylaw to provide for housekeepingamendments to Schedule "D"
(c) District of Mission User Fees and Charges Amending Bylaw5235-2011-4029(2) — a bylaw to provide housekeepingamendments to Section C
Adoption
First, Second andThird Readings
First, Second andThird Readings
12. OTHER BUSINESS
(a) Release from Closed Council — August 8, 2011 Page 80
13. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S REPORT
14. MAYOR'S REPORT
15. COUNCILLOR'S REPORTS ON COMMITTEES, BOARDS, AND ACTIVITIES
16. QUESTION PERIOD
17. ADJOURNMENT
MissionON THE FRASER
REQUEST TO APPEAR AS A DELEGATION
01 1
To: Director of Corporate Administration
Date:
-Rcko -121- v)-k- oc-e- mopre,\
\,\ /
( \Th nrNO ) .neA D‘CUj\c\CA
Atck4,,A-). r-or Jy\f_al -)Orik
I hereby request permission to appear as a delegation before District of Mission Mayor andCouncil with reference to the following topic:
I understand that the deadline for submission of the request, including any presentation orsupporting material, is 4:30 p.m. on the Monday preceding the date of the meeting and thatonce my appearance has been confirmed, I will be allotted a maximum of 10 minutes to makemy presentation.
• -LName: 7,5//i2
THIS INFORMATION COLLECTED FOR'INTERNAL OFFICE USE ONLY:
Address:
City/Province'
Postal Code:
Email:
Delegation Confirmed to Appear on: )?-6 . /5h/ Date Confirmed: 8-1/, Confirmed by:
3
G:clerk/forms/reauest to appear as a delegation.cfoc
CULTURALRESOURCESCOMMISSION
'spun calcultLre
Date: Thursday, March 17, 2011
District of MissionCRC Minutes
Time: 12:00 pm Place: Mission Leisure Centre Board Room
Community Outreach / Announcements• Mar. 25th Deadline for Nominations for Myrtle Evertt Woman of the Year Awards
1. Call to order: present, regrets, absent✓ Pam Alexis Sharon Syrette, regrets Diana Muntigl, regrets ✓ Marion Quednau✓ Francis Sleigh Kat Wahamaa, regrets ✓ Nancy Arcand ✓ Bronwen Sutherland✓ Kusum Soni Mike Scudder, Council Liaison, absent✓ Ray lierman, Parks, Recreation & Culture Danielle Pope, Parks, Recreation & Culture, regretsGuest: Annette Williams, infoMissionMinutes: Cindy Waters
Presentation: Annette Williams gave an overview of the infoMission website and noted that they are currently getting about 16 visitors tothe site per day. They would like to increase the amount of events being posted from the Arts community as they are notcurrently subscribing to the service in large numbers.
2. Approval of AgendaMOTION: Moved by Nancy Arcand and seconded by Kusum Soni that the agenda be accepted as distributed.
CARRIED
3. Minutes of Previous Meeting - February 17, 20113.1. Corrections, Additions, Acceptance
Item 5.2 - Delete line "Since this is standard wording for awards applications it will not be modified."MOTION: Moved by Francis Sleigh and seconded by Nancy Arcand that the Minutes of February 17, 2011 be accepted as
revised.CARRIED
ACTION
ACTION BY TIMEFRAME3.2. Business Arising (if not part of reports)
3.2.1. Style of MinutesMinutes to be limited to Action/Person/Timeframe Cindy Future Minutes
3.2.2. Vice Chair Appointment
Cultural Resources Commission CAW
District of Mission CRC Minutes - March 17, 2011 Page 2
ACTION
ACTION BY TIMEFRAMETabled
3.2.3. Consolidated ReportTabled
4. CRC Operations4.1. Resignations, Appointments, & Reappointment of Members
Council has appointed Bronwen Sutherland, Kusum Soni, and Nancy Arcand for a two Ray Completeyear term expiring January 2013. Kat Wahamaa's appointment expires in January 2013as well.
Council has retroactively reappointed Pam Alexis, Sharon Syrette, and Diana Muntigl for Ray Completea two year term expiring January 2012. Marion Quednau and Francis Sleigh'sappointments expire in January 2012 as well.
As per the Terms of Reference, a call for members must be advertised in The Mission
CRC September 2011Record in October of each year. Action item for September Agenda.
Suzanne Vermeer's letter of resignation was received in January 2011. Suzanne Complete4.2. Contact List
The Contact List was distributed and errors noted. Revised list will be redistributed. Cindy Before next meeting4.3. Conflict of Interest Information
Conflict of interest would arise if someone were to benefit personally. District's policy Cindy By next meetingwill be revised with CRC inserted in place of District for adoption at next meeting.
MS Word version of document will be sent to Cindy. Ray Before next meeting
5. Working Groups5.1. Forums
5.1.1. Cultural Officer PresentationNewly acquired User Name and Password for Creative City to be given to Kat. Ray Following this meeting
5.1.2. CommissionsThe gym is available for all Thursdays in May so far. Danielle Complete
5.2. Cultural AwardsWorking group clarifying and simplifying criteria and application process. Committee By next meeting
5.3. Public Art Policy5.3.1. Town Square / Spirit Square Public Art
Cultural Resources Commission CA W
District of Mission CRC Minutes - March 17, 2011 Page 3
ACTION
ACTION BY TIMEFRAMEFeedback given to Sharon Fletcher regarding eagle at the waterfront. Kat Complete
Suggestion given to Sharon Fletcher that CRC get involved with crafting of Artist Kat/Francis CompleteCall and jurying of submissions for Town Square public art once they have gonethrough the focus group stage with the DBA and local residents.
Info. on Buster Simpson (major works of public art in Vancouver, throughout the Kat Following this meetingPacific Northwest, and international), speaking in Abbotsford on April 7di, waspassed onto Sharon Fletcher and will be forwarded to members.
5.4. Public Art SelectionWorking group to meet, review application from Mission Arts Council, and draft Francis Prior to next meetingrecommendation.
5.5. Culture, Tourism & Economic ImpactSurvey used at the Clarke Theatre supplied to this working group. Bronwen Complete
5.6. Membership / PRBronwen will Chair. Press release to be sent to paper. Bronwen Following this meeting
5.7. Cultural OfficerNo report.
5.8. Hall of FameIn contact with sign maker but no other progress to date. Will be late Spring/early Ray/Diana June/JulySummer before everything is complete.
6. Other Business6.1. Deputy Director - New Hire
Stephanie Key, previous Director of Parks & Leisure Services for District of Kent for 18 Ray Completeyears and Director of Tourism Harrison for past 3 years, will start April 11th. She andDanielle will alternate attendance at CRC meeting for the next while.
6.2. Mr. Silver's ProposalCouncil made a motion to support this proposal in principal subject to Mr. Silver Ray Following this meetingconsulting with CRC among other groups. Invite him to next CRC meeting.
7. Adjournment and Date/Time of Next MeetingMeeting adjourned at 1:12 pm. Next meeting is Thurs., April 21, 2011 @ noon.
Cultural Resources Commission CAW
(5)
CULTURALRESOURCESCOMMISSION
District of MissionCRC Minutes
Date: Thursday, April 21, 2011
Time: 12:00 pm Place: Mission Leisure Centre Board Room
Community Outreach / Announcements• Wed., Apr. 27th @8 pm - Music at the MAC - Lorne Warr• Hatzic Elementary Centennial "Memory Book" - $10 (goes towards school legacy projects) - see Sharon Syrette
1. Call to order: present, regrets, absent✓ Pam Alexis ✓ Sharon Syrette Diana Muntigl, regrets ✓ Marion Quednau✓ Francis Sleigh ✓ Kat Wahamaa, ✓ Nancy Arcand Bronwen Sutherland, regrets✓ Kusum Soni Mike Scudder, Council Liaison, regrets✓ Stephanie Key, Parks, Recreation & Culture ✓ Danielle Pope, Parks, Recreation & CultureGuest: Raphael Silver - not in attendanceMinutes: Cindy Waters
Presentation: Raphael Silver was scheduled to give a presentation regarding his application to put House Posts in FRHP but he was not present at themeeting despite his recent confirmation of his intention to attend.
2. Approval of AgendaMOTION: Moved by Sharon Syrette and seconded by Nancy Arcand that the agenda be accepted as revised.
CARRIED
3. Minutes of Previous Meeting - March 17, 20113.1. Corrections, Additions, Acceptance
MOTION: Moved by Kusum Soni and seconded by Nancy Arcand that the Minutes of March 17, 2011 be accepted a distributed.CARRIED
ACTION ACTION BY TIMEFRAME3.2. Business Arising (if not part of reports)
3.2.1. Vice Chair AppointmentNancy Arcand volunteered for this position Complete
3.2.2. Consolidated ReportTabled Sharon Next meeting
3.2.3. Mural Policy UpdateCouncil has returned this to CRC. Tabled pending more information from Council. Mike May Meeting
4. CRC Operations
()lit urn! Rocnurrec Commiccion CAW
District of Mission CRC Minutes - April 21, 2011 Page 2
ACTION
ACTION BY TIMEFRAME4.1. Contact List
List will be updated with Stephanie's contact information and redistributed. Cindy Prior to next meeting4.2. Conflict of Interest
Not all of document is relevant to CRC. Revise and send to Pain and Cindy for redistribution to Sharon Prior to next meetingmembers.
5 Working Groups5.1. Forums
5.1.1. Cultural Officer PresentationTabled Kat/Bronwen Next meeting
5.1.2. Commissions• Tentative date May 26th. Awaiting responses from other Commissions. Sharon Next meeting• Check w/Sharon Fletcher for conflicts with this date. Danielle Next meeting
• Work on logistics. Kat/Sharon Next meeting
5.2. Cultural AwardsTentative key dates for Mission Muse Awards:
• General announcement - May/June• Announce Call for Submissions - late Aug/early Sept• Submissions Close - late Sept/early Oct• Jury selections - (2 weeks) mid to late Oct.• Awards - late Oct.
Dates/timelines to be finalized and venue booked Committee Next meeting
5.3. Public Art PolicyWorking Group disbanded.
5.4. Public Art Selection• Application from the MAC to be given to committee. Danielle Following meeting• Committee to meet at earliest possible convenience since time is of the essence. Date of Francis Following meeting
committee meeting to be sent to Pam.5.5. Culture, Tourism & Economic Impact
• Survey to be distributed to those involved in arts and cultural events in Mission. Kat Prior to next meeting• Contact from CRC Gmail account to be sent to Kat. Cindy Following meeting
5.6. Membership / PRTabled. Bronwen Next meeting
5.7. Cultural OfficerTabled
5.8. Hall of FameShort term goals will be complete (existing materials back on display). Staff June 11 0 1
6. Other Business
Cultural Resources Comm ission CAW
CO
CRC Minutes - April 21, 2011 Page 3District of Mission
ACTION ACTION BY TIMEFRAME 6.1. Amenities: Arts & Culture Focus Group
• Representation of CRC at meeting (new date). Pam/Sharon May 25th• Email to members asking for their feedback prior to meeting. Cindy Following meeting
7. Adjournment and Date/Time of Next MeetingMeeting adjourned at 1:35 pm. Next meeting is Thurs., May 19, 2011 @ noon.
Cultural Resources Commission CAW(r)
CULTURALRESOURCESCOMMISSION
Date: Thursday, May 19, 2011
District of MissionCRC Minutes
Time: 12:00 pm Place: Mission Leisure Centre Board Room
Community Outreach / Announcementse Safe Harbour Respect for All - June 7'h (date was incorrect in last email)
1. Call to order: present, regrets, absent✓ Pam Alexis ✓ Sharon Syrette Diana Muntigl, regrets ✓ Marion Quednau✓ Francis Sleigh Kat Wahamaa, absent ✓ Nancy Arcand Bronwen Sutherland, regrets✓ Kusum Soni ✓ Heather Stewart, alternate for Mike Scudder, Council Liaison✓ Stephanie Key, Parks, Recreation & Culture ✓ Danielle Pope, Parks, Recreation & CultureGuest: Jim Hinds and Janis SchulzMinutes: Cindy Waters
Presentation: Janis Schulz and Jim Hinds gave an overview of the Heritage Commission's mandate and presented a questionnaire for CRC members aswell as for members of the community in general. The results of this questionnaire will help them to update their list of heritage sites.
2. Approval of AgendaMOTION: Moved by Nancy Arcand and seconded by Sharon Syrette that the agenda be accepted.
CARRIED
3. Minutes of Previous Meeting - April 21, 20113.1. Corrections, Additions, Acceptance
MOTION: Moved by Nancy Arcand and seconded by Francis Sleigh that the Minutes of April 21, 2011 be accepted as distributed.CARRIED
ACTION ACTION BY TIMEFRAME 3.2. Business Arising (if not part of reports)
3.2.1. Consolidated ReportDraft will be compiled over the summer. Sharon September Meeting
3.2.2. Mural Policy UpdateCouncil has issued details regarding what they need from CRC. Staff must report back Stephanie Next meetingclarifying the need for both Public Art Policy and Murals Policy. Murals Policy, whichapplies to private buildings, should depict heritage themes, and does not fall undermandate of CRC, requires revision. Members to review draft before submission toCouncil.
3.2.3. Amenities: Arts & Culture Focus Group - May 25th
GntIWraI Rpcniirrec Cnnimiccinn
CAW
District of Mission CRC Minutes - May 19, 2011 Page 2
TIMEFRAMEMay 25th
Prior to next meeting
Next meeting
Following this meetingFollowing this meeting
Following this meetingFollowing this meeting
Following this meetingFollowing this meetingFollowing this meetingFollowing this meetingFollowing this meeting
Next meeting
Next meeting
Next meeting
Ongoing
CAW
ACTIONPam and Sharon will attend meeting to provide feedback on behalf of CRC and they stillneed comments from members. Kusum asked that they voice the need to makeimmigrants feel included.
4.. CRC Operations4.1. Conflict of Interest Information
Tabled.
5. Working Groups5.1. Forums
5.1.1. Cultural Officer PresentationTabled
5.1.2. Commissions - Let's Talk Forum= Firm date of June 14th was decided. Poster to be revised.• Work on logistics.
5.2. Mission Muse Awards• General consensus not to partner with Chamber• Cost of trophies is $150 plus tax through Jim Unger, Clayburn Copper.• Look at Cedarbrooke Chateau and find a Thurs. date no later than Nov. 3rd.
• Confirm Diwali date.5.3. Public Art Selection Committee
Sharon & Pam to assist Francis. First meeting set for Fri., May 27th @ 10:30 am at Leisure Centre.• Email reminder to Pam, Frank, Sharon, & Danielle.• Confirm meeting room availability.• Contact Shelley Clarkson & Glen Kask.• Contact Catherine McDonald• Additional names of possible Committee members to be submitted to Pam
5.4. Culture, Tourism & Economic ImpactTabled
5.5. Membership / PRTabled
5.6. Cultural OfficerTabled
5.7. Hall of FameTimeline for reinstating existing materials is still on track for early June. Final update to follow.
6. Other Business6.1. Multicultural Festival
Kusum looking for volunteers to organize a multicultural festival. Offers and ideas are requested.
Cullum] Resources Commission
Sharon
Kat/Bronwen
KatKat/Sharon
CompletedCompleted
MarionKusum
CindyDanielle
PamMarion
Members
Kat
Bronwen
Stephanie
Members
ACTION BYPam/Sharon
District of Mission CRC Minutes - May 19, 2011 Page 3
ACTION
ACTION BY TIMEFRAME6.2. Public Art Proposals
• MAC proposal for public art legacy after 2014 Winter Games to be submitted to CRC assoon as possible, enabling MAC timely application for funding and submission to WinterGames committee to be formed in 2012.
• Mission Arts Youth Council being formed and will issue a proposal to CRC re: public artfor the Skate Park Expansion in 2012 (Amenities).
7. Adjournment and Date/Time of Next MeetingMeeting adjourned at 1:35 pm. Next meeting is Thurs., June 16, 2011 @ noon.
Pending
Pending
Cultural Resources Commission CAW
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held May 26, 2011 at10:00 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 1
Members Present: Councillor Harris (Vice-Chair-Abbotsford), Councillor Gibson(Abbotsford); Councillor Gill (Abbotsford) (part); Councillor Scudder (Mission); CouncillorPieces (Mission) and Councillor Gidda (Mission)
Staff Present: Deputy Director of Engineering — S. Abushawashi (Mission); Director,Community Planning — C. Johannsen (Abbotsford); Deputy Director of Planning —B. Pitkethly (Mission); Planner - J. Bryndza (Abbotsford); First Canada ULC - C. Brown;BC Transit — J. van Schaik; M. Orfield and W. le Roux; UFV Student Union Society -J. Mitchell; Abbotsford Chamber - T. Luck and Recording Secretary — S. Jones(Abbotsford)
Public: Two
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m.
2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
Minutes of the MATC April 28. 2011 Meeting
Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that the Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford TransitCommittee (MATC) meeting, held April 28, 2011, beadopted.
MATC 47-2011 CARRIED.
3. DELEGATIONS
None
4. BUSINESS OUT OF MINUTES
1 Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee Follow-up Sheet — May 2011
Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that the Mission Abbotsford Transit CommitteeFollow-up Sheet for May 2011, be received.
MATC 48-2011 CARRIED.
13
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held May 26, 2011 at10:00 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Pace 2
.2 Central Fraser Valley Transit Future Plan (J, van Schaik, M. Orfield andJ. Bryndza) - update
Surrounding discussion identified that the stakeholder workshops will be held inSeptember, during phase two of the project. Stakeholders will also be engagedduring phase one of the project.
Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that the verbal update regarding the Central ValleyTransit FutUre Plan, be received as information.
MATC 49-2011 CARRIED,
7 CORRESPONDENCE
1 Petition regarding Bus Route #1 — Bus Stop at Blueridge and Homestead inAbbotsford
Councillor Gill joined the meeting at 10:30 a.m.
Two members of the public were present and indicated that the bus stop onHomestead Crescent and Blueridge Drive has limited service, currentlyweekends or evenings only, creating access difficulty for residents in the area.They requested a full service bus stop.
Moved by Councillor Pieces, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that (a) correspondence, dated May 11, 2011,Petition regarding Bus Route #1 — Bus Stop at Blueridgeand Homestead in Abbotsford, be received; and (b) MATCdirect staff to provide an analysis of bus stop service atBlueridge Drive and Homestead Crescent with options andrecommendations for improvement for the June 2011MATC meeting.
MATC 50-2011 CARRIED.
Members of the public were excused at 10:45 a.m.
4. BUSINESS OUT OF MINUTES
.3 Central Fraser Valley Transit System Planning Activities — 2011 AbbotsfordExpansion (,), van Schalk) - Update
Surrounding discussion of the City of Abbotsford expansion identified that theBourquin Exchange is at maximum capacity. Work that was previously completedon new exchange planning should be used as a starting point for futureexchange planning. BC Transit will bring five buses from Whistler (used duringthe Olympics) to this exchange.
14
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held May 26, 2011 at10:00 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 3
It was noted that all communications regarding the 2011 Abbotsford Expansionshould clearly identify that the expansion pertains only to Abbotsford.
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by Councillor Gill,that (a) the Central Fraser Valley Transit System PlanningActivities - 2011 Abbotsford Expansion report, be received;and (b) staff report back to MATC with the proposedquantity of free passes to be given out during the CanadaDay celebration.
MATC 51-20 - 1 CARRIED.
i. REPORTS
1 Analysis to Mission Council regarding a Bus Stop at the Mission Senior's ActivityCentre
Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that (a) the analysis to Mission Council regarding abus stop at the Mission Senior's Activity Centre, bereceived, with the endorsement of Option 2; and (b) thisitem be referred back to staff and Mission Council.
MATC 52-2011 CARRIED.
.2 Abbotsford Portion of the 2011/12 Annual Operating Agreement for the CentralFraser Valley Transit System
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that the Abbotsford portion of the 2011/12 AnnualOperating Agreement for the Central Fraser Valley TransitSystem be received and forwarded to Abbotsford CityCouncil for approval.
MATC 53-2011
CARRIED.
6. NEW BUSINESS
.1 BC Transit scooter size requirements — Update
Surrounding discussion regarding the BC Transit scooter size requirementsindicated that BC Transit is currently in the process of standardizing the scootersize requirements for all buses. A suggestion that retailers carry a taggingsystem button which indicates that the scooter meets the dimensionrequirements set by BC Transit was received in a positive manner from retailers.
15
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held May 26, 2011 at10:00 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Paae 4
Another option is to have a floor mat at retailers with dimensions that correspondto BC Transit's requirements for scooter sizes (if the scooter fits on the mat itmeets BC Transits size requirements).
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by CouncillorScudder, that (a) the verbal report by BC Transit regardingBC Transit scooter size requirements, be received; and (b)staff report to MATC at the September 2011 meeting withthe official guidelines.
MATC 54-2011 CARRIED,
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that the May 26, 2011 Mission Abbotsford TransitCommittee meeting, be adjourned. (11:40 p.m.)
MATC 55 -2011 CARRIED.
The next MATC meeting will be held at 10:00 am., Thursday, June 23, 2011, in Room530 at Abbotsford City Hall.
Certified Correct:
16
Councillor L. Harris, Vice Chair S. Jon s, Recorder
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held June 23, 2011 at10:07 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 1
Members Present: Mayor Atebe (Chair-Mission); Councillor Harris (Vice-Chair-Abbotsford); Councillor Gibson (Abbotsford); Councillor Scudder (Mission); andCouncillor Gidda (Mission)
Staff Present: General Manager, Engineering & Regional Utilities — J. Gordon (part);Deputy Director of Engineering — S. Abushawashi (Mission); Planner - J. Bryndza(Abbotsford); First Canada ULC - C. Brown; BC Transit — J. van Schaik; University of theFraser Valley — C. Toews; School District #75 (Mission) - S. Weir and J. Marshall; andRecording Secretary — D. Bell (Abbotsford)
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 10:07 a.m.
2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
.1 Minutes of the MATC May 26, 2011 Meeting
Moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that the Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford TransitCommittee (MATC) meeting, held May 26, 2011, beadopted.
MATC 56-2011 CARRIED.
3. DELEGATIONS
None
4. BUSINESS OUT Oi= MINUTES
.1 Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee Follow-uo Sheet — June 2011
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that the Mission Abbotsford Transit CommitteeFollow-up Sheet for June 2011, be received.
MATC 57-2011 CARRIED.
17
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held June 23, 2011 at10:07 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Pane 2
.2 Central Fraser Valley Transit Future Plan and Draft Public Consultation PhaseOne Report (J. van Schaik, M. Orfield; B. Pitkethly and J. Bryndza) - Update
Discussion included the importance of how the final plan will be marketed anddistributed and how people will use the final product. The final product should beuser friendly. Deliverables should be easily identified and the processtransparent.
The stakeholder information will be compiled and inserted into the PublicConsultation Phase One Report.
Consideration should be given to get students from a UFV Urban GeographyClass involved in the Transit Future Plan.
Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by CouncillorHarris, that the verbal update regarding the Central ValleyTransit Future Plan, be received as information.
MATC 58-2011 CARRIED.
.3 Analysis to improve transit service to accommodate schools in Mission (J. vanSchaik. C. Brown. S. Abushawashi) — Update
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by Councillor Harris,that (a) the analysis to improve transit service toaccommodate schools in Mission, be received asinformation; and (b) BC Transit provide a draft reportregarding the financial implications of the two options andreport to MATC at the July meeting.
MATC 59-2011 CARRIED.
' .4 Central Fraser Valley Transit System Planning Activities — 2011 AbbotsfordExpansion (J. van Schaik, J. Bryndza) — Update
Discussion included the number of free tickets to give away at the Canada DayCelebration (1,500 tickets), erecting signs for the new bus stops, and the newRider's Guide.
Moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Councillor Gidda,that the verbal report regarding the Central Fraser ValleyTransit System Planning Activities — 2011 AbbotsfordExpansion, be received.
MATC 60-2011 CARRIED.
18
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held June 23, 2011 at10:07 a.m. i n Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 3
5. REPORTS
Analysis of Bus Stop Service at Blueridge Drive and Homestead Crescent (J. vanSchalk, J. Brydndza, C. Brown)
Discussion included the analysis of bus stop service at Blueridge Drive andHomestead Crescent. MATC recommends that Councillor Gill approach thehome owners regarding the new bus stop location and that staff sendcorrespondence to the two home owners closest to the new bus stop.
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorHarris, that (a) the analysis of bus stop service at BlueridgeDrive and Homestead Crescent, be received, with theendorsement of Option 2; and (b) a bus stop be installedon Ridgeview Drive approximately 10 meters south fromwhere the previous stop was removed.
MATC 61-2011
6. NEW BUSINESS
CARRIED.
Meeting between Abbotsford Police Department, First Canada ULC and City ofAbbotsford regarding Bourguin Exchange and Environs (C.Brown)
Discussion identified that the Abbotsford Police Department should be invited tothe July MATC meeting as a delegation.
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that the information regarding the BourguinExchange and environs be received.
MATC 62-2011
CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE
None
19
Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee meeting held June 23, 2011 at10:07 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Pace 4
8 ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that the June 23, 2011 Mission Abbotsford TransitCommittee meeting, be adjourned. (10:25 a.m.)
MATC 63 -2011 CARRIED.
The next MATC meeting will be held at 10:00 a.m., Thursday, July 28, 2011, in Room530 at Abbotsford City Hall.
Certified Correct:
20
1 1 Mayor James Atebe D .
Recorder
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldJuly 14, 2011, at 9:06 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall
WSC Members Present: Mayor Peary (Abbotsford) (Chair); Mayor Atebe (Mission);Councillor Gibson (Abbotsford); Councillor Gidda (Mission): Councillor Gill (Abbotsford);Councillor Plecas (Mission); and Councillor Ross (Abbotsford)
UMC Members Present: General Manager Engineering, Regional Utilities — J. Gordon(Abbotsford); Director of Finance — J. Lewis (Abbotsford); Director ofFinance - K. Bjorgaard (Mission); and Director of Engineering and PublicWorks - R. Bomhof (Mission)
Staff Present: Director of Wastewater & Asset Management — R. Isaac (Abbotsford);Director of Water & Solid Waste — T. Kyle (Abbotsford); General Manager,Finance & Corporate Services - P. Soanes (Abbotsford); City Manager — F. Pizzuto(Abbotsford); Recording Secretary - R. Brar (Abbotsford)
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 9:06 a.m.
2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
.1 Minutes of the June 16. 2011 Meeting
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by CouncillorPlecas, that the minutes of the Abbotsford/MissionWater & Sewer Commission meeting held June 16, 2011,be adopted.
WSC 76-2011 CARRIED.
3. DELEGATIONS
None.
4. BUSINESS OUT OF MINUTES
.1 Monthly Follow-up Report
Moved by Mayor Atebe, seconded by Councillor Gibson,that the monthly follow-up report, be received.
WSC 77-2011 CARRIED.
.2 JAMES Plant Monthly Report — June 2011
Moved by Mayor Atebe, seconded by Councillor Ross, thatReport No. WSC 71-2011, dated June 28, 2011, from theDirector of Utility Operations, regarding JAMES PlantMonthly Report — June 2011, be received.
WSC 78-2011 CARRIED .
21
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldJuly 14. 2011. at 9:06 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 2
.3 Monthly Water Report — June 2011
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that Report No. WSC 73-2011, dated July 4, 2011,from the Director of Utility Operations, regarding MonthlyWater Report — June 2011, be received.
WSC 79-2011 CARRIED.
.4 Financial Statements — May 2011
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorGidda, that Report No. WSC 72-2011, dated June 28,2011, from the Budget & Payroll Manager (Abbotsford),regarding Financial Statements — May 2011, be received.
WSC 80-2011
CARRIED.
5. REPORTS
.1 Elevated Metals at Farmer Wells (5600-20)
Moved by Councillor Ross, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that Report No. WSC 69-2011, dated June 3,2011, from the Water Planning Engineer, regarding theElevated Metals at Farmer Wells, be received.
WSC 81-2011 CARRIED.
2 Proposed Sewer Use Bylaw Amendments for Abbotsford and Mission (5500-60)
R. Isaac, Director of Wastewater & Asset Management, provided a powerpointpresentation, regarding the proposed Amendments to the Sewer Use Bylaws;Background (Mercury & Silver Levels); Identified High Risk Dischargers; Code ofPractice for (Automotive Operations), (Vehicle Wash Operations) and (Dry CleaningOperations); Public Information Meetings; and Proposed Changes to Bylaw.
The WSC Commission members suggested we should provide awareness to the publicby painting fish on the catch basins, so the public would be aware that anything thatgoes down or is poured in the catch basins affect the fish habitat.
22
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting held
July 14, 2011, at 9:06 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 3
Moved by Mayor Atebe, seconded by Councillor Gidda,that Report No. WSC 49-2011, dated July 4, 2011, fromthe Utilities Environmental Manager, regarding theproposed amendments to the Sewer Use Bylaw for theCity of Abbotsford and District of Mission, be received;(1) the WSC recommend that the City of Abbotsford andDistrict of Mission Councils adopt amendments to theSewer Use Bylaw No, 1862-2009 and the Sewer UseBylaw No. 5033-2009 respectively, as outlined in thisreport; and (2) staff to outline a communication strategywith timelines of the phasing in the new processes.
WSC 82-2011 CARRIED.
6. NEW BUSINESS
None.
7. MOTION TO CLOSE
Moved by Councillor Ross, seconded by CouncillorGibson, that the July 14, 2011, WSC meeting, beadjourned (9:59 a.m.).
WSC 83-2011
CARRIED.
Certified Correct:
23
WSC C ChairGeorg Peary dy Lewis
MDISTRICT OF
ON THE FRASER
Planning DepartmentMemorandum
24
FILE: PRO.DEV.ALRALR11-001
To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: PlannerDate: August 15, 2011Subject: Agricultural Land Reserve Non-Farm Use Application ALR11-001 for 31042
Silverdale Avenue
The letter from the Agricultural Land Commission attached as Appendix 1, regarding therequest for the non-farm use application for 31042 Silverdale Avenue, be received.
G:\COMDEV\MAI gricultural Land Reserve Applications\ALR11-001 Rockin the River\CoW followup.docx
PAGE 1 OF 1
Agricultural Land Commission133-4940 Canada WayBurnaby, British Columbia V5G 4K6Tel: 604 660-7000Fax: 604 660-7033www.alc.gov.bc.cc
25
June 24, 2011
Reply to the attention of Eamonn WatsonALC File: 52278
Kenny Hess33518 — 9 th AvenueMission, BCV2V 2J2
Dear Mr. Kenny Hess:
Re: Application for non-farm use of the Aciricultural Land ReservePlease find attached the Minutes of Resolution # 197/2011 outlining the Commission's decisionas it relates to the above noted application. As agent, it is your responsibility to notify yourclient(s) accordingly.
Yours truly,
PROVINCIAL AG ULT L LAND COMMISSION
Per:
Brian Underhil , executive Direc •r
Enclosure: Minutes
cc: District of Miss , ALR11-001
EW/52278d1
PROVINCIAL AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION
A meeting was held by the Provincial Agricultural Land Commission on May 25, 2011 atthe offices of the Commission located at #133 — 4940 Canada Way, Burnaby, B.C.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Richard Bullock ChairJennifer Dyson Vice-ChairGordon Gillette Vice-ChairSylvia Pranger Vice-ChairBert Miles CommissionerRoger Mayer CommissionerJim Johnson CommissionerJerry Thibeault CommissionerLucille Dempsey CommissionerDenise Dowswell CommissionerJim Collins Commissioner
COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT:
Tony PellettEamonn WatsonShaundehl RunkaBrian UnderhillColin Fry
Regional PlannerLand Use PlannerPolicy PlannerExecutive DirectorExecutive Director
APPUCATION ID: # 52278PROPOSAL: Non-farm use — Rockin 3 River Productions is requesting to relocate a 3-day
country music festival to the subject property. The proposal involves hosting thefestival each August for the years of 2011, 2012, and 2013. The proposedfestival would utilize approximately 33 ha of ALR land and would require 10 daysof access to the subject property. The festival would require areas for music,camping, parking, food and beverages.(Application submitted pursuant to section 20(3) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act)
NFORMATIOI
Owner: Winter Blossum Holdings Ltd.Date of Acquisition: August 18, 2010Parcel ID: 003-706-494Title No. BB1177295Legal Description: North East Quarter Section 24 Township 14 New Westminster District
Except: Firstly: Part on Plan 908 Secondly: Part on Plan 4898 Thirdly:Part on Plan with Bylaw Filed 23489 Fourthly: Part on Plan 14512 Fifthly:Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 22448) Sixthly: Part on Plan 40188 Seventhly:Part on Plan 65457 Eighthly: Plan BCP45451
Size: 41.2 haArea in ALR: 35.9 haCurrent Land Use: ResidentialFarm Classification: No(BC Assessment)
OMMISSIOW ONSIDERATION::.
Context
Section 6 of the Agricultural Land Commission Act identifies the purposes of the Commissionas: (1) to preserve agricultural land; (2) to encourage farming on agricultural land incollaboration with other communities of interest; and (3) to encourage local governments, firstnations, the government and its agents to enable and accommodate farm use of agriculturalland and uses compatible with agriculture in their plans, bylaws and policies.
Agricultural Capability
Based on the information contained in Map 92G.019 (Scale 1:25,000) of the BC Land Inventory(BCLI), 'Land Capability Classification for Agriculture in B.C.' system, the agricultural capabilityratings of the ALR portion of the subject property are identified as being:
Organic SoilsClass 3 — Land in this class has limitations that require moderately intensive management
practices or moderately restrict the range of crops, or both.Class 5 — Land in this class has limitations that restrict its capability to producing perennial
forage crops or other specially adapted crops.
L degree of decomposition — permeabilityW excess water
Agricultural Suitability
The Commission assessed whether external factors such as encroaching non-farmdevelopment have caused or will cause the land to become unsuitable for agriculture. TheCommission does not believe there are external factors that render the land unsuitable foragricultural use. The subject property is located in a farm area and is a suitable size foragriculture.
Assessment of Potential Impact on Agriculture
The Commission also assessed the impact of the proposed music festival against the long termgoal of preserving agricultural land. The Commission is concerned that the use of the subjectproperty for a music festival would negatively impact the existing or potential agricultural use ofthe subject property and surrounding lands in the ALR.
Although the music festival is for 2 days, the August timing of the festival precludes the use ofthe majority of the property for many ground crops with the exception of hay production. TheCommission does acknowledge that a small portion of the property will not be used for themusic festival; however these portions of land are of lower agricultural capability. In addition,despite the proposed rehabilitation the Commission felt there were no safeguards that could beemployed to ensure the protection of the land from soil compaction due to camping and crowdsand soil contamination from litter, motor oil and other toxic fluids associated with motor vehicles.
Furthermore, it is the Commission's experience that music festivals become semi-permanentevents, reducing incentives to initiate and intensify agricultural activity.
In summary, the Commission is concerned that the music festival would reduce the range ofagricultural opportunities available for the subject property, while also negatively impacting theprime agricultural soils. Permitting the use of the subject property for a music festival does notencourage farming.
Other Factors
Although the proposed relocation of the music festival to the subject property accommodated afinancial circumstance of the proprietors of the music festival, the Commission noted thateconomic factors are not considered by the Commission. Further to this, the Commission wasmade aware that the previous location of the music festival, situated outside the AgriculturalLand Reserve (the "ALR") and used for the past 3 years, was still available to the proprietors ofthe music festival.
The Commission believes that the high agricultural capability of the subject property allows for abroad spectrum of agricultural uses. In addition, there were no factors identified by theCommission that would render the subject property unsuitable for agriculture.
The Commission believes that the use of ALR land for a music festival is not an appropriate useand that such a use would neither encourage farming nor preserve farm land.
Although the Commission discussed the economic factors presented in the application, itbelieves consideration of such factors is inappropriate given the objectives of the agriculturalland preservation program.
ECISION ,Itno
IT WASMOVED BY: Commissioner Sylvia PrangerSECONDED BY: Commissioner Gordon Gillette
THAT the application be refused for the following reasons:• The land has high agricultural capability;• The land is suitable from agricultural use; and,• The proposal is inconsistent with the objective of the Agricultural Land Commission Act to
preserve agricultural land.
AND THAT the applicant be advised of the provisions of Section 33 of the Agricultural LandCommission Act which provides an applicant with the opportunity to submit a request forreconsideration.
S.33 (1) On the written request of a person affected or on the commission's owninitiative, the commission may reconsider a decision of the commission under this Actand may confirm, reverse or vary it if the commission determines that(a) evidence not available at the time of the original deciSion has become available,(b) all or part of the original decision was based on evidence that was in error or wasfalse,
(2) The commission must give notice of its intention to reconsider a decision undersubsection (1) to any person that the commission considers is affected by thereconsideration.
AND THAT the applicant be advised that a revised proposal does not constitute new informationand will not be considered as a basis for reconsideration and the time limit for submitting arequest for reconsideration is one (1) year from the date of the decision letter.
File Category: INF.SAN.STUFile Folder: Fraser River Crossing
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Director of Engineering & Public Works
Date: July 22, 2011
Subject: Fraser River Sewer Crossing Project
Recommendation
It is recommended that:
• Opus DaytonKnight be awarded the project proposal to study the Fraser River Crossingand connecting land segments in the amount of $29,530 plus HST,
• The budgets of $100,000, $150,000 and $5,150,000 in years 2014, 2015, & 2016respectively be moved and changed to $50,000, $200,000 and $5,150,000 in years 2011,2012 & 2013 respectively.
Background
To meet future growth projections and to add redundancy to the current single sewer main rivercrossing Mission requires a second sewer river crossing by around 2017. Since Abbotsford is alsoconstructing a water-main crossing for the Stave Lake project it makes sense to complete thesewer project at the same time to take advantage of environmental approvals and a commontrench excavation below the river.
Opus DaytonKnight has already completed a preliminary cost estimate to complete the rivercrossing alongside the water-main. The District's budget is based upon this estimate.
Discussion
The previous study (attached) completed a cost comparison to construct the river crossing andland portions jointly with the proposed new Abbotsford water-main and separately as a District onlyproject. It concludes that Missions estimated cost to complete the project jointly would be$4,573,500 vs $6,805,000 if completed separately. These estimates exclude engineering fees andHST. This study focused on the river crossing only in order to confirm the value to the District ofcombining the project.
The previous study did not deal with how the existing forcemain would interconnect with the newmain, how it would connect to the JAMES plant. Now that we know there is value to move forwardwith this project jointly with Abbotsford these two tasks need to be completed in addition to apreliminary design of all three components.
Since Opus DaytonKnight is already working on the water-main river crossing for Abbotsford and is
Page 1 of 2
very familiar with the project details it is good value to have them complete the sewer main study atthe same time. A copy of their proposal is attached.
Funding
The current Financial Plan notes $100,000, $150,000 & $5,150,000 in years 2014, 2015 & 2016respectively for total cost of $5.4M. Abbotsford is targeting to have the Stave Lake water supplysystem on line by 2015 so will be completing the water-main in the preceding years. The exacttime is uncertain at this point however in order to be prepared ahead of time it is recommendedthat the budgets change to $50,000, $200,000 & $5,150,000 in years 2011, 2012, & 2013respectively. The three phases represents preliminary design, detailed design and construction.
Finance Comments
This project is part of our sewer DCC program, with 99% of the costs to be borne by developerDCCs and 1% from the sewer capital reserve fund as an assist factor. Based on the District'ssanitary sewer financial plan which includes the sewer DCC spending/collection projections a loanof approximately $2 million dollars will be needed to undertake this project in 2013. If the balancein the District's sewer capital reserve fund is not sufficient enough in 2013 to provide an internalloan for this project we will have to resort to external borrowing. The amount of DCC funding (the99%) that is currently allocated to this project should be reviewed in terms of what percentage ofthe project is actually attributable to growth versus redundancy.
Ken Bjorgaard
I have reviewed the financial aspects of this report.F:\ENGINEER\RBOMHOF\Water & Sewer\Fraser river Crossing Report July 22, 2011.docx
31
FILE: ADM.COU.INC Page 2 of?2011 Staff Reports
OPUS
LA)
32
•
June 1, 2011
Mr. Rick Bomhof, P.Eng.District of Mission8645 Stave Lake StMission, B.C.V2V 4L9
DAYTON KNIGHT
Dear Mr. Bomhof:
RE: Proposal for Engineering ServicesDistrict of MissionMission Forcemain River Crossing and Connecting Land Segments
Further to our telephone discussion on May 20, 2011, Opus DaytonKnight Consultants Ltd. ispleased to submit the following proposal for the above project.
1.0 BACKGROUND
Opus DaytonKnight is currently undertaking the preliminary design for the installation of a new1200 mm o water transmission main across the Fraser River near the Mission Raceway in thevicinity of the existing 600 mm e water and sewer main. In order to facilitate the futuredevelopment anticipated by the District of Mission, the District has requested that OpusDaytonKnight provide a proposal for engineering services for the preliminary design of a new750 mm o forcemain, along with its connecting land portions. In addition to this, the Districtrequests that Opus DaytonKnight review the connection of the Mission sewer to the JointAbbotsford Mission Environmental Systems (J.A.M.E.S.) waste water treatment plant(WWTP).
It is anticipated that the forcemain across the Fraser River would be installed in conjunctionwith the water transmission main.
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
This proposal is proposed as follows:• Preliminary design — Land Portions• Preliminary design — River Portion• Interconnections with existing pipeline• JAMES WWTP tie-in.
Opus Daytonithight Consultants LtdAbbonstord Office
We would complete the preliminary design drawings fcir the proposed forcemain. Thealignment is assumed to be from the JAMES WWTP to the north end of the MissionRaceway (a distance of approximately 2,400m).
The plan and profile drawings would be developed that would identify the followingelements:
• The main size, material, length and grade.• The location of air release valves.• The location and offset of the main relative to the property line.• Pigging chambers• Isolating valves
We propose to provide preliminary design drawings in accordance with therequirements of the District o Mission Drawing Standards. We anticipate the followingdrawings would be required:
Description ScaleNumber
ofDrawings
Plan & Profile (2400 m) 1:500 H; 1:50V
7
Miscellaneous Details NTS 3
TOTAL 10
We propose to consult with BC Hydro, Telus, FortisBC and any other public utilitycompanies involved to review the preliminary designs. Opus DaytonKnight ConsultantsLtd. would provide the District with copies of all correspondence sent and receivedfrom the utility companies.
We are currently undertaking environmental approvals for the proposed watermaincrossing, and have included the proposed 750 mm e forcemain in these approvals. Assuch, no additional environment approvals are anticipated.
We will provide the District with a cost estimate to undertake the land portion of theworks.
33
Page
34
3.2 Interconnections
It is understood that the District would like to have the ability to divert flows from oneforcemain to the other in order to facilitate cleaning. It is envisioned that this willconsist of diversion chambers on either side of the river, complete with appropriatevalving, It is anticipated that the connection of these lines will be difficult, as theexisting line is constantly conveying sewage across the river. We will devise a tie-inplan that will minimize the amount of down time the existing forcemain will be subjectto.
It is likely that the new forcemain will be installed with pigging chambers to facilitatecleaning.
3.3 JAMES WWTP Tie-In
Opus DaytonKnight has recently completed the JAMES WWTP Master Plan. As such,we have intimate knowledge of the future expansion plans of the plant. We will be ableto review the existing connection to the plan and how it fits with the overall master plan.We will also be able to tie-in the proposed forcemain in a location that is of the greatestbenefit to both Mission and the JAMES Plant.
4.0 BUDGET
The various tasks are envisioned to involve the following effort and 2011 rates:
• Principal-in-Charge• Project Manager• JAMES WWTP Advisor• Senior Project Engineer• Assistant project Engineer• Support Staff
Jack Lee (JL)Joel McAllister (JM)John BoyleDennis Harrington (DH)Matt Brigden (MB)SurveyDrafting (DF)Word Processing (WP)
$195/hr$140/hr$195/hr$180/hr$84/hr$135/hr$72/hr$60/h r
A summary of the cost is identified as follows:
TUSk JI, j. ;jB ,.. , . DH.. M B S URV . DF WP Disbursemeats
Amount
$195 $140: .: $195 - $180 ... $84 '$135 . $72 $69
Plan and Profile 4 20 6 50 16 125 1 550 520.130.00
We propose to undertake the work for a lump sum price of $33,073.60 includingdisbursements and HST.
5.0 SCHEDULE
Upon approval, we propose the following completion dates based on weeks:
Plan and Profile 4 weeksInterconnections 2 weekJAMES WWTP Tie-In 2 weekTotal 8 weeks
We trust this will meet with your requirements. If you have any questions or require anyfurther information please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
This memo is intended to present a comparison of two alternatives for the District of Mission'splanned sewer forcemain crossing of the Fraser River that will be required to meet future flowrequirements from the District of Mission that must be conveyed to the JAMES wastewatertreatment plant in Abbotsford. The two alternatives are to combine the sewer forcemain crossingwith the planned water transmission main crossing of the Fraser River that the City ofAbbotsford plans to construct within the next 3-5 years, or to construct a separate sewerforcemain crossing at a future date.
1.0 BACKGROUND
The Abbotsford Mission Water & Sewer Commission (AMWSC) April 9, 2010 Water 2010Water Master Plan (WMP) recommended paralleling the existing water transmission main fromMaclure Road in Abbotsford to the proposed water treatment plant (WTP) to be located north ofCannon's Pit in Mission and extending north to an intake and pump station to be built at the eastside of Stave Lake. The pipe diameter is to be 1200 mm 0 south of Lougheed Highway and 1350mm 0 north of Lougheed Highway. The WMP shows the pipe to be located along Gladwin Roadsouth of the river in the City of Abbotsford and along Cedar Street and Dewdney Trunk Road inthe District of Mission (Cedar/Gladwin Alignment). The recommended alignment north of theFraser River is now along Clay/Wren Street.
Figure 1-1 illustrates the proposed work program which includes consideration of a onekilometre 750 mm 0 sanitary forcemain crossing of the Fraser River in parallel with the 1200mm 0 water transmission main crossing if the water transmission main alignment is near theJAMES plant.
After reviewing the alignment proposed in the WMP a revised alignment for portions of thewater transmission main route has been selected as shown on Figure 1-2 attached. The rivercrossing has been moved upstream of the existing twin 600 mm 0 water and sewer mains thatwere installed in 1982 in order to avoid damage to those mains during and after installation ofthe new crossing. On the south side the alignment has been selected to minimize impact onenvironmentally sensitive areas within Matsqui Trail Park.
The new water transmission main crossing is proposed to be installed by the dredge-drag-covermethod, which has been used successfully in the past for several river crossings in thisimmediate vicinity. The rationale for selecting this method of construction over alternativeapproaches is set out in TM# 1 attached as Appendix A.
The installation of the water transmission main across the river presents an opportunity for theDistrict of Mission to install their future sewer forcemain across the river at the same time as thewater transmission main installation. This could offer considerable savings over construction of aseparate sewer forcemain crossing at a future date.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
2.1 Sewer Crossing in Conjunction with Water Main Crossing
For this alternative, the 750 mm 0 sewer forcemain crossing the Fraser River would beinstalled at the same time as the water transmission main, and in the same dredged trench.Approximately 1,000 m of 750 mm 0 sewer forcemain would be constructed to spanunder the river. Under this scenario, the sewer forcemain pipe would be capped off oneither side of the river until future flows require it to be placed into service. There may bean opportunity to connect the new forcemain to the existing forcemain, in order tofacilitate maintenance of the existing forcemain.
The water transmission main will be constructed using steel pipe with butt-welded fieldjoints for maximum strength to withstand forces due to pulling of the pipe element andbending to conform to the trench profile. It will be lined with epoxy and coated withpolyurethane. The sewer forcemain would also be constructed of welded steel pipe, linedand coated as for the water transmission main. The sewer forcemain pipe would be joinedto the water transmission main by welded steel plate gussets at appropriate intervals toprevent the two pipes from contacting each other during the pulling operation.
The land-side extensions to enable the sewer forcemain to connect to the District ofMission's sanitary collection system on the north side and the JAMES Plant on the southside would be constructed at a future date as dictated by system flows. Advantagesinclude cost-sharing of the relatively expensive dredging operation required to establish atrench in the riverbed and backfill the pipe after installation, sharing of mobilization anddemobilization costs for assembly of the pipe elements and the heavy pulling equipmentnecessary to drag the segments into place, and sharing of costs for the necessaryenvironmental and other agency approvals that must be obtained for such a crossing.
2.2 Land Sections in Conjunction with Water Transmission Main Crossing
This alternative would add the north and south land sections of sewer forcemain to bebuilt at the same time as the water transmission main river crossing and land-sideextensions. The sewer forcemain would parallel the water transmission main toapproximately the north boundary of the Mission Raceway on that side of the river, andto Gladwin Road on the south side. The advantages include a single mobilization of thecontractor's equipment, and a single disturbance of private properties on either side of the
41.102 0 2011 Page 2 of 9OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
40
river, including the environmentally sensitive foreshore areas. Dyke crossings would beconstructed under a single permit.
2.3 River Crossing and Land Sections Constructed Independently of the Water MainCrossing at a Future Date
Under this alternative the sewer forcemain crossing and associated land sections wouldbe constructed at a future date dictated by flow requirements. This would offer theadvantage of deferring capital expenditures to a future time frame. Also, because thesewer forcemain is smaller in diameter than the water transmission main it may bepossible to install it by horizontal directional drilling (HDD), albeit at a significant costpremium.
Installing the low pressure sewer forcemain as a separate, future project also opens thepossibility of choosing an alternative pipe material such as fusion-joined high densitypolyethylene.
It must be noted, however. that a feasible alignment for a future sewer forcemain crossingof the Fraser River will likely be constrained by the need to provide sufficient clearancefrom existing crossings and the concerns of upland private property owners. Thesefactors may lengthen the route of the land portions of the future sewer forcemain ordictate the construction by HDD at a premium price.
3.0 COST ESTIMATES
3.1 Cost Estimate Methodology
The cost of steel pipe was obtained from a recent estimating quote from Northwest PipeCompany and the estimated cost for HDPE pipe was obtained from Corix Water. Thecost of dredging and backfilling and the value of stockpiled sand was obtained fromFraser River Pile and Dredge Ltd. of New Westminster. Costs for horizontal directionaldrilling were obtained from two sources, Direct Horizontal Drilling Ltd., and QuantaPipeline Services, both from Alberta.
Property costs for temporary working space and permanent rights-of-way were obtainedfrom the City of Abbotsford's property department and reflect a blended rate betweenagricultural land on the south side of the river and commercial/industrial land on thenorth side.
For the land sections, pipe installation costs were estimated using figures obtained fromOpus DaytonKnight's recent experience with steel main construction in the City ofAbbotsford, modified to reflect the sewer forcemain diameter.
41.102 CO 2011 Page 3 of 9OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
OPUS
41
Assumptions:
• The cost for common items would be shared between the water and sewer projects inthe ratio of their diameters, i.e. 750/1200 attributed to the sewer forcemain.
• Property utilized for the project that is owned by either the District of Mission or Cityof Abbotsford would not result in a cost to the project.
• Installing the sewer land sections in a common trench in conjunction with the watermain would result in a 10% savings in the unit cost per meter of that specific item.
• Contingency allowance for the river crossing was set at 20% for both cases and forthe land sections the contingency allowance was set at 10% reflecting the differentdegree of risk.
• In the case of a sewer forcemain crossing installed separately by HDD the cost ofrestoring the riverbank erosion protection and riparian areas has been deleted. Alsothe cost of winch rental and installation has been deleted since the HDD drilling rigwould perform that function.
• To estimate the cost of HDD installation, the midpoint of the two estimates receivedfor drilling the hole to install the 1200 mm water main by this method was used ($7.5million), multiplied by 750/1200.
• Temporary working space for the pipe assembly is assumed to be required for 3months. For land sections a 2 month period is assumed from start to final restoration.
41A02 CO 2011 Page 4 of 9OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
OPUS,
42
43
3.2 Sewer Forcemain Crossing Constructed in Conjunction with Water TransmissionMain Crossing
TABLE 3-1SEWER FORCEMAIN CROSSING INSTALLED CONCURRENTLY WITH WATER
TRANSMISSION MAIN (RIVER SECTION)
ItemNo
Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Amount
I Mobilization and demobilizationIncluding site clearing, grading*
L.Sum 1 $45,000 $45.000
2 Supply of 750 mm 0 x 8.00mm steel sewerpipe epoxy lined & polyurethane coated
Linealmetre
1.000 $500 $500.000
3 Assembly of pipe string on land includingattaching to water main
L.Sum 1 $375,000 $375,000
4 Installation of pipe in dredged trenchincluding equipment rental*
+ Property appraisal to be completed to confirm land values
41.102 CO 2011 Page 7 of 9OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
OPUS
TABLE 3-4SEWER FORCEMAIN INSTALLED IN FUTURE (LAND SECTION)
ItemNo
Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Amount
1 Mobilization and demobilization LumpSum
$50,000 $50,000
2 Supply and install welded steel pipe at alldepths
Lin. M 920 $1.200 $1.104,000
3 Mitered bends Each 16 $3,750 $60,000
4 100 mm Air Valves complete withchamber
Each 2 $40.000 $80.000
5 Utility Crossings Each 2 $20,000 $40,000
6 Road Restoration Sq. m 2,400 $26.00 $62,400
7 Restoration and Cleanup LumpSum
1 $25,000 $25,000
8 Testing and Commissioning LumpSum
1 $25,000 $25,000
9 Land Acquisition — Permanent RW+ Hectare .25 $845,200 $211.300
10 Land Acquisition — Temporary WorkingSpace+
Hectare 0.66 $3,600 $2,400
Sub-Total for Land Sections $1,660,100
10% Contingency $166,000
TOTAL COST FOR LAND SECTIONS $1,826.100
+ Property appraisal to be completed to confirm land values
4.0 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
For the purpose of developing comparative estimates, it has been assumed that the cost ofbackfilling, mobilization and demobilization, property acquisition, and surface restoration wouldbe shared between the water transmission main and sewer forcemain projects in the ratio of theirrespective diameters. Likewise, it is assumed that the value of dredged sand stockpiled on landwould be shared between the District of Mission and City using that same ratio.
The estimated cost to construct the 750 mm sewer forcemain crossing of the Fraser River whendone in conjunction with the water transmission main crossing is $3,031,400 (Table 3-1).
41.102 0 2011 Page 8 of 9OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
OPUS
46
The estimated cost to construct the 750 mm sewer forcemain crossing and adjacent land sectionsin conjunction with the water transmission main construction is $4,573,500(Table 3-1 plus Table3-2).
The estimated cost to construct the sewer forcemain crossing, of the Fraser River by itself at afuture date is $4,978,900 (Table 3-3).
The estimated cost to construct the sewer forcemain crossing of the Fraser River and associatedland section at some future date is $6,906,200 (Table 3-3 plus Table 3-4).
The estimates for the various options are summarized as follows:
River Section Only River and Land SectionsConstruct the 750 mm sewerforcemain concurrently withthe water transmission main.
$3,031,400 $4,573,500
Construct the 750 mm sewerforcemain by itself in thefuture.
$4,978,900 $6,805,000
This assumes future construction using the dredge-drag-cover method. For HDD construction itis estimated that using this method would add approximately $3 million to the river crossingcost.
Use of HDPE pipe for a future sewer forcemain crossing would cost in the order of $180,000 lessthan for steel pipe, based on the difference in cost for pipe material supply and jointing.
Note that all cost estimates are in 2011 dollars.
It should also be noted that the estimated costs for property acquisition for temporary workingspace and permanent easements are preliminary and would be subject to modification asdetermined by actual appraised values.
EICKSCN LAKECONTROL STRUCTURE 0MID FLOATINGPUMP STATION
638M
DINTS
LOCATION "A
(FROM STAVE IAKEINTAKE & PUMPSTATION PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REP)
PROPOSED STAVE LAKE PUMPSTATION AND OUTLET MAIN
CANNEL- LAKEAND FLOATINGPUMP STATION
27904
4."
- .NORRISH CREEKINTAKEPAL 24.104
NCRRISH CREEKTREATMENT PLANTTM. - 2320
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WATERTREATMENT PLANT SITES
cr MIL
BELL ROADAMMONIA STATION -
BEST ARE PRY AND/ PUMP STATION
- MARY ANN RESERVOIR \I TVIL 20SM
e.amL
13500 TREATED WATERTRANSMISSION MAIN
NBEST Mt
—
/
FOR ROAD
717MIMPUM ROV
I [ \ \
I I\I r i \
\I / \I
1 _____.•_\
L J .
MAO
MLLERT ROM
OA/MM. ROAD
IMMURE RPM
CLAThURN 0
SOON 111,101 PEE WELL
ECIBEVAN NELLS
MARSHALL YCLLS
ACKERMAN
1 1. Na2 & N63 RINER41.71LS RESERVOIR
TVA 1 RIM3.9ML
MCCONNELL NCI
INDUSTRIAL HELLSA. C
NONONS".FARMER *ELLS1
OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
DISTRICT OF MISSIONSEWER FORCEMAIN CROSSING OF THE FRASER RIVER
2010 WATER MASTER PLANCLAY/WREN ALIGNMENT
OPUS
MASER HANINAT
TONNUNENo.l, 00.2
r
J
SECTION A
NN
S
N
12000 TREATED WATERTRANSMISSION MAIN
DOMED ROM
MACLURE RESERVOIRPAL 123MMAL-
OPUS DMONKNIGHT
DISTRICT OF MISSIONSEWER FORCEMAIN CROSSING OF THE FRASER RIVER
SITE PLAN
Opus
EXISTING
PROPOSED WATER
PROPOSED SEWER
LEGEND
Abbotsford(''■.„,d/Mission
Water & Sewer Services
APPENDIX A
OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT LTD. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 1FRASER RIVER CROSSING - CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY OPTIONS
51
ABBOTSFORD/MISSION WATER & SEWER COMMISSIONWATER TRANSMISSION MAIN
STAVE LAKE TO MACLURE
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 1
TO: Mr. Nadeem Kazmi, P.Eng., City of Abbotsford
FROM: Jack Lee, P.Eng., Opus DaytonKnight Ltd.
DATE: October 26, 2010
RE: Fraser River Crossing — Construction Methodology Options
This memorandum provides a comparison of construction methodologies to install the proposedStave Lake to Maclure water transmission main across the Fraser River.
1.0 BACKGROUND
The Abbotsford Mission Water & Sewer Commission (AMWSC) April 9, 2010 Water MasterPlan (WMP) recommended paralleling the existing transmission main between Maclure toLougheed Highway with a 1200 mm 0 pipe along the Gladwin Road alignment. There isapproximately 1000 m (horizontal distance) of water transmission main that will be installedacross the Fraser River from the north end of Gladwin Road to the District of Mission.
Three installation options were reviewed for the Fraser River crossing:
A fourth option is to attach the proposed 1200 mm 0 water transmission main to the Abbotsford/Mission Bridge. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure will not permit attachingutilities onto their bridges, especially a large 1200 mm 0 pipe. This option was not investigatedfurther.
2.0 DREDGE / DRAG / COVER METHOD
2.1 Description of Installation
The water transmission main would be installed by pulling the submerged pipeline acrossthe river within a dredged trench. The trench would be excavated by suction dredge withthe removed sand deposited on land adjacent to the crossing.The trench would be deep enough to ensure that the pipe would be installed withadequate cover to prevent damage from anchors, debris carried by river bed movements,
41.102 2011 Page 1 of 9 OPUS DAYTON KNIGHT
onus
52
river scour and any dredging activities in the future. The existing 600 mm 0 water supplymain that was installed in 1982 across the Fraser River was designed for a depth of 4.6 mof cover for future dredging plans, and another 3 m of cover for pipe protection as wellfor any river bed erosion and has performed well since its installation.
The water transmission main's external coating would be wrapped with timber lagginglaid in strips and held in place with steel bands. The lagging also protects the pipecoating during the installation process and backfilling. Continuous steel skid plateswould be installed at the bottom of the pipe to prevent damage to the timber lagging andto reduce drag during the installation process.
A nose cone together with a pulling block and flotation tanks would be installed at thefront of the pipe. A winch or hydraulic pulling device located on the opposite side of theriver would be used to pull the pipe across. It is likely that the pipe would be assembledin four sections due to the space limitation of the staging area. The dragging operationwould be stopped in order to weld each section together. The entire dragging processwould likely take about 24 to 30 hours due to the time required to weld each sectiontogether and restore the corrosion protection at each joint.
The pipe would be backfilled with about 3 m of river sand obtained from a nearbyunderwater borrow site after installation. The remaining trench backfill would becompleted using the natural action of the river. Experience shows that this would occurwithin a few months following crossing installation due to the action of spring freshetflows in the river.
Construction time using this method would be approximately 4 to 6 weeks of whichabout 4 weeks is needed for the dredging work in the river.
2.2 Advantages / Disadvantages
2.2.1 Advantages are:
• The dredged sand could be used by the City of Abbotsford for preloading and fill forthe JAMES expansion.
• The dredged sand could be used by the District of Mission/private developers fortheir proposed waterfront developments.
• The sand could be used for the Norrish Creek water filtration beds. Some of thedredged sand could probably be utilized for bedding the land sections of the watermain, at a significant cost saving over imported bedding.
• Debris encountered along the pipe trench could be easily removed.
• Minimal geotechnical investigation is required.
41.102 C) 2011 Page 2 of 9
OPUS DAYIONKNiGH T
53
• This is a proven technology that has been successfully implemented across the samereach of the Fraser River by the design team.
2.2.2 Disadvantages are:
• Work has to be undertaken during the Fisheries window, likely in the winter.
• A large amount of dredged material that would need significant stockpiling area.
• A large force is required to pull the final segment of pipe when the entire length isconnected.
2.3 Approvals / Permits
The following approvals/permits would be required.
• Department of Fisheries and Oceans• Ministry of Agriculture• Agricultural Land Commission• Navigable Waters Protection Agency• Canadian Coast Guard• Ministry of Environment• Fraser Health Authority• District of Mission• City of Abbotsford• Metro Vancouver Parks Department
3.0 FLOAT / SINK / COVER METHOD
3.1 Description of Installation
This method would be similar to the dredge/drag/cover method except the pipe would befloated across the river rather than being dragged across the river bottom. The pipewould be covered after installation. This method was used to install the two JAMESoutfalls and is used for most outfall installations.
3.2 Advantages / Disadvantages
3.2.1 Advantages are:
The advantages are the same as for the Dredge/Drag/Cover method as noted in Section2.2.1.
The disadvantages are the same as for the Dredge/Drag/Cover method as noted in Section2.2.2 plus the following:
• Risk of the pipe not settling into the dredged channel during the sinking stage due toriver currents.
• Risk of the pipe buckling and possibly breaking ("kink" in the pipe) during thesinking process.
3.3 Approvals / Permits
Approvals and permits required are the same as the Dredge/Drag/Cover method.
4.0 HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONAL DRILLING (HDD)
4.1 Description of Installation
HDD was developed in the 1970's for the oil and gas industries. The process consists offour main steps:
i. Site investigation and designii. Drilling of a pilot holeiii. Enlargement of hole by dragging successively larger reamers through the pilot
hole.iv. Pull bad( of pipe
i. Site Investigation and Design
An extensive geotechnical investigation would be required to determine the soilscondition under the Fraser River bed. This would likely consist of deep bore holes atabout 30 m intervals to a depth of 10 m below the proposed pipe invert. The drill rigwould operate from a barge. The results of the geotechnical investigation woulddetermine the drilling tools and equipment required for HDD.
ii. Installation of Casing Pipe
To ensure an open borehole through the sand layer that overlies deeper clay deposits asteel casing pipe would be driven at a downward slope at each end of the crossing intothe clay and the sand inside this casing removed by auguring. The casing would beapproximately 1500 mm 0 and approximately 200 m long at each end.
iii. Drilling of a Pilot Hole
A pilot hole would be drilled from the entry point to the exit point along the proposedalignment and pipe grade. For a crossing of this length it is likely that bores would be
advanced simultaneously from each side of the river and intersect roughly midway. Apilot hole across the Fraser River would require about 5 days of drilling.
iv. Enlargement of Hole
Once the pilot hole is completed, the hole is enlarged by pre-reaming. Pre-reamingwould create an annular space to install the pipe. The final diameter of the drilled hole isusually 50% larger than the diameter of the pipe to be installed. For the proposed 1200mm 0 transmission main a 1500 mm 0 to 1800 mm 0 hole is anticipated.
Pre-reaming would involve several stages with increased reamer size for each stage. Weanticipate four to five passes would be required with the following sizes after the pilothole: 550 mm 0, 800 mm 0, 1200 mm 0, 1500 mm 0 and 1800 mm 0. Each pass wouldtake approximately 7 to 10 days to complete.
A drilling fluid (water based mud with bentonite and polymers) is injected continuouslyunder pressure in the hole to:
• Power the mud motor for the cutting head• Lubricate the cutting head and drill pipe• Convey the cuttings to the surface• Maintain the drill hole from collapsing• Seal the hole from drilling fluid loss
v. Pull Back of Pipe
Once the hole is enlarged to the required size and cleaned of debris the assembled pipe(usually completely pre-assembled as one single string) is pulled back with the drill rod.The assembled pipe is usually set on rollers to reduce drag during the pull back operation.
4.2 Advantages / Disadvantages
4.2.1 Advantages are:
• The approval and permitting process would likely not be as stringent as the other twomethods that require dredging.
• Dyke penetration on each side of the river may not be required.
• Effective method for installing in silts and clays.
• Construction would likely be possible during most favourable weather conditions forpipe assembly independent of timing restrictions due to fish migration.
41.102 () 2011 Page 5 of 9
OPUS DAYTONKNIGHT
56
OPUS
4.2.2 Disadvantages are:
• There is significant risk associated with hole collapse both during the initial bore,reaming process, and pipe pull. The 1200 mm 0 size over a 1400 meter length wouldmake this project one of the largest directional drills in the world.
• There is significant risk that the pipe may be stuck if it is immobilized for too long ifspace constraints require multiple segments to be welded during the pull backoperation.
• Extensive geotechnical investigation is required at the outset to determine the soilsconditions. Since the drill holes are spaced along the proposed alignment, thegeotechnical explorations may not provide complete information with respect tofrequency of obstructions, such as buried trees.
• Soil conditions are major factors affecting the feasibility of HDD. Availableinformation indicates that loose to very loose sand deposits dominate the soil profileto about El. -27 m to El. -30 m. Loose sands are problematic for maintaining therequired open hole for the HDD installation and so the drilling would have to passbelow these sand layers.
• The existence of deep layers of loose sands would require installation of large-diameter steel casing pipe, at least 1500 mm 0 and approximately 200 m in length oneach side of the crossing to reach the underlying silt/clay layers.
• A "frac out" could also result if a lens of looser material was encountered on thealignment, that wasn't evident in the test boreholes.
• A "frac out" in the river would have the risk of very serious environmentalconsequences.
• Unanticipated obstructions such as buried trees, stumps, cobbles or boulders are verydifficult and costly to remove.
• For HDD installation it is advisable to pull the pipe into place in a continuous string ifat all possible. This requires a long staging area in order to pre-assemble the entirepipeline. The crossing site is constrained in this regard by the highway and bridgeinterchange on the north side and by the CN railway tracks on the south side.
• The length of pipe to be installed by HDD would be longer than the other twomethods by at least 400 m due to the deeper depth required and the minimum bendingradius of the pipe.
• Drilling fluid disposal can be up to 3 times the volume of the displaced soil, and canbe costly because of the chemical additives that require special treatment.
• Higher cost than the other two methods and beyond the limits of any previous HDDprojects to date.
• Attendant risks are the pipe getting stuck part way across the river and problemssealing the casing pipes at the sand/clay interface.
4.3 Approvals / Permits
The following approvals/permits would be required:
• Department of Fisheries and Oceans• Ministry of Agriculture• Agricultural Land Commission• Navigable Waters Protection Agency• Canadian Coast Guard• Ministry of Environment• Fraser Health Authority• District of Mission• City of Abbotsford
4.4 Cost Comparison
Costs have been estimated at a very preliminary level from experience with past projectsand input from dredging and HDD contractors. Estimates do not include the cost of thewater main pipe as it is common to both.
• Dredge/drag /cover method — the dredging and backfillina would cost in the range of$4 to $5 million. Net value of the sand recovered (approximately 300.000 cubicmetres) would he $2 to $3 million.
• HDD method - $6 to $10 million
5.0 DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Because of the risks noted in Section 3.2.2 the Float/Sink/Cover method is not recommended.
The HDD contractors that we have spoken with are optimistic that they could do the work butwill not guarantee its success. To date, none of the contractors that we have spoken with haveinstalled a pipeline by HDD of this length and pipe diameter. To pursue the HDD option further.additional geotechnical work needs to be undertaken as noted in Levelton's February 11, 2010proposal. The additional cost to drill in the river is $57,900 (i.e. difference of $103,800 and$45,900), without HST. This would provide limited soils information only at the drill holelocations. Another option is to arrange for a HDD contractor to drill a pilot hole along the
proposed alignment and profile to determine the soils. Order of magnitude cost provided byMears for this work is $500k to $750k.
HDD has been used successfully for many river crossings but it is not recommended for thisproject because:
1. The river crossing alignment based on available geotechnical data indicates that saturatedloose sand dominates the soil profiles to about -30 m elevation. This is about 25 m below theriver bottom. Loose sand is problematic for HDD which means the pipe would need to belocated well below the -30 m elevation into possible silts and clays.
2. Loose sands require that oversized casing pipes be driven on the alignment to stabilize thehole for HDD.
3. The required length of cased hole would likely be approximately 200 metres on each side ofthe river.
4. The installation cost to install the pipe by HDD is more than by the Dredge/Drag/Covermethod.
There has been no case of a 1200 mm 0 pipe, 1400 m in length installed by HDD to date. Theclosest size and length is about 1100 m of 1066 mm 0 or 700 m of 1200 mm 0. There issignificant risk to install this transmission main by HDD given the soil conditions and physicaldimensions of the main.
The feasibility of constructing this crossing by HDD has been researched in consultation withtwo leading HDD contractors working primarily for the oil and gas industry and based inAlberta. Both Quanta Pipeline Services and Direct Horizontal Drilling were contacted and giventhe project details. Both firms provided records of having installed many river crossings using.HDD. The latter firm is currently mobilizing to install two gas main crossings of the Fraser Riverin the Tilbury Island area of Delta after the initial HDD contractor failed in an attempt to drill theinitial bore a year ago and abandoned much of the drill string in place. The largest of these mainsis 600 mm 0. Direct Horizontal Drilling has explained the methodology they would use if theAMWSC crossing were to be installed by HDD, however the most significant project they cancite is one of 1066 mm 0 by 1100 m long, which is of lesser scope than this project.
The question of seismic vulnerability of conventional dredge-drag-cover installation vs.installation by HDD has been considered. For HDD construction the interface between dissimilarsoils (sand/silty clay) raises the concern over differential movement at that location in anearthquake because the two layers are likely to behave differently which could stress the pipe at alocation difficult to reach for any necessary repairs. For the conventional installation the areas ofconcern are at each side of the river where there is potential for bank liquefaction in anearthquake. This risk would be considered in detail during final design and appropriatemitigative measures would be incorporated.
The Dredge/Drag/Cover method is a proven method and has been used to install AMWSS's twoexisting river crossings of the Fraser River in 1982 and in 1995. It is a methodology thatincidentally results in a valuable product (sand) that helps offset the cost of constructing vitalpublic infrastructure.
There are environmental considerations to be taken into account such as timing the in-riverdredging operations to avoid critical fish migration periods. It may be necessary to limit theamount of riverbed disturbance by reusing some of the excavated material as trench backfill. It isworth noting that the bed of the Fraser River in this location is subject to considerable shifting onan annual basis as a result of natural river flows.
Metro Vancouver has installed all of their large diameter water supply and trunk sewer mainsacross the Fraser River utilizing the dredge/drag/cover technology (over fifteen crossings). Forthis crossing, the net cost of dredge/drag/cover installation is estimated to be about 50% of thecost of installing by HDD. The possibility of accelerating the planned 900 mm sewer crossing forthe District of Mission to be installed in the same trench and at the same time as the water maincrossing is another factor that favours the dredging option as this would bring additional costsavings and avoid a second such installation in 2 or 3 years' time.
Our discussion with Brian Naito of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) at our May25, 2010 meeting lead us to believe that temporary disturbance of the riverbed at this locationduring the appropriate time of year would probably not present a potential risk to fisheryresources. Scott Resources forwarded an information package for DFO' s review and to decidewhether an EA is required. Supplementary information requested by DFO was prepared andsubmitted. Subsequently, we have been advised on October 25, 2010 that DFO will require thatthe project requires a formal screening under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act(CEAA).This will mean additional work to prepare and submit detailed drawings andconstruction methodology descriptions. We believe that this can he completed withoutjeopardizing the overall project schedule, however further clarification of the requirements andtime frames necessary is being sought in consultation with DFO.
Installation of the crossing by HDD is more costly and risky in that this scope of project has notbeen successfully accomplished using this method before. HDD also carries an environmentalrisk in the form of potential loss of drilling mud to the river.
The Dredge/Drag/Cover method is recommended for the Fraser River Crossing.
Per the District's Investment Policy FIN.20, staff are required to report to council on the District'sinvestment holdings on a quarterly basis.
The following table summarizes the District's investment holdings as at June 30, 2011:
AmountM.F.A. Short-Term Bond Fund $25,112,515M.F.A. Intermediate Fund 8,319,486M.F.A. Money Market Fund 295,302Total Investment Portfolio $33,727,303
General Bank Account $20,176,459
The District's general bank account is currently earning interest at 1.5%, which is a more favourablereturn than the M.F.A. Money Market Fund has earned lately. This explains the relatively low balance inthe M.F.A. Money Market Fund shown above, and as such staff felt it was prudent to include the bankbalance in this report. The general bank account balance shown above also includes property taxcollections that were deposited by June 30 th , but had not yet been transferred to the appropriateinvestment fund.
Kris Boland, CGA
GAFINANCE\Investments\Memos\investment Holdings Report - Jun 30 2011.doc
Page 1 of 1
Finance DepartmentMemorandum
62
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Director of Finance
Date: July 26, 2011
Subject: Clarification of Interest on Overdue Accounts
Recommendation1. That the District of Mission Consolidated User Fees and Charges Bylaw No. 4029-2007, bylaw
be amended by deleting the existing Section C Financial Services (4) in its entirety andreplacing it with the following:
"C Financial Services
Description ofExisting
Fee/Charge 2011 RatePolicy
Reference
Rate of interest Non-compounding interest of 0.065753% per FIN.2charged on all day (equivalent to 2% per month or 24% peroverdue municipal annum) on fees that remain outstanding after 30fees that are set and days from the mailing date of the invoice.invoiced pursuant to Interest will be charged on outstanding orDistrict bylaws. unpaid amounts on the 31 st day from the invoice
mailing date and thereafter until payment isreceived in full or until the unpaid amounts aretransferred to property taxes (only applies tocertain property related fees), at which timelegislative interest rates would apply."
2. That the District of Mission Accounts Receivable — Credit & Collection Policy (FIN.2) beamended by deleting the existing Section 7 Administrative Cost Recovery Fee and InterestCharges in its entirety and replacing it with the following:
"7. Administrative Cost Recovery Fee and Interest Charges
A 5% administrative cost recovery fee will be charged on accounts receivable billings,based on the gross invoice total before any applicable taxes, with the exception of pre-established or set fee billings determined by bylaw, policy or agreement, e.g. landfillaccounts, transit passes and tickets, etc. and other special circumstances approved by theDeputy Treasurer/Collector or his/her designate. This administrative fee partially covers theDistrict's administrative costs (general accounting required, departmental time involved withbillings and collections, office supplies, postage, etc.) that are incurred as a result ofbillings.
Non-compounding interest of .065753% per day (equivalent to 2% per month or 24% perannum) on fees that remain outstanding after 30 days from the mailing date of the invoicewith interest accumulating on the 31st day from the invoice mailing date and thereafter until
Page 1 of 2
payment is received in full or until the unpaid amounts are transferred to property taxes(only applies to certain property related fees), at which time legislative interest rates wouldapply."; and,
3. That the District of Mission Accounts Receivable — Credit & Collection Policy (FIN.2) beamended by deleting the existing Section 8 Payment Terms and Collections in its entirety andreplacing it with the following:
"8. Payment Terms and Collections
The following payment terms and collection process shall be followed:
a) Payments will be due within 30 days from the mailing date of the invoice withinterest accumulating on the 31 st day from the invoice mailing;
b) Statements will be issued, at a minimum, on a quarterly basis;
c) If any amount is payable by the District of Mission to a party with an overdueaccount the amount that is due from the other party will be deducted from theamount payable by the District of Mission;
d) All outstanding amounts that can be collected as property taxes under the provisionof the Community Charter will be transferred to the applicable property tax accountat year-end;
e) Certain overdue accounts, as determined by the Deputy Treasurer/Collector and/orhis/her designate, will be turned over to a collection agency for collection purposes;and
f) The following collection steps will be taken by staff:
After 30 days — send statement and start charging interestAfter 60 days — send first warning letterAfter 90 days — phone and send final warning letterAfter 120 days — send to collections"
Report
The District's user fees and charges bylaw currently provides for interest on outstanding accountsreceivable under section #4 of the bylaw schedule (see attached). This section also refers to theDistrict's accounts receivable policy (Fin. 2) for further information on the application of interest onoverdue amounts (see attached current policy).
The District's fees and charges bylaw should stand alone in terms of the application of interestcharges. In other words, one should not have to refer to the accounts receivable policy in regardsto how interest is applied on overdue amounts. Staff are recommending that the District's fees andcharges bylaw be updated as per the wording in the recommendation so that it is clear (basedsolely on the bylaw wording) as to when and how the District charges interest on overdue amounts.The wording has also been updated to reflect the current practice, which will necessitate a changeto the accounts receivable policy as well.
Ken Bjorgaard
G:/Finance/Accounts Receivable/interest on accounts receivable.docx
63
Page 2 of 2
District of Mission Consolidated User Feesand Charges Bylaw No. 4029-2007
Paae 6 of 9
Description of Existing Fee/Charge
'GST/HSTto be
Added
uaryanJ1, 2010
Rate
July 1,2010Rate
2011Rate
PolicyReference
(a) Manual hard copy maximum 2 business dayturnaround time $30.50 $30.50 $32.00
(b)Manual hard copy maximum 2 hour turnaroundtime $61.00 $61.00 $64.00
fe\
' 1
Verbal confirmation of tax statement figureswithin 2 weeks of providing original figures $0.00 $0.00$0.00
(d)Manual hard copy confirmation of taxstatement figures after 2 weeks of providingoriginal figures
$30.50 $30.50 $32.00
(e)On-line services to BC Online(Other online customers will have BC OnlineAdministration Fee added to this fee)
$24.00 $24.00 $25.00
4Interest on outstanding Accounts Receivableaccounts - non-compounding interest onoutstanding accounts over 30 days
2.00% 2.00% 2.00% FIN.2
5Accounts Receivable Administration Fee -administrative cost recovery charge on certaininvoices
5.00% 5.00% 5.00% FIN.2
D FORESTRY SERVICES
1 Minor Forest Product and Activity Permit(a) - Commercial Permit fee per month $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 LIC.18(b) - Botanical Products per month $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 LIC.18
(c) - Personal Permit fee per week(any product) $25.00 $25.00 $25.00 LIC.18
2 Forestry Gate Keys
(a) Weekly charge (2 week minimum) for theduration that the gate key is outstanding $5.00 $5.00 $5.00 PRO.26
in the key loan agreement, the deposit willbe refunded to the loanee.
-$60.00 -$60.00 -$60.00 PRO.26
(d)
- If the key is returned later than due date inaccordance with the key loan agreement. aportion of the deposit will be refunded to theloanee.
-$20.00 -$20.00 -$20.00 PRO.26
64
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - CREDIT & COLLECTION
FIN.2
Date Policy Adopted: October 19, 1987Date Policy Amended: December 6, 2002Date Policy Amended: November 21, 2005Date Policy Amended: December 18, 2006Date Policy Amended: January 4, 2010
1. General
Council Resolution Number: 24CAO Approval
Council Resolution Number: 05/991Council Resolution Number: 06/1238
Council Resolution C2010/003
The District of Mission provides various goods and services to a variety of persons andorganizations, e.g. property owners, residents, contractors, other governmental bodiesand agencies, etc., on an ongoing basis. Generally, goods and/or services must be paidfor before they are provided or rendered, however, under certain circumstances, asoutlined in this Credit and Collection Policy (Policy), credit privileges will be extended.Various flexible payment options will be provided to customers to facilitate prepaymentof goods and services, where credit is not extended.
2. Purpose
This Policy provides for the extension of approved credit in specific circumstances. ThePolicy is intended to safeguard the resources and assets of the District of Mission thatresult from accounts receivable, by minimizing risk, by maximizing cash flow, and byreducing the administrative and carrying costs that invariably come with accountsreceivable and subsequent collection efforts.
3. Extension of Credit
Credit will only be extended under the following conditions or in the followingcircumstances, where credit approval has been granted and if an established chargeaccount is up to date or current.
a. For work done or services provided to land or improvements or any otheramounts which can be transferred to property taxes and collected as such underthe provisions within the Community Charter, including property related bylawinfractions;
b. For emergency work and/or services that are required, e.g. repairs to roads orutilities as a result of damage by a contractor, utility company, or property owner,emergency cleanups, ICBC claims, etc.;
District of Mission Page 1 of 4Financial Administration — Accounts Receivable-Credit and Collection — FIN.2 Finance Department
65
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
FIN.2
c. Amounts due under lease, rental or other contractual agreements that havecredit arrangements and that have been approved by Council;
d. The sale of Forestry products and/or services, e.g. timber, logs. poles, roadgrading, etc., that are approved for sale via Council or approved through a formalagreement, permit and/or tender process;
e. For landfill tipping fees only for established businesses that have existing landfillcharge accounts with the District and for new accounts as approved by theDirector of Finance or the Deputy Treasurer/Collector.
f. For soil removal fees where the soil quantities removed are only known after thefact;
g. For goods and/or services provided to other governments, governmentalagencies, departments or bodies (includes RCMP), crown corporations,regulated utility companies and School District #75 (Mission) (includes allschools);
h. Bus tickets and passes provided to sellers or distributors where a customeragreement has been entered into;
i. For funeral homes or companies that collect cemetery fees on behalf of theDistrict;
j. Goods and/or services provided by Public Works where a deposit or prepaymenthas been taken and the costs exceed the prepaid amount;
k. On-going, longer duration (greater than one month) Recreation rentals andbookings where a formal agreement has been entered into;
I. For property related information provided to banks or other financial institutions;m. Companies and non-profit groups or organizations that provide services on
behalf of the District of Mission;n. For surplus goods that are sold through an auction company under an
agreement;o. Leisure Centre Guide Advertising when the customer has advertised in the guide
in the past and kept their account up to date;p. Sale of recyclable materials from the landfill;q. Leisure Centre passes if the insurance company has given us something in
writing guaranteeing that they will pay for the changes;r. Other specific or unique circumstances that are approved by the Director of
Finance or his/her designate.
Club Kids — Parks, Recreation, and Culture
The Club Kids program is paid for in advance, if the parent portion is not paid by the 10 th
of each month the child(ren) will not be allowed to attend until it is paid. The Ministrysubsidized portion is now pre-approved before the child attends. If it is not yet pre-approved, the parent has to pay the full amount until pre-approval is received and thenthe parent will be refunded.
If, under extenuating circumstances, an amount becomes due for services rendered (ie.A child attends that is not yet registered) under our Club Kids program, an invoice will besent out within 30 days and if not paid within 2 months, the child(ren) will not be able toattend until the account is paid up.
District of Mission Page 2 of 4Financial Administration — Accounts Receivable-Credit and Collection — FIN.2 Finance Department
66
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
FIN.2
4. Credit Application and Approval
A credit application will be required in certain instances or cases as determined by theDeputy Treasurer/Collector or his/her designate. The Deputy-Treasurer or his/herdesignate will provide some procedural guidelines to the various departments as towhen a credit application will be required.
The Deputy Treasurer/Collector or his/her designate will complete credit checks, whereapplicable or prudent, before credit is granted, and will then approve or deny specificcredit requests. Departments will not provide goods and/or services until credit has beenapproved, in cases where a credit application is required.
5. Withdrawal of Credit Privileges
Continued extension of credit is contingent on the person or organization maintaining itsaccount in good standing. Credit privileges will be withdrawn when any charge on anaccount remains unpaid for 60 days. In the event that credit privileges are withdrawn,prepayment will be required for all further goods provided or services rendered until theaccount is brought up to date. The District may also choose not to provide further goodsand/or services on outstanding accounts. If non-payment persists or if an account isrepeatedly over-due credit privileges will be permanently withdrawn.
6. Non-Sufficient Fund Cheques and Other Dishonoured Payments
Any payments (cheques, preauthorized debit, credits cards, etc.) that are not honouredand that result in a charge back to the District's bank account will be treated as accountsreceivable and will be assessed a fee, as set out in the District's Fees and ChargesBylaw No. 3954-2006, and amendments thereto.
7. Administrative Cost Recovery Fee and Interest Charges
A 5% administrative cost recovery fee will be charged on accounts receivable billings,based on the gross invoice total before any applicable taxes, with the exception of pre-established or set fee billings determined by bylaw, policy or agreement, e.g. landfillaccounts, transit passes and tickets, etc, and other special circumstances approved theDeputy Treasurer/Collector or his/her designate. This administrative fee partially coversthe District's administrative costs (general accounting required, departmental timeinvolved with billings and collections, office supplies, postage, etc.) that are incurred as aresult of billings.
Interest at a non-compounded rate of 2% per month will be charged on all overdueamounts (terms are net 30 days) starting on the 31 st day from the invoice date andthereafter until payment is received.
8. Payment Terms and Collections
The following payment terms and collection process shall be followed:
a. Payments will be due within 30 days from the invoice date with interestaccumulating after 30 days;
District of Mission Page 3 of 4Financial Administration — Accounts Receivable-Credit and Collection — FIN.2 Finance Department
67
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
FIN.2
b. Statements will be issued, at a minimum, on a quarterly basis;c. If any amount is payable by the District of Mission to a party with an overdue
account the amount that is due from the other party will be contraed or deductedfrom the amount payable by the District of Mission;
d. All outstanding amounts that can be collected as property taxes under theprovisions of the Community Charter will be transferred to the applicable propertytax account at year-end;
e. Certain overdue accounts, as determined by the Deputy Treasurer/Collectorand/or his/her designate, will be turned over to a collection agency for collectionpurposes.
f. The following collection steps will be taken by staff:After 30 days — send statement and start charging interestAfter 60 days — send first warning letterAfter 90 days — phone and send final warning letterAfter 120 days — send to collections
9. Agreements
When the District enters into agreements including entering into or renewing leaseand/or rental agreements it will ensure that security, penalty and/or enforcementprovisions are provided for within those agreements, to ensure that amounts due underthose agreements are paid within the terms so specified.
10.Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
An allowance for doubtful accounts will be set up on an annual basis at year-end, inaccordance with generally accepted accounting principles, with the accounts andamounts to be determined by the Director of Finance and the Deputy Treasurer/Collectoror their designates, in consultation with the District's auditor.
11.Reporting and Write-Off of Bad Debts
An annual report will be provided to Council as soon as possible after year-end, by theDeputy Treasurer/Collector or his/her designate, which outlines the status of theDistrict's accounts receivable at year-end and which recommends the formal write-off ofany amounts that have been set-up as doubtful and/or are deemed to be uncollectible.
12.Transitional Provisions
All existing credit arrangements in place prior to this Policy being adopted will betransitioned to the new Policy requirements as soon as contractually and practicallypossible including compliance with the new credit application process and paymentterms.
District of Mission Page 4 of 4Financial Administration — Accounts Receivable-Credit and Collection — FIN 2 Finance Department
68
33063 - 4th Avenue,Mission, B.C. V2V 1S6
(604) 826-6810Fax (604) 826-1424
tiouse saeti
ee
69
Sinc
Veve Sharpe, President
Fraser House Society
July 15, 2011
Mayor and CouncilDistrict of Mission8645 Stave Lake Street, Box 20['Assign, B.C. WA/ 4L9
Dear Mayor Atebe and Council,
I request your attention to the matter of an adjoining lane between Fraser House locatedat 33063 4 th Avenue and the property owned by Norman and Elizabeth Chamberlain at33043 4th Avenue.
Fraser House Society has leased this building from the District of Mission since 1967 tooperate our substance use treatment and prevention programs. Initially we offeredresidential treatment services for men and in 1987 we transitioned to offering out-patientservices to the community of Mission. I believe that the lane in question is a fire laneand it is also the only access to two of our six doors, one on the main floor and one onthe lower floor.
In 2006 the District of Mission agreed to lease the lane to Mr. & Mrs. Chamberlain.There was no discussion or consultation about the matter. Unfortunately, sinceimplementing the lease the Chamberlains have placed restrictions on our access andhave made it clear that we are not welcome to use the lane for our deliveries ortemporary use during our annual Christmas luncheon and other occasional events.
Prior to the lease, the lane was productively shared between the two properties. It is ourunderstanding that the lease is up for renewal. The Board of Directors of Fraser HouseSociety requests that the District of Mission return the lane to a 'shared' access.
DISTRICT OF MISSION Dao Rep
%70717,0 Date
/1/07/-70 IPC O. File Folder Name
Date,Scapned i Fie Category
- 330V36tiejTa:Othyorai5c tsas El Exempt Q COWOtherPar: DReport to COW Dirzturnvi:n ElReply for M,ayer^ Sid
Reouer,ted By Citr ❑ 1-1 Ple,WZISE to Council F ilow Up
cc. Kelly Ridley, Deputy Director of Corporate Administration
An agency supported by the Fraser Health Authority
M. DISTRICT OF
issionON THE FRASER
Corporate AdministrationMemorandum
70
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
Date: August 15, 2011
Subject: PSIT - Update
Recommendation:
For information
Background
The District of Mission received a notice of civil claim challenging, indirectly, the Public Safety InspectionProgram in early July of this year. The challenge is around the validity of the controlled substance bylawalong with a number of other related procedures in the administration of this bylaw.
Council has put the program on hold indefinitely, other than RCMP led property inspections, and hasrequested a full review of the program and bylaw. To date the review has basically been completed witha final report was due in late July. The report was to detail any proposed bylaw changes, options forprogram continuance, changes to the fee structure and any outstanding operational questions posedthrough the review process.
Due to unknown outcomes from a civil claim it is staffs opinion that any bylaw changes or programchanges should not be considered at this time. Therefore the program should remain on hold with apossible final report on changes to come once staff has a clearer understanding of the implications on theclaim.
Subject: Cultural Resources Commission Resignation
Background:
Attached is the letter submitted by Diana Muntigal to the Cultural Resources Commission advising of herresignation. Diana's term is set to expire at the end of 2011 and the Commission is not meeting until midSeptember. As the Appointment Procedure in the Terms of Reference states that each Octobernominations are accepted for the upcoming year, the Commission felt it was best to leave the positionvacant and incorporate it into the annual nomination process in October.
Stephan'e eY
FILE: [CLICK HERE TO TYPE EFS FILE CATEGORY] Page 1 of 2[Click here to type EFS File Folder Name]
Diana Muntigl
72
June 1, 2011
Pamela Alexis, ChairCultural Resource Commission,Mission, BC
Dear Pam,
At this point in time I find that I must limit my involvement with extracurricular activities andcommitments and focus my attention on post surgery recovery as well as on my immediateobligations related directly to work. I am therefore tendering my resignation from the CRC.
It has been a pleasure to work with you and everyone on the committee, and I thank Council forthe opportunity to do so. As time goes on I hope to again be available for additionalcommittee involvement.
Best of wishes,
Diana Muntigl
Parks, Recreation & CultureMemorandum
73
MDISTRICT OF
lsslonON THE FRASER
To:
Chief Administrative Officer
From:
Deputy Director, Parks, Recreation & Culture
Date:
July 22, 2011
Subject: Mural Policy LAN.43
Recommendation:
That the Mural Policy LAN.43 be eliminated as it is addressed in the Public Art Policy ORG.08.
Background:
The Cultural Resources Commission reviewed the Murals Policy and the Public Art Policy and felt uponreview that the intent of the Mural Policy was addressed in the Public Art Policy. Murals placed on theexterior of buildings whether privately or publically owned are accessible for the public to enjoy and,enhance and celebrate our community. The Public Art Policy refers to this in the following areas:
I Defining Public Art for Mission"Public Art" in Mission is defined as:"artwork which is accessible to the public and has aesthetic qualities. The artwork can be permanent,semi-permanent, functional, temporary, and includes all forms of art and performance."
II Public Art Vision"Public Art enhances the livability of Mission. It builds our community by enhancing our quality of life,contributing to economic development and helping us to celebrate our rich heritage and our unique anddistinctive cultural diversity. It brings art to life for our citizens in many everyday settings. Public artshows our commitment to local artists and to providing our citizens with access to art from BritishColumbia, Canada and around the world."
Ill Goals6. To encourage participation of and partnership with the private sector to provide for enhanced publicart in private spaces which are publically accessible.9. To ensure that public art reflects and contributes to Mission's heritage and culture.
VI Setting the Stage for Public ArtPublic art initiatives may be developed and brought forward by any of the following:-From businesses interested in either donating space or financial support for the development of publicart
Further, the Public Art Policy has an application and review process in place for public art projectsincluding responsibilities and selection committee criteria. The Commission felt having one policystreamlined the process for both the applicant and the District and thus was the most effective method ofdealing with applications.
---'8tepha e Key
FILE: [CLICK HERE TO TYPE EFS FILE CATEGORY]
Page 1 of 1[Click here to type EFS File Folder Name]
That a photo display be approved for installation on the north and west exterior walls of the LeisureCentre subject to the following conditions being met
• The cost for the production and installation of the photos and donor acknowledgment be paid forfrom the Arts Council project funds
• All photos must be of a sport, recreation and culture theme as approved between the Arts Counciland the Parks, Recreation & Culture Department
• A maximum of 5 photos to be selected• The photos to be of a consistent size, colour tone and spacing• The maintenance of the photos to be included in the annual maintenance of the Leisure Centre• The donors be acknowledged by the Arts Council in their display cases located in the Leisure
Centre, and;
That Council consider expanding the concept of historical photo displays in the District and task theCultural Resources Commission to comment on any applications through the Public Art Policy.
Background:
As per the Public Art Policy the Cultural Resources Commission (CRC) established a SelectionCommittee to review the application submitted by the Mission Arts Council. This application seeks toplace a photo mural on the exterior of the Leisure Centre with historical photos compiled and submittedby Mr. Eric Leblanc. The recommendation attached approves the application in principle but asks thatthe proponent address several items. The Parks, Recreation & Culture (PRC) Department has followedup with the Arts Council for further discussion and provides comment and suggestion below to theoutstanding questions from the CRC and items identified earlier by Council.
Inclusion and ownershipThe Arts Council would be the owner of the photos and work in partnership with the PRC Department onthe selection. The applicant and the PRC Department will jointly agree on the photos to be displayed toensure they stay within the sport, recreation and culture theme to fit with the Leisure Centre location.Therefore, some of the submitted photos would be eliminated.
Budget$10,000 has been raised to date through individual, business and organization donations. In someinstances individuals requested a specific photo to be included in the project. In discussion with the
FILE: [CLICK HERE TO TYPE EFS FILE CATEGORY] Page I of 2[Click here to type EFS File Folder Name]
applicant it was agreed that the photos displayed on the Leisure Centre must fit the sport, recreation andculture theme and if they did not an effort could be made by the Arts Council to find another suitablecommunity location. If one could not be found the funds would be returned.
Alternative site optionsThe applicant notes that the original location for the mural was the Home Hardware building locateddowntown but due to its sale the Leisure Centre was their next option. As the photos for the LeisureCentre will be of a sport, recreation and culture theme it was felt that there was potential to expand thephoto mural concept to other locations in the downtown core. Currently no locations have been identifiedbut the Arts Council is willing to investigate other options. Discussion took place regarding specificallychoosing photos which have a connection to a particular location (ie logging photos on the side of ashake & shingle building) and it was felt that this should be considered when determining locations.
Presentation and aestheticsThe Leisure Centre is a modern looking building with some design limitations for placing the photos at alevel that can easily be seen. This raised the question of whether the placement of photos is suited tothis style of building. It is felt that if the photos are displayed in a manner which compliments the currentdesign of the building (ie clean, symmetrical lines, consistent colour tone, etc.) they will look appealing.
Public safety, risk and management issuesThe applicant notes that volunteers would carry out annual maintenance of the photos (washing withsoap, water and tsp). From a risk management and union perspective it is felt that this work should beincorporated into the annual Leisure Centre maintenance conducted in September each year. Districtstaff would clean the photos as recommended in the application. This would have a minimal impact onthe budget (approximately $200/year of staff time).
Care, maintenance and decommissionThe PRC Department considered how the durability of the photos over time and the exterior of theLeisure Centre might be impacted by the project. After discussion with the manufacturer and PRC staff itwas felt that this was minimal. The photos are designed for outside application in our climate and at thetime of decommission touch up repairs (filling stucco holes) to the facility can easily be completed bymaintenance staff. In the event that the photos become unpresentable and require maintenance costssignificantly more than anticipated the District would have the right to remove them. The costs toreplace/repair them will be the responsibility of the Arts Council. The District commitment to display thephotos is 10 years.
The application of historical photos on buildings within the District of Mission, public or privately owned,has the potential to create a distinct look and identity which celebrates Mission's heritage. In discussionwith the Chair of the Heritage Commission and Economic Development Officer support was received inprinciple for this concept.
StephanieAttachments: CRC Recommendation
Concept Photo
FILE: [CLICK HERE TO TYPE EFS FILE CATEGORY] Page 2 of 2[Click here to type EFS File Folder Name]
75
*.< Review of a Photo-Mural Public ArtOn Mission Leisure Centre Facility
May 13, 2011
76
CULTURALRESOURCESCOMMISSION
Title of Public Art Project Mural on Leisure Centre Building
Sponsors/ contact person Mission Arts Council, Nancy Arcand Executive Director
RECOMMENDATION
General recommendation of the Public Art Selection Committee was yes - with a numberof specific requirements that the proponent needs to meet in the following areas:
• Public safety, risk and management issues
• Care and maintenance
• Inclusion
• Acknowledgement
• Plan for decommission or removal
• Financial information and detailed budget
Before proceeding, the CUPE union and District Engineering departments need to beconsulted, and a detailed list of expenses related to the photo-mural submitted to Districtstaff. A detailed list of questions, concerns and actions that need to be taken areincluded in the chart which forms part of this report.
Many of the questions were answered only in part by the applicant. The SelectionCommittee did not have any photographs of the design at the time of the meeting.There is concern about losing the original photo scrapbook layout of the mural andpotentially becoming more of a `billboard' effect — is there any way to modify this(framing, `mounting corners') that fits with the historic photo concept?. How is theoriginal concept modified to apply to the new location? The donors need to be up-datedand fully informed of what the photo-mural will look like — before the project actually goesup.
Additional comments (received by email, after the meeting, in response to layout shownin photos we received by email) — "messy" layout, may need to be tidied up. These arefrieze elements & should be orderly in placement and size. Legend should be at lowerand at readable level. Should Architects opinion be sought? (copyright design). It is adifficult height to service, but more secure.
The Leisure Centre location is the Selection Committee's 2nd choice for location — a realeffort should be made by the proponent to put the photo-mural on private space in thedowntown area. It was suggested that it could be developed as part of the downtownrevitalization, particularly if the concept of archival photos became popular, they could bemounted on different buildings, or moved from one location to another to maintain on-going interest and tell the story of the community.
Selection Committee: Community Members: Glen Kask, Shelly Clarkson
CRC — Pam Alexis, Frank Sleigh, Sharon Syrette
77
Parks, Recreation & CultureMemorandum
78
MDISTRICT OF
lsslonON THE FRASER
To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: Deputy Director, Parks, Recreation & CultureDate: August 8, 2011
Subject: Transit and Recreation Passes for Canada World Youth Exchange Program
Background:
At the July 18, 2011 Council Meeting, Council asked staff to prepare a report detailing the cost of transitpasses and Leisure Centre passes for the Canada World Youth Exchange Program which consists of 18students and 2 supervisors. The students will be in Mission from September 10, 2011 — December 30,2011 and during their stay they will live with host families and integrate into the community byvolunteering with local organizations which allows the participants the opportunity to gain valuable workexperience while making a contribution to the community.
The youth are in the community for approximately 3.5 months.
• Transit passes are $45 per month and are not prorated for portions of a month. The youth andadult rate is the same.Monthly pass cost: 20 x $45. X 4 months $3,600.00
• 3 Month Leisure Centre Pass cost: 20 x $141.60 $2,832.00*(*This is the adult rate as ages of the students varies between the student and adult rate)
A 3 month pass will suffice as they probably won't be activated immediately when they arrive inthe community.
Total cost to the District $6,432.00
If Council wishes to support this initiative, the Finance Department has recommended that it be fundedfrom the Council contingency budget.
Stephanie Key
FILE: GAPARKREC \STEPHANIEREPORTS \201 I -COUNCIL \AUG
Page 1 of 1
79
Parks, Recreation & CultureMemorandumM DISTRICT OF
RecommendationThat approval be provided to the Mission Senior Centre Association to seek grant funds for improving theacoustics in Hall 1 of the Mission Community Activity Centre and establishing an entrance wall in thefacility, and;
That a support letter be provided by Council to accompany the application.
BackgroundThe Mission Seniors Centre Association have approached the Department to assist them in writing aNew Horizons for Seniors Program Grant. These grants support projects led or inspired by seniors. Thelocal Association is hoping to fund equipment for activities such as floor curling and senior's fitness,computer and office equipment and small renovations to the Mission Community Activity Centre.
As the owner of the facility, the renovation work will be managed by the Department. The renovationswhich the seniors are proposing include:
• Creating an entrance wall inside the front door on the west side to partially separate Hall 1 fromthe entrance. This will address noise, drafts and interruptions as a result of multi-purpose use inthe building. Estimated cost $2,500.
• Acoustic improvements to Hall 1 involving the application of ceiling tiles and wall treatments.Estimated cost $6,000.
While this grant is being applied for by the Seniors Association, all users of the Activity Centre will benefitfrom the improvements. The application deadline is September 16 and if successful the work will need tobe completed within the following 12 months.
2'•-• /Stephanie Jey
FILE: GAPARKREC \ STEPHANIE \REPORTS k20 I I-COUNCIL \AUG Page 1 of 1
MDISTRICT OF
0\ THE FRASER
Corporate AdministrationMemorandum
80
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Acting Executive Assistant
Date: August 10, 2011
Subject: Released from Closed Council on August 08, 2011
At the August 8, 2011 closed council meeting, the following information was released from closedcouncil:
That the District of Mission has sold 33098 Myrtle Avenue, legally described as PI LMP 20544,LD 36, Sec 28, Twp 17, Parcel A of Plan 2522, for $152,000.00.
That the District of Mission has entered into a West Coast Express Mission Service and FundingAgreement with the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority.
