council chambers agenda a) parks and recreation …and~minutes/parks~recre… · presentation a)...

CITY OF LANGFORD

PARKS, RECREATION, CULTURE AND BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING

Monday, June 27 t h , at 5:00 p.m.

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

AGENDA Page

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

3. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

a) Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - April 26, 2011 001

4. REPORTS

a) Beach Access - Guyton Way - Staff Report (File No. 6000-35) 004

b) LASN (Landscape Architecture Specified News) - Goldstream Avenue - Verbal Report (File No.5800-01)

c) Learn to Fish Program - Lake Ida Ann - Verbal Report (File No. 6200-01)

d) Aerator in Langford Lake - Verbal Report (File No. 6000-35)

5. ADJOURNMENT

CITY OF LANGFORD

MINUTES OF THE PARKS, RECREATION, CULTURE AND BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING

Tuesday, April 26 t h , 2011 at 5:00 p.m.

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

PRESENT

Councillor L. Seaton (Chair), Councillor R. Wade (Vice-Chair); Members: K. Reece, R. Prettie, M. Stearns,

and A. Sturgeon.

ATTENDING

Parks Manager, Mike Leskiw and City Planner, Matthew Baldwin.

ABSENT

Members: G. Brownlow, G. Terlson, and VCMMC Rep. M. Gibbins.

1. CALL TO ORDER

The Chair called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

MOVED BY: COUNCILLOR WADE

SECONDED: A. STURGEON

That the Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification Committee approve the Agenda as

presented.

CARRIED.

3. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

a) Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification Committee Meeting - March 28 t h , 2011


SECONDED: A. STURGEON

That the Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification Committee meeting of

March 28 t h , 2011 be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED.

P I

Minutes of the PRC&B Committee April 26 t h, 2011

Page 2 of 3

4. PRESENTATION

a) Dr. Stan Orchard Re: Bullfrog Work in Langford (File No. 5280-45)

Dr. Stan Orchard gave a verbal update and power point presentation on the status o f t h e bullfrog eradication

done in Langford.

5. REPORTS

a) Parks and Boulevard Maintenance Contract

- Staff Report (File No. 2240-60)


SECONDED: K. REECE

That the Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification Committee recommend to Council:

That Council renew the Parks and Boulevard Maintenance Contract with VCMMC for 5 years.

CARRIED.

b) Trail Maintenance Contract - Staff Report (File No. 2240-60)


SECONDED: K. REECE


That Council renew Trails Maintenance Contract with VCMMC for 5 years CARRIED.

c) Bear Mountain Parks and Boulevards Maintenance Contract - Staff Report (File No. 2240-60)


SECONDED: K. REECE


That Council approve the Bear Mountain Parks and Boulevard Maintenance Contract wi th

TerraWorx for 5 years.

CARRIED.

P2

Minutes of the PRC&B Committee April 26 , h, 2011

Page 3 of 3

d) Dog Park Property

- Verbal Report (File No. 5900-01)

The Chair provided an update to the Committee wi th respect to the portion of right-of-way by David

Cameron School being proposed for a Dog Park and mentioned that staff would be meeting with a

representative from the Ministry of Transportation in the near future.

e) Earth Day - Verbal Report (File No. 8100-20)

The Vice-Chair reported that Wal Mart and four (4) schools were involved in a successful Earth Day

clean-up that took place in the neighbourhood. He expressed his hope that this will be a bigger event

next year.

f) A T Gordon Memorial Park Opening - Verbal Report (File No. 6000-20)

The Vice-Chair reported that the opening and renaming celebration of Valley View Park to A T Gordon

Memorial Park took place on Sunday, April 17 t h , 2011. The event was successful and the community is

very happy with the park and the work done by the developer.

6. ADJOURNMENT

The Chair adjourned the meeting at 6:05 p.m.

CHAIR CERTIFIED CORRECT

(Administrator)

P3

CITY OF LANGFORD

2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue Langford, BC

V9B 2X8

Tel: (250) 391-3162 Fax: (250) 391-3439

parks@cityoflangford. ca Website: www.cityoflangford.ca

PARKS DEPARTMENT

Staff Report

to

Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification

Committee

Date: June 27, 2011

File No.: 6000-35

Subject: Guyton Way Right of Way

Background

On August 13 t h, 2007, the Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Standing Committee recommended the following:

"1. Proceed with consideration of a Development Variance Permit No. DVP-07-11 for the property located at 2792 Guyton Way with the following variances:

a) That Section 6.20.06(1 )(c) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied by reducing the minimum exterior side lot line setback from the required 4.5m (215ft) to 1.5m (5ft);

i) That the applicant build a solid board fence with a minimum height of 1.8 m (6 ft) along the exterior side lot line prior to the issuance of Occupancy Permit and provide bonding for this work prior to the issuance of this Development Variance Permit; and ii) That the applicant complete construction of the trail and viewing platform prior to issuance of this Development Variance Permit."

On August 30, 2007, Council approved the following Planning and Zoning Standing Committee resolution:

"a) Planning and Zoning Committee-August 13 t h, 2007

1. Development Variance Permit Application-2797 Guyton Way (Application to Vary the Side Yard Setback) (File No. DVP-07-11) That Council direct staff to proceed with consideration of a Development Variance Permit No. DVP-07-11 for the property located at 2797 Guyton Way with the following variances: a) That Section 6.20.06(1 )(c) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied by reducing the minimum exterior side lot line setback from the required 4.5m (215ft) to 1.5m (5ft) for the first story only (i.e. no living areas above the first floor is allowed in the set back);

i) That the applicant place the garage portion of the dwelling on the easterly setback (towards Guyton Way)."

Subject to:

Subject to:

P4

Commentary

On April 28, 2011, Councilor Seaton and the Parks Manager met with a group of local residents at Guyton Way. Councilor Seaton reviewed the history of the neighborhood and mentioned that there was never any intent of making an access at this location due the steepness of the bank and the sharp drop-off at the water's edge. The area was intended to be a riparian habitat with a storm water drain. At this meeting Ms. Maureen Mulzet, of 1273 Kingfisher, inquired as to the process needed to have the City construct an access and platform/dock. It was mentioned that there would need to be a Biologist report stating that such an access would be possible and an engineered design for the staircase and dock which would then need Provincial approval. At present this project is not in the Parks 5-Year Capital Plan.

On May 24, 2011, Maureen Mulzet delivered to City Hall the attached letter and petition. Shortly after this date, a local resident entered the riparian zone and hand dug steps in the bank down to the lake shore (photo attached). As a result, Richard DeKelver, the local Provincial Conservation Officer, and Marlene Caskey, Senior Ecosystem Biologist for the Province, have become involved as this action took place on crown land without authorization.

On June 21 , 2011 Mr. Kam Brar delivered to City Hall an environmental report prepared by Enkon (attached). The report recommends that the riparian area be reestablished as an access at this location is not feasible and would create a liability to the City.

Financial Implications

The area in question is quite steep and any staircase or dock installed in this area would require significant Capital funding and then ongoing operational funds for maintenance. This would require additional Parks funding.

Legal Implications

The shoreline in this area drops off quickly so anyone falling in the water may have a difficulty getting back to shore. An access at this location would create a liability to the City.

That the Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification Committee recommend that Council:

1. Retain Guyton Way as a riparian area and direct staff to work with the Provincial Government and Enkon to ensure that the disturbed bank is reinstituted and replanted per Enkon's report dated June 15, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

Options

Mike Leskiw Parks Manager

/Matthew Baldwin City Planner

Steve Ternent Treasurer

P:\Parks\5800 PARKS ADMINISTRATION- 01 General\Reports to Council-Committee\Committee\2011\ReportsM 1-06-27\Guton Place doc P5

June 15,2011

Project #: 1466-002

Kam Brar 2797 Guyton Way Victoria, B.C. V9B 5T5

Attention: Mr. Kam Brar

Dear Mr. Brar:

R E : ASSESSMENT OF F E A S I B I L I T Y OF B E A C H A C C E SS AT GUYTON WAY EASEMENT

BACKGROUND

Several residents within the Guyton Way subdivision, in the City of Langford, are interested in creating beach access on Langford Lake. This access is desired at an easement between 2797 Guyton Way and 2806 Lakeshore Place. ENKON was initially contacted by a resident regarding what works would be required to obtain all necessary permits and approvals in order to construct beach access at this site. A budget was prepared in the spring of 2011 and submitted to the resident. Shortly after another resident in the area was noted digging stairs into the bank to provide access to the shore of Langford Lake. No permits or approvals were applied for or received for these works and ENKON did not conduct a field assessment prior to these works commencing.

ENKON attended the site, on behalf of the City of Langford, to inspect damage to the riparian setback. Impacts to the riparian area were noted and were documented. The following memo outlines impacts noted in the setback, the feasibility of constructing an access at this location and recommendations to restore the impacted area.

R E S U L T S

Impacts to Langford Lake Riparian Setback

During the inspection ENKON noted that the lower branches of several trees had been pruned to an approximate height of 2 m. A l l riparian vegetation within the

E N K O N L N R 0 N M L •\ L

iui'B .i10 - rJd View i l resl VimriA, R.r,. r^naca

vaw 3>'7 Phone. (250; -180-7103

:dx: (250) 480-7141 [--liiil: enkon Menken.com

P6 \

\

Mr. Kam Brar June 15,2011 Page 2

E N K O N E N V I R O N M E N T A L

impacted corridor had been removed but it does not appear that any trees were removed. Soil was excavated to allow for the creation of soil steps. This material was deposited into the adjacent riparian area. ENKON did not note that any of the soils had been deposited within Langford Lake. There were signs of mild mechanical damage at the base of a tree and the roots of a large arbutus had been exposed during soil excavation.

Photograph 1 - View from top of bank towards Langford Lake

$^sk. If

Photograph 2 - View of plant material deposited into adjacent riparian area.

P 7

Mr. Kam Brar June 15, 2011 Page 3


Photograph 3 - View of soil deposited into adjacent riparian area.

Photograph 4 - View of tree pruning.

Photograph 5 - View of tree pruning. Photograph 6 - View of exposed and damaged Arbutus root.

P8



Photograph 7 - View of exposed Arbutus roots. Photograph 8 - View of mechanical damage and deposition of large rock against tree trunk.

Photograph 9 - View upslope from limit of disturbance.

Photograph 10 - View of stormwater outlet headwall with accumulated rubble from excavation works.

Al l works were conducted within the 30 m assessment area and the 15 m Streamside Protection and Enhancement Area (SPEA) as outlined in the Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR). No works are allowed within the 15 m SPEA at any time unless first approved by the Ministry of Environment and the City of Langford.

A l l works at the site have ceased and a barricade has been installed by the City to prevent intrusion into the area. Due to works at this site there are now exposed

P 9

Mr. Kam Brar June 15, 2011 Page 5


soils that are prone to wind and rainfall erosion. I f left untreated this can cause erosion of fines into Langford Lake potentially causing a water quality concern.

Feasibility of Access Creation

After assessing the site and looking at the building code it is not feasible to construct an access at this site. Due to the steep nature of the slope and short run it will not be possible to install stairs that would accommodate a maximum rise of 8 inches and a minimum run of 9 inches. In addition landings must be as wide as they are deep and must be no less than 36 inches. Because this property is owned by the City improper installation of stairs would create a liability issue that would be unacceptable. Also, there is currently no handrail present at this site which is required by code for outdoor stairs on City property. There is a steep drop-off at the top of the stormwater outlet headwall and this is now totally unprotected due to the removal of the vegetation. Because stairs are not suitable for this site and because they were illegally installed within the SPEA they are recommended for removal. Without stairs present at this location there would be no need to install a handrail. The creation of a handrail at this site would be considered an installation of a permanent structure within the SPEA with is not authorized under the RAR.

In addition to the challenge of building stairs within this area there is also the problem of building a structure over top of a stormwater pipe. This easement is in place to allow for access to this pipe in case of repairs. There are minimum cover requirements over top of pipes and the further excavation of this slope might reduce required cover. ENKON did not note exposed bedding material indicating that the stair excavation works were not within very close proximity to the pipe.

Concerns over safety have been raised by the neighbours. The access that was created is sheltered and is not visible from the street. I f an accident were to occur at this site is would not be readily observable and access into the site would be challenging due to the steep slope and overhanging vegetation. As well a secluded Lake access point, such as this, would be ideal for loitering and after hour partying which is a safety concern as well.

Another concern would be the continued environmental damage caused by users of the stairs. Unfortunately it is likely that garbage (i.e. cans, cigarette butts, plastic bags, glass) wil l be left behind. There is also the potential that users wil l try to widen the steps to provide better access and wil l further impact the riparian vegetation in the process.

PIO



Recommendations for Restoration

The impacted area within the Langford Lake riparian setback is approximately 11 m long by 1.5 m wide resulting in a total area of 16.5 m 2 . Because these works were done without approvals or authorizations and because it is not feasible to construct a legal staircase to access the shore ENKON recommends that the area be restored. The soils that were set into the adjacent riparian area should be removed and used to re-grade the impacted slope back to its natural grade. It may be necessary to import some clean topsoil to ensure that this bank is back to original grade. Because no trees were removed and the canopy is still intact ENKON recommends that 17 shrubs be plants on the slope. Ideal shrubs for this site include salal, common snowberry and sword fern. These plants should be installed approximately 1 m apart to ensure proper cover on the slope. Once the plants are installed then approximately 3-4 inches of straw mulch should be placed over the remaining slope. This straw wil l help to protect exposed soils against erosion and wil l also help to keep the ground moist.

Once the plants are installed there will be the requirement for watering for the duration of the summer/fall until the winter rains commence. These plants will not survive the summer heat and dry conditions without watering and due to the close proximity of the exposed soils to Langford Lake this planting cannot be conducted in the fall. These plants should be watered at least twice a week and more frequently i f they show signs of struggling. I f the City is not able to water these plants the residents at 2797 Guyton Way have volunteered to take on the task. These plants must exhibit an 80% survival rate after one year to be considered a successful riparian restoration undertaking.

I f you have any questions or require further information please do not hesitate to give me a call at (250) 480-7103.

Yours truly,

Ann M Matteson, B.Sc, Project Biologist

cc. Mike Leskiw, City of Langford - Parks Department

P H

City of Langford

2 n d Floor, 877 Goldstream Ave.

Langford, B.C.

V9B-3X8

Re; Lake Access Guyton Way

As discussed with Mike Leskiw and Lanny Seaton on April 28, 2011 here

are the requested items:

1. A signed petition from the community stating that lake access is

wanted. As it was stated in the past that community did not want

this.

2. A biologist quote, as we are unsure of to proceed with this since

there was a study done May 2011.

3. A plan as to how the area could be constructed

We as a community are willing to help with the construction. Also

we would like this to be considered a "local area improvement plan"

possibly included in our taxes.

Thanks -

Maureen Mulzet

P14

Lake Access Guyton Way

City Of Langford

2 n d Floor, 877 Goldstream Ave.

Langford, B.C.

V9B-3X8

We the residents of Lakeshore place, Kingfisher place, and Guyton way,

Goldstream avenue, Lake End road, petition the city to allow lake

access and a platform/dock down from the viewing platform area on

Guyton Way. This is what we were all lead to believe was part of our

home purchase package. The community is filing this petition, this #fcf4

day of tVvj in 2011 regarding the request above

Thanks

Please see the attached signatures

P15

Name address Phone email

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

(173 & brisker \ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

pA£ca€ HAcrA>S

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

27 CH A k £ « {

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

L _ t ^ 2rs 97$ vZ'/y

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

Al fxnmf - ISO

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

- j . -j

(Yfeli^'CL LOCO5 i rH

lam^ K r m f i ^ Pi

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

:TAHI : R -

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

fiSGwktf t <<'•'' feu

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

v/ >:>. .-€> y/^v J?$&e i-dM:t £>"0

—'

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

\ ) , C A.

j

S. /?< 7

,„ , —;»

'C G-A.

\BT\A K m ^ W ? , AftfJ //

'C G-A.

m Tin r\ .^y' ^ ^" - .

'C G-A.

^ " ' r ... '

'C G-A. 'C G-A.

p5j

2 $ c 7 UK6SV)crc6

'C G-A.

^ II I"! ra\teVfei^

'C G-A.

(AW411 (A

'C G-A.

L*X4> £-t> -

'C G-A. 'C G-A. -i jj V ' —

, z x - Ml9- H c€4- 'C G-A.

>^ 7) tA-X ^ './ ^

'C G-A.

P16

Name address Phone email

/ JY^/^ll"

J v ****

6*0. c x

P17

Hi Maureen,

Here is the quote and the Client Authorization Form. We have looked into what would be required and it is as follows:

1. Riparian Areas Assessment to be submitted to City of Langford 2. Section 9 Notification to be submitted to Ministry of Environment Water Stewardship Branch (to

get approval to build a dock) 3. Crown Land Tenure application to be submitted to Ministry of Agriculture and Lands (because

Langford Lake is crown land, also needed to build dock)

If you have any questions regarding the quote please give me a call.

Sincerely,

Susan Blundell, M.Sc, R.P.Bio. Manager of Environmental Services ENKON Environmental Ltd. Suite 310 - 730 View Street Victoria, B.C. V8W 3Y7 Phone (250) 480-7103 Fax (250) 480-7141 Mobile (250) 881-4368 http://enkonenvironmental.com

P19

Gyton Way Easement RAR Assessment, Section 9 Notification and Crown Land Tenure Application

Table 1 - Professional Fees

Task Senior Project Biologist Project Biologist Drafting TOTAL

COST Task

Hours Fees Hours Fees Hours Fees

TOTAL

COST

1 Site Assessment 3 $330 - - - - $330

2 Report/Application 24 $2,040 4 $300 $2,340 Preparation

24 $2,040 $300 $2,340

3 Meetings 4 $440 - - - - $440

TOTAL 7 $770 24 $2,040 4 $300 $3,110

^ Complete RAR assessment of site, flag high water mark and identify potential impacts to shoreline and riparian area.

Prepare RAR report for submission to the City of Langford and complete Section 9 Notification and Crown Land Tenure Application.

3 If required meet with the City of Langford and the Province of British Columbia to discuss proposed project.

Table 2 - Disbursement Budget

Expense Item Estimated Cost Travel $40

Application Fees $280 Printing $10

Fax/Mail/Courier S10

TOTAL $340

These figures do not include H.S.T.

Notes:

1 . Foundations and structures to be designed by others.

May, 2011

Not to Scale

council chambers agenda a) parks and recreation …and~minutes/parks~recre… · presentation a)...

Documents