greater vancouver regional district intergovernment and … · 2015-04-20 · greater vancouver...

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING

Thursday, April 23, 2015 1:00 p.m.

2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia

A G E N D A1 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 April 23, 2015 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for April 23, 2015 as circulated.

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 April 2, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held April 2, 2015 as circulated.

3. DELEGATIONS 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 Status of Reserves

Designated Speaker: Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer

That the Board approve the application of reserves as set out in Schedules 1, 2 and 3

of the report titled “Status of Reserves” dated March 25, 2015.

1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.

I&F - 1

Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda April 23, 2015

Agenda of 4

5.2 GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution

Designated Speaker: Dean Rear, Director, Financial Planning & Operations

That the GVS&DD Board:

a) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 is October 1, 2015; and

b) Direct staff to prepare a new amending bylaw to amend GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 to clarify that the Bylaw does not apply to secondary suites.

5.3 Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Designated Speaker: Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer That the GVRD Board refer the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District

Capital Projects to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC to consider and report back on

the issues raised in the report dated April 16, 2015, titled “Capital Projects Protocol –

Policy Update”.

5.4 Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement

Project – Funding Request

Designated Speaker: Greg Smith, Senior Director, Corporate Services

That the GVRD Board approve a capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and

Rescue Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre.

5.5 Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy

Designated Speaker: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations

That the GVRD Board approve the Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy as presented

in the report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”.

5.6 National Zero Waste Council Update

Designated Speaker: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations

That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive for information the report

titled National Zero Waste Council Update dated April 13, 2015.

5.7 Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance

Designated Speaker:

Allan Neilson, General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment

a) That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to send a draft submission to the Chair of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to reiterate Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing objections concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and the rule that prohibits the appointment of local elected officials as local representatives; and

b) That the Board ratify the Metro Vancouver submission.

I&F - 2


Agenda of 4

5.8 GVRD Nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors

Designated Speaker:

Chris Plagnol, Director Board and Information Services/Corporate Officer,

Legal and Legislative Services

That the GVRD Board designate Raymond Louie as Metro Vancouver nominee to the

E‐Comm Board of Directors for the 2015‐2016 term.

5.9 Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a Standby/Emergency Power Generation Source

That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Province of BC and to BC Hydro requesting

that the decision to close the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant be reconsidered and

that it be maintained as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro

Vancouver.

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.1 Intergovernment and Finance Committee 2015 Work Plan

6.2 Intergovernment and Finance Committee Terms of Reference

7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING

That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee close its regular meeting schedule for April 23, 2015 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e), (g) and (k), and 90 (2) (b) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if

the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district;

(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; (k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of

a regional district service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the board or committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public; and

90 (2) A part of a meeting must be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to one or more of the following:

I&F - 3


Agenda of 4

(b) the consideration of information received and held in confidence relating to negotiations between the regional district and a provincial government or the federal government or both and a third party.”

10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION

That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of April 23, 2015.

Membership: Louie, Raymond (C) – Vancouver

Moore, Greg (VC) – Port Coquitlam

Brodie, Malcolm – Richmond

Clay, Mike – Port Moody

Corrigan, Derek – Burnaby

Deal, Heather – Vancouver

Mussatto, Darrell – North Vancouver City

Steele, Barbara – Surrey

Stewart, Richard ‐ Coquitlam

Walton, Richard – North Vancouver District

I&F - 4

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Thursday, April 2, 2015 Page 1 of 3

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Intergovernment and Finance Committee held at 9:03 a.m. on Thursday, April 2, 2015 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Councillor Raymond Louie, Vancouver Vice Chair, Mayor Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Mayor Mike Clay, Port Moody Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Councillor Heather Deal, Vancouver Mayor Darrell Musatto, North Vancouver City Mayor Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Mayor Richard Walton, North Vancouver District MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey STAFF PRESENT: Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer Klara Kutakova, Division Manager, Board and Information Services/Deputy Corporate Officer,

Legal and Legislative Services 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 April 2, 2015 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for April 2, 2015 as circulated.

CARRIED 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 February 19, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held February 19, 2015 as circulated.

CARRIED

2.1

I&F - 5


3. DELEGATIONS No items presented.

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

No items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 Authorization to Attend 2015 International Events

Report dated March 25, 2015, from Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations, seeking input on the attendance and remuneration of Board members to attend events that are within the mandate of Metro Vancouver's international engagement objectives, and on recommendations to the Board Chair. It was MOVED and SECONDED

That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee:

a) supports attendance at the following 2015 international events:

ICLEI World Congress 2015

Resilient Cities 2015

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) World Council Meeting

2015 Study Tour

Sustainable Innovation 2015

IEDC 2015 Annual Conference b) authorizes the Chair of the Intergovernment and Finance Committee to

forward the names of the recommended attendees to the Board chair for authorization.

CARRIED 6. INFORMATION ITEMS

No items presented.

7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS

No items presented.

I&F - 6


9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for April 2, 2015 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (i) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor‐client privilege,

including communications necessary for that purpose.” CARRIED

10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adjourn its regular meeting of April 2, 2015.

CARRIED (Time: 9:04 a.m.)

____________________________ ____________________________ Klara Kutakova, Raymond Louie, Chair Deputy Corporate Officer 11120241 FINAL

I&F - 7

11002989

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer Date: March 25, 2015 Meeting date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Status of Reserves

RECOMMENDATION That the Board approve the application of reserves as set out in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the report titled “Status of Reserves” dated March 25, 2015.

PURPOSE To present, for approval, additional reserve applications to those previously approved by the Board in October 2014 and to project the reserve status of operating and designated reserves for 2015. BACKGROUND The 2015 Greater Vancouver Districts’ Final Budget approved in October contained estimates of reserves and their proposed uses. Some of these proposed uses were based on forecasts of year‐end results. With the year‐end accounting process now complete we are able to update this information for the actual results of the year. Detailed information on actual operating results were included in the report “2014 Financial Results Year‐End” presented to the Performance and Procurement Committee on April 15, 2015. ADDITIONAL RESERVE APPLICATIONS Schedules 1, 2 and 3 are additional reserve applications being presented for Board approval. Schedules 4 and 5 present updated operating and designated reserve projections for 2015. Additional Proposed Applications of Reserves in 2015 – Use of Excess Reserves: As outlined in Schedule 1, it is proposed that additional unspecified operating reserves, resulting from 2014 operating surpluses, or the solid waste sustainability reserve funds be applied as follows:

Air Quality – to Air Quality Equipment Reserve to fund future equipment acquisitions

Regional Parks ‐ to Heritage Parkland Acquisition Fund Reserve to fund future parkland acquisitions

General Government – to Regional District Fleet Vehicle Reserve to fund future fleet vehicle replacements

Regional Planning – to Regional Growth Strategy Reserve to fund future requirements should they arise

Water – to reduce future debt requirements

Solid Waste – to fund the future Landfill closure and post closure obligations

Liquid Waste – to reduce future debt requirements and to fund the Lab Equipment Reserve

5.1

I&F - 8

Status of Reserves Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 3

These applications are consistent with Board policy regarding use of reserves. Projects being carried forward from 2014 ‐ Initiatives started in 2014 to be completed in 2015: Several operating program projects were started but not completed within the 2014 fiscal year, thus generating a program surplus. We require Board approval to carry these surpluses forward to complete the projects in 2015. The initiatives presented are those deemed by staff as a high priority and difficult to accommodate within the approved funding in 2015. These applications are listed on Schedule 2. Application of Reserve to Fund 2014 Deficit: The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District’s Solid Waste function incurred a deficit in 2014 due to lower than expected waste flows. The funding of this deficit is required by law and is presented for approval on Schedule 3. The deficit will be funded from GVS&DD (Solid Waste) Sustainability Innovation Fund reserves. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board approve the application of reserves included on Schedules 1, 2 and 3 as

presented. 2. That the Board make changes to the proposed application of reserves as appropriate and

approve the reserve applications as amended.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The approval of the reserve applications as included under alternative 1, which is recommended, has no financial impact on the 2015 levies to member municipalities. These applications enable Metro Vancouver to position surplus funds to avoid future debt requirements and to apply sustainability innovation funds to fund future closure and post closure landfill obligations (Schedule 1), complete planned initiatives already in progress (Schedule 2), and meet the legislated requirement to fund any operating deficits (Schedule 3). Operating reserves in excess of Board established thresholds or unspecified designated reserves, are utilized by policy to avoid future debt or fund future expenditures. These applications as set out in Schedule 1, if not approved, would remain in operating or designated reserves. While these amounts would be available for use in the future, the short term impact would be higher borrowing requirements which would apply upward pressure on the municipal levies. Should any of the items listed in Schedule 2, projects that were started in 2014 but not complete, not be approved, the initiatives, while likely completed, would require that some planned initiatives in 2015 be reprioritized resulting in the lowest priority items not being undertaken or deferred to future years. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The application of reserves as included in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 are recommended for approval. These applications are consistent with legislated requirements and Board policy on the use of reserves and provide the funding necessary to complete operating priorities currently in progress as well as reduce future debt requirements.

I&F - 9

Status of Reserves Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 3 of 3

The unspecified reserves that remain over guidelines will be considered as part of the 2016 budget process and generally will be phased in over future years to offset municipal funding requirements. Attachments Schedule 1 ‐ Proposed Application of Reserves – Additional Items Schedule 2 ‐ Reserve Applications – Projects Carried Forward from 2014 Schedule 3 ‐ Application of Reserves – Required for 2014 Deficit Schedule 4 ‐ Operating Reserves Schedule 5 ‐ Designated Reserves

I&F - 10

GREATER VANCOUVER DISTRICTS

2015 Budget - Proposed Application of Reserves - Additional Items (To Be Approved by the Board in May 2015)

Function Application Operating ReservesDesignated Reserves

GVRD

Air Quality

Contribution to Air Quality Equipment Fund (1) 63,872$

Parks

Contribution to Heritage Parkland Acquisition Fund Reserve (1) 818,374

General Government

Contribution to Regional District Fleet Vehicle Reserve (1) 1,335,320

Regional Planning

Contribution to Regional Growth Strategy Reserve (1) 158,551

GVWD

Fund Future Capital Requirements (1) 1,517,141

GVS & DD

Solid Waste

Fund Landfill Post Closure Fund (2) 5,000,000

Liquid Waste

Fund Future Capital Requirements (1) 4,878,063

Fund Lab Equipment Reserve (1) 100,000

TOTAL RESERVE APPLICATION 8,871,321$ 5,000,000$

(1) Unspecified operating reserves, resulting from 2014 operating surpluses, to be used to fund future capital / equipment / other expenditures.

(2) Unspecified Solid Waste Sustainability Innovation Fund reserve amount set aside for possible future landfill closure and post closure obligations.

SCHEDULE 1

I&F - 11


2015 Budget - Reserve Applications - Projects Carried Forward from 2014 Year (To be approved by the Board in May 2015)

Function ApplicationOperating Reserves

GVRD

General GovernmentComplete Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management (IPREM) work (1) 78,900$

Air Quality Complete consulting projects for Air Quality Policy and Management collaborative work (2) 80,000

Complete consulting project for Climate Change Policy and Management collaborative work (3) 27,500

Regional Planning

Complete Growth Management consulting projects, cost studies and backgrounders (4) 50,000

Labour Relations

Complete upgrade of software enhancement and information services for the Labour Relations function (5) 60,000

GVS & DD

Liquid Waste

Complete Region-wide Baseline for Municipal On-site Rainwater Management (6) 28,000

Complete Liquid Waste Development Cost Charge review (7) 100,000

Complete Lynn Creek Sanitary Sewer work (8) 150,000

Complete Liquid Waste projects public consultation work (9) 100,000

GVWD

Complete Lower Seymour Conservation Reserve public washroom facility work (10) 230,000

Complete Greenwood Reservoir isolation work (11) 120,000

Complete Vancouver Heights Reservoir modifications work (12) 218,000

Complete Chilco and Alberni Reclorination Station upgrade work (13) 261,000

TOTAL $1,503,400

Note: This schedule represents projects budgeted/planned for but not completed in 2014 and requiring Board approval forthe carryforward of funding to complete the projects in 2015.

(1) Funding to complete deliverables under the Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management program. (2) Funding to complete stakeholder engagement workshops for a broad range of industry and other groups, health impact

assessement framework for reducing exposure to traffic emissions and regulatory and non-regulatory programs and policies to prioritize development of options for reducing volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in the Region as part of deliverables in Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan and Regional Ground Level Ozone Strategy .

(3) Funding to complete restoration work for a degraded area of the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area for the purposes of methane reduction, carbon sequestration along with the development of further greenhouse gas (GHG) carbon offset credits as part of requirements of Metro Vancouver as a signatory to the BC Climate Action Charter.

(4) Funding to complete research and policy analysis regarding Climate Change mitigation and adaption opportunities.

(5) Funding to complete work regarding clarifying, refining and elevating services offered.

(6) Funding to complete work with municipalities via the Stormwater Interagency Liasion Group to identify a region-wide base-line for on-site rainwater management as outlined in Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan.

(7) Funding to complete consulting review work in 2015 regarding the Liquid Waste development cost charge program.

(8) Funding to complete purchase of materials and work crew scheduling due to design amd work permit delays in 2014.

(9) Funding to complete public consultation work in 2015 regarding Liquid Waste projects and initiatives delayed in 2014.

(10) Funding to complete design and construction work in 2015 due to unanticipated 2014 architectural/engineering delays.

(11) Funding to complete design work in 2015 due primarily to delays in securing consulting resource in 2014.

(12) Funding to complete preliminary and detailed design work in 2015 due to delays in securing consulting resource in 2014.

(13) Funding to complete design and construction work in 2015 due to additional electrical design and delays in parts delivery.

SCHEDULE 2

I&F - 12


Application of Reserves - Required for 2014 Deficit (To Be Approved by the Board in May 2015)

Function ApplicationDesignated Reserves

GVS&DD

Solid Waste Fund deficit from designated reserve (1) ($3,436,190)

TOTAL ($3,436,190)

(1) Lower than expected waste flows in the system.

SCHEDULE 3

I&F - 13

METRO VANCOUVER DISTRICTS2015 BudgetOperating ReservesSummary by District

Actual 2015 Required2014 Projected Under Unspecified

Surplus/(Deficit) Reserves Guideline Reserves

GVRD General Functions

General Government 1,688,688$ 285,599$ 285,599$ -Air Quality 1,032,697 378,840 378,840 -Global Positioning System 220,695 844,581 19,178 825,403 (2)Labour Relations 484,469 1,046,249 104,516 941,733 (1)Regional Parks 1,153,629 1,261,858 1,261,858 -Regional Planning 289,616 138,629 138,629 -West Nile Virus - 319,837 - 319,837911 Telephone 1,962 578,441 197,451 380,990 (2)

Sub-total GVRD 4,871,756$ 4,854,034$ 2,386,071$ 2,467,963$

GVS & DDSolid Waste (3,436,190)$ 9,762,547$ 9,762,547$ -

Liquid WasteFraser Area 2,974,075$ 6,533,585$ 6,533,585$ -

Lulu Island Area 1,560,531 1,399,650 1,399,650 -

North Shore Area 1,506,381 1,502,993 1,502,993 -

Vancouver Area 3,653,614 3,865,960 3,865,960 -

Drainage Areas 271,378 4,238,402 193,870 4,044,532 (2)

Sub-total Liquid Waste 9,965,979$ 17,540,590$ 13,496,058$ 4,044,532$

Sub-total GVS & DD 6,529,789$ 27,303,137$ 23,258,605$ 4,044,532$

GVWD 17,935,118$ 14,478,580$ 14,478,580$ -

TOTAL 29,336,663$ 46,635,751$ 40,123,256$ 6,512,495$

(1)

(2)

future years.

The application of unspecified reserves will be phased in over future years.

Unspecified reserves will be used to fund future capital / equipment purchases as required or will be phased in over

SCHEDULE 4

I&F - 14

METRO VANCOUVER DISTRICTS2015 BudgetDesignated ReservesSummary by District

Projected 2015Reserves

MVHC

Restricted Operating ReservesSection 27 2,978,684$ BCH Consolidated Operating Agreement 1,766,327

Capital Replacement ReservesSection 27 2,511,296 BCH Consolidated Operating Agreement 3,697,030

Other ReservesDevelopment 8,612,568 MVHC 2,499,532

TOTAL MVHC 22,065,437

GVRD

Sasamat Volunteer Fire Dept 1,001,856

Air Quality Equipment Fund 2,684,886

Regional District Sustainability Innovation Fund 17,821,693

Regional Growth Strategy Reserve 228,569

Cultural Grant Reserves 2,348,512

Asset Replacement Reserve 7,242,699

Self Insurance Fund 3,785,230

Other Regional Reserves 3,240,762

Parks ReservesHeritage Parkland Acquisition Fund 5,816,665 Capital Maintenance Reserve 1,069,078 Capital Replacement and Development Reserve 3,162,917 Legacy Fund 2,936,985 Other Parks Reserves 911,036

Fleet Vehicle Reserve 1,654,567

Building Operations and Corporate Programs 13,716,207

TOTAL GVRD 67,621,662

GVS & DD

Solid WasteFlyash Provision 1,190,291 Waste-to-Energy R&D Reserve 5,571,502 Post Closure Fund 7,495,147 Solid Waste Sustainability Innovation Fund 5,187,404

19,444,344

Liquid Waste

Laboratory Equipment 265,757 Lions Gate contingency 1,355,988 Sewerage & Drainage Sustainability Innovation Fund 14,035,489 Biosolids Inventory Reserves 11,615,544 Capital Reserves 50,075,450

77,348,227

GVS & DD Equipment FundSolid Waste Equipment Fund 7,326,246 Liquid Waste Equipment Fund 5,040,681

12,366,927

TOTAL GVS & DD 109,159,498

GVWDOffice Building - Capital 912,567 Water Sustainability Innovation Fund 10,048,661 Laboratory Equipment 355,301 Capital Reserves 7,461,024

TOTAL GVWD 18,777,553

TOTAL 217,624,150$

SCHEDULE 5

I&F - 15

11158752

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Dean Rear, Director, Financial Planning & Operations Date: April 16, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution

RECOMMENDATION That the GVS&DD Board:

a) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 is October 1, 2015; and

b) Direct staff to prepare a new amending bylaw to amend GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 to clarify that the Bylaw does not apply to secondary suites.

PURPOSE To seek a resolution addressing concerns from member municipalities arising from the implementation of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014. BACKGROUND At the July 25, 2014 meeting, the GVS&DD Board introduced and gave three readings to the GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw 286, 2014 (“Amending Bylaw 286”), which amended GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 (“GVS&DD DCC Bylaw”). The Inspector of Municipalities approved Amending Bylaw 286 on November 5, 2014, and it was adopted by the Board on November 28, 2014. Amending Bylaw 286 removes the exemption from payment of DCCs for residential developments with fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units, and allows for collection of DCCs at the time building permits are issued. Amending Bylaw 286 also introduced new dwelling unit definitions to clarify residential development types and to facilitate the collection of DCCs. Amending Bylaw 286 was intended to bring the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw into line with municipal DCC bylaws and to ensure that all new development in the region contributes to the cost of GVS&DD’s growth‐related infrastructure.

Amending Bylaw 286 was forwarded to member municipalities in February 2015. Following this, Metro Vancouver staff received a large number of queries regarding the Bylaw’s implementation. One of the key messages received is that member municipalities require much earlier notification when DCC amendments are being implemented in order to provide sufficient notification to residents and businesses of the incoming changes. There was also confusion about whether Amending Bylaw 286 means that DCCs are payable with respect to secondary suites.

5.2

I&F - 16

GVS&DD DCC Amending Bylaw 286 Resolution Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 4

Metro Vancouver staff are undertaking a review of all aspects of the regional DCC program, including the impact of the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw on affordability and suite legalization initiatives. The review of the full DCC program is on the GVS&DD standing committee work plan for this year and will be referred to RAAC later this year for municipal review as policies are being developed. AMENDING BYLAW 286 Effective Date Based on communications with member municipalities, municipalities need advance notification of upcoming changes in order to have sufficient time to notify interested parties of the amendments, adapt administrative procedures and implement other necessary changes in a controlled manner. Metro Vancouver staff believes that the effective date of Amending Bylaw 286 needs to be specified, and, for practical purposes, should be no earlier than June 1, 2015. This will ensure that Amending Bylaw 286 is implemented at the same time across the region. The ‘in‐stream protection’ provisions contained in section 58.2(9) of the GVS&DD Act for building permit and subdivision applications would commence on the effective date. Consistency with Municipal DCC Bylaws Metro Vancouver staff have reviewed municipal bylaws across the region to assess common practice with regard to the application of municipal DCC bylaws at building permit stage to developments containing fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units, and whether secondary suites are defined and exempted from payment of DCCs in municipal bylaws. Attachment 1 summarises the results of this review. Amending Bylaw 286 is intended to apply to residential developments with fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units. It appears that almost half of member municipalities have updated the language in their respective bylaws to collect DCCs at building permit stage on residential developments with fewer than four self‐contained dwelling units. Those municipalities represent a significant portion of the population of the region. With respect to secondary suites, while the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw does not specifically define a secondary suite, “Dwelling Unit” is defined in section 3.1(f) as follows:

one or more rooms comprising a self‐contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of cooking facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash‐basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;

The characteristics of a secondary suite fit the above definition, thus compelling DCCs to be applied and charged for building permits that include a secondary suite, either now or in the future. As noted in Attachment 1, almost no municipalities define secondary suites specifically within their DCC bylaw. However, though the definition of dwelling unit and the approach to application of charges varies significantly between municipalities, most do not specifically apply DCCs to secondary suites. Further, in discussing the GVS&DD DCC Bylaw at the April 10th meeting of the Regional Planning Advisory Committee, the representatives urged the GVS&DD to not apply DCCs to secondary suites due to the potential impact on affordable housing and suite legalization initiatives.

I&F - 17


Page 3 of 4

To address these concerns, staff have developed two alternatives which are described below.

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVS&DD Board:

c) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 is October 1, 2015; and

d) Direct staff to prepare a new amending bylaw to amend GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 to clarify that the Bylaw does not apply to secondary suites.

2. That the GVS&DD Board: a) Deem that the effective date of GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286,

2014 is June 1, 2015; and b) Direct member municipalities to apply GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw

No. 286, 2014 to secondary suites within the municipality in the same manner that the municipality applies its municipal DCC bylaw to secondary suites.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Alternative 1 If the GVS&DD Board approves a resolution as presented in Alternative 1, the implementation of the current Amending Bylaw 286 would be postponed to an effective date of October 1, 2015. This would allow time for the District to obtain the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities for a new amending bylaw with a new definition that creates an exemption to DCCs for secondary suites. This approach would ensure that the application of regional DCCs to secondary suites is consistent across the region, although not necessarily consistent with every municipality’s DCC bylaw. Given the requirement to obtain the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities, it is likely that the effective date of the amendment could not be obtained earlier than October 1, 2015. Alternative 2 If the Board supports proceeding with the resolution as presented in Alternative 2, DCC charges arising from the bylaw amendment would be deferred until the June 1st effective date. Under this alternative, the “in stream” provisions contained in section 58.2(9) of the GVS&DD Act would take effect more quickly than as proposed under alternative 1. The Board would adopt a resolution deeming an effective date of Amending Bylaw 286 as June 1, 2015. The resolution would direct member municipalities to apply GVS&DD DCC Bylaw to secondary suites within their respective jurisdictions in the same manner that the municipality applies for its municipal DCC bylaw.

I&F - 18


Page 4 of 4

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Amending Bylaw 286 received Inspector of Municipalities approval on November 5, 2014, was adopted by the Board on November 28, 2014 and was forwarded to municipalities earlier this year for implementation. Following the distribution of the Amending Bylaw 286, Metro Vancouver staff received a large number of queries regarding the Bylaw’s implementation. Given this feedback, it is important that the issue of the effective date and the applicability of the Bylaw to secondary suites is resolved. Based on the forgoing analysis staff recommends Alternative 1, that establishes an effective date of October 1, 2015 for the current GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 which will allow time for a new amending bylaw to be prepared to clarify the bylaw’s application to secondary suites, and to ensure that an effective date does not occur until later this year. This alternative will provide certainty to building permit applicants and ensure consistent application across the region. Attachments: 1. Review of GVS&DD Member Municipality Development Cost Charge Bylaws 2. GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014 (Orbit # 11172606) 3. GVS&DD Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 – Unofficial Consolidation (Orbit # 11172606)

I&F - 19

11158752

GVS&DD MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE BYLAWS

1 City of Langley has indicated that DCCs are not applied to building permits for secondary suites 2 District of Maple Ridge DCC Bylaw does not specify any exemptions. 3 The City of New Westminster has indicated that the single detached dwellings are charged on a parcel basis, which means that if there is no change to the parcel area, they do not charge DCCs for the parcel. Sewerage and Drainage DCCs are general only charged for subdivision applications. 4 “Secondary Suite” is not defined in the District of North Vancouver’s DCC Bylaw, it specifies to refer to the definition outlined in their Zoning Bylaw 5 The City of Port Coquitlam has indicated that they do not apply DCCs for most circumstances involving under four units. The only circumstance when they may charge DCCs is in the case of one additional unit for a new duplex replacing a single family house. 6 The City of Port Moody has indicated that DCCs apply to all new self‐contained dwelling units as defined in their zoning bylaw. However, the City has not applied DCCs to secondary suites and have not dealt with coach houses. 7 The City of Richmond has indicated that townhouse and apartments are the exception as they are charged on permits containing 4 units or more only. 8 Laneway house is not defined in the City of Vancouver’s Development Cost Levy Bylaw, it specifies to refer to their Zoning and Development Bylaw

Municipality Language to charge DCC for buildings with less than 4 dwelling units at Building Permit?

Define secondary suites, coach house or other infill characteristics?

City of Burnaby No No

City of Coquitlam Yes Carriage houseSecondary suite

Corporation of Delta No No

City of Langley Yes with exceptions1 No

Township of Langley No No

District of Maple Ridge Yes2 No

City of New Westminster Yes with exception3 No

City of North Vancouver No No

District of North Vancouver No Secondary suite4

City of Pitt Meadows Yes No

City of Port Coquitlam No with exception5 No

City of Port Moody Yes with exceptions6 No

City of Richmond Yes with exceptions7 No

City of Surrey Yes No

City of Vancouver Yes Laneway house8

District of West Vancouver No No

City of White Rock No No

5.2Attachment 1

I&F - 20

GVS&DD MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES DWELLING UNIT DEFINITIONS

9 City of Burnaby’s Zoning Bylaw No. 4742 10 Corporation of Delta’s Zoning Bylaw No. 2750 11 Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw No. 2500 12 City of New Westminster Zoning Bylaw 6680 13 City of Pitt Meadows Zoning Bylaw No. 2505

Municipality “Dwelling Unit” Definition

City of Burnaby Means one or more habitable rooms constituting one self‐contained unit with a separate entrance, and used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes for not more than one family and containing not more than one kitchen or one set of cooking facilities.9

City of Coquitlam Means one or more rooms which comprise a self‐contained unit with a separate entrance, used or intended to be used as a domicile by one or more persons and usually containing living, sleeping and sanitary facilities and containing or providing for the installation of only one set of cooking facilities.

Corporation of Delta Means one or more habitable rooms containing ‘Cooking Facilities’, eating, living, sleeping and ‘Bathroom’ facilities, and occupied or constructed to be occupied by one or more persons as a single unit.10

City of Langley Includes one self‐contained unit with living, sleeping, cooking and sanitary facilities which is used or intended to be used for the residential accommodation of one family.

Township of Langley Means one or more habitable rooms occupied as residential accommodation by one family and containing or providing for only one set of cooking and/or laundry facilities located within a single family or multi‐family zone. Excludes hotel or motel units or recreation vehicles. A maximum of two sets of cooking and/or laundry facilities may be permitted within an owner occupied fee simple detached single family principal dwelling unit, except where a coach house has already been legally constructed on a lot.11

District of Maple Ridge Means one or more rooms used for the residential accommodation of only one family when such room or rooms contain or provide for the installation of only one set of cooking facilities.

City of New Westminster Means one or more habitable rooms designed, occupied or intended for use, including occupancy, by one or more persons as an independent and separate residence in which a facility for cooking, sleeping facilities and a bathroom are provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons12

City of North Vancouver Means a self‐contained suite of rooms which provides accommodation for not more than one family and which suite of rooms does not contain more than one set of cooking facilities

District of North Vancouver Includes a room, a suite of rooms or a building that is used or is intended to be used as an individual self‐contained private residence which contains or includes:

a) A sink, a toilet, a washbasin, a shower or bath, or facilities for the installation of same, whether such equipment or facilities are provided to each such room, suite of rooms or building structure or are shared;

b) Not more than one set of cooking facilities; and c) Accessory uses that are customary ancillary uses to such

residences

City of Pitt Meadows Means accommodation providing sleeping, washrooms, and kitchens to be used permanently or semi‐permanently for a household, but does not include a motor home or a room in a hotel13

I&F - 21

14 City of Port Coquitlam Zoning Bylaw No. 3630 15 City of Port Moody Zoning Bylaw No. 1890 16 City of Richmond Zoning Bylaw No 8500 17 City of Vancouver Zoning & Development Bylaw 3575 18 West Vancouver Zoning Bylaw No. 4662 19 City of White Rock Zoning Bylaw No. 2000

City of Port Coquitlam Means a self‐contained suite of rooms used or intended to be used as a residence by one family and containing both cooking and sanitary facilities14

City of Port Moody Means one or more habitable rooms constituting one self‐contained unit with a separate entrance, used or intended to be used for residential purposes and containing only one kitchen equipped with a sink and cooking facilities, and having one electrical service15

City of Richmond Means accommodation providing sleeping, washrooms and kitchens to be used permanently or semi‐permanently for a household, but which does not include a motor home or a room in a hotel or a motel16

City of Surrey Means 1 or more habitable rooms which constitute 1 self‐contained unit used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes for which is provided:

a) cooking equipment or the facilities for the installation of cooking equipment; and

b) one or more bathrooms with a water closet, wash basin and shower or bath

City of Vancouver A self‐contained housekeeping unit17

District of West Vancouver A building or portion of a building having 2 or more rooms used or intended to be used together for the domestic purposes of one or more persons and including at least one living room, one cooking facility and one bathroom and not rented or available for rent or occupation for periods of less than 30 days18

City of White Rock Means one or more habitable rooms used for the residential accommodation of one or more persons as an independent and separate residence containing cooking, living, sleeping and sanitary facilities, consisting of one stove and kitchen sink, and one or more sets of sanitary facilities for the exclusive use of such person or persons, but specifically excludes a recreational vehicle19

I&F - 22

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT AMENDING BYLAW NO. 286,2014

WHEREAS:

A Bylaw to Amend "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010".

A. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District has adopted "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010", a bylaw imposing development cost charges on every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure from a Member Municipality; and

B. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District wishes to amend the "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010".

NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

1. The "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010" is amended by:

(a) deleting the definitions of "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use" in their entirety from section 3.1, inserting the following definitions each in their correct alphabetical order, and re-lettering the definitions in section 3.1 accordingly:

"Apartment Dwelling Unit" means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that consists or may consist of two or more storeys and contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby the building or structure has a principal exterior entrance used in common for access to the Dwelling Units. Apartment Dwelling Unit does not include Dwelling Units that are Townhouse Dwelling Units;

11Residential Dwelling Unit'' means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that contains or may contain up to three Dwelling Units;

"Townhouse Dwelling Unit'' means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby each Dwelling Unit has a direct exterior entrance;

(b) deleting the definitions of the following terms in section 3.1 in their entirety and replacing them with the following definitions:

11Dwelling Unit'' means one or more rooms comprising a self-contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of cooking

Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014

Page 1 of 3 I&F - 23

DDavis

Text Box

5.2 Attachment 2

facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash-basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;

"Subdivision" includes a division of land into two or more Parcels, whether by plan, apt descriptive words or otherwise under the Land Title Act or the Strata Property Act, the consolidation of two or more Parcels of land, and phased strata plans;

(c) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in the definition of "Combination Development" in subsection 3.1(c);

(d) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and ''Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in the definition of "Non-Residential Use" in subsection 3.1(u);

(e) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in the definition of "Residential Use" in subsection 3.1(cc) as renumbered;

(f) adding the following as section 4.1.1 immediately after section 4.1:

No Exemption. Without limiting the generality of section 4.1, a Building Permit in section 4.1(b) includes a permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of any building or structure that will, after the construction, alteration, or extension, contain one or more Dwelling Units and be put to no other use than the Residential Use in those Dwelling Units.

(g) deleting subsection 4.2(e) in its entirety;

(h) deleting the terms "Apartment Residential Use", "Single Family Residential Use", and "Townhouse Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Apartment Dwelling Unit", "Residential Dwelling Unit", and "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", respectively, in section 4.5; and

(i) deleting the terms "Single Family Residential Use", "Townhouse Residential Use", and "Apartment Residential Use", and replacing them with the terms "Residential Dwelling Unit", "Townhouse Dwelling Unit", and "Apartment Dwelling Unit", respectively, under the heading "Description" in section 1 of each of Schedule A, B, C, and D attached to the "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010".



2. This bylaw shall be cited as "Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending Bylaw No. 286, 2014".

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this _25_ day of _July_ 2014.

APPROVED BY THE INSPECTOR OF MUNICIPAliTIES this -=5- day of --'-'N;.;:;.o-'-'ve::..:...m:..;.;;b;;..;:e;.;...r _ 2014.

PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this 2~ day of Nb\f€1!\tei 2014.

Chris Plagnol, Co



* BRITLSH COWMBIA

Statutory Approval

Under the provisions of section 58.5

of the Greater Vancouver Sewera e and Draina e District Act

I hereby approve Bylaw No. 286

of the Greater Vancouver Sewera e and Draina e District ,

a copy of which is attached hereto.

Dated this day

of , 2014

I&F - 26

THIS IS A CONSOLIDATION, FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES, OF:

“Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010” (Adopted April 23, 2010)

“Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Amending

Bylaw No. 286, 2014” (Adopted November 28, 2014)

As of November 28, 2014

COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL BYLAWS MAY BE INSPECTED AT

BOARD AND INFORMATION SERVICES METRO VANCOUVER

DEVELOPMENTCOST CHARGE (DCC)

CONSOLIDATED

I&F - 27

DDavis

Text Box

5.2 Attachment 3

Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010 Page 1 of 17

GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE BYLAW NO. 254, 2010

WHEREAS: A. Pursuant to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act, the Greater

Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (“the GVS&DD”) may, by bylaw, impose development cost charges on every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure from a Member Municipality;

B. Development cost charges provide funds to assist the GVS&DD in paying capital costs

incurred to provide, construct, alter or expand sewerage facilities to service development within the area of the GVS&DD, excluding the portion of capital costs charged by the GVS&DD to Member Municipalities under section 54 of the Act;

C. Pursuant to the Act, development cost charges are not payable in certain circumstance and

the GVS&DD may waive or reduce development cost charges for eligible developments; D. Member Municipalities collect the development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw and

remit them to the GVS&DD; E. The GVS&DD and a Member Municipality may enter into an agreement under section 58.3

of the Act under which all, some or some portion of the development cost charges under this Bylaw that would otherwise apply are not required to be collected and remitted by the Member Municipality and the Member Municipality agrees to pay to the GVS&DD an amount equal to the development cost charges that the Member Municipality would have collected under this Bylaw but for such an agreement; and

F. In setting development cost charges under this Bylaw, the GVS&DD has considered:

a. future land use patterns and development and the phasing of works and services; and

b. how development designed to result in a low environmental impact may affect the

capital costs of infrastructure referred to in section 58.2(2) of the Act.

NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District in open meeting assembled enacts as follows:

1.0 REPEAL OF BYLAW

1.1 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 187, 1996 is hereby repealed.

I&F - 28


2.0 CITATION

2.1 The official citation for this Bylaw is “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 254, 2010”.

2.2 This Bylaw may be cited as the “Development Cost Charge Bylaw”.

3.0 INTERPRETATION 3.1 Definitions. In this Bylaw:

(a) “Apartment Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that consists or may consist of two or more storeys and contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby the building or structure has a principal exterior entrance used in common for access to the Dwelling Units. Apartment Dwelling Unit does not include Dwelling Units that are Townhouse Dwelling Units;

(b) “Building Permit” means any permit required by a Member Municipality that

authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure; (c) “Combination Development” means any Development that comprises two or more

of the following uses:

(i) Apartment Dwelling Unit; (ii) Residential Dwelling Unit; (iii) Townhouse Dwelling Unit; and (iv) Non‐Residential Use;

(d) “Community Charter” means the Community Charter, SBC 2003, c. 26; (e) “Development” means:

(i) a Subdivision; or (ii) the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure for

which a Building Permit is obtained;

(f) “Dwelling Unit” means one or more rooms comprising a self‐contained unit that is used or intended to be used for living and sleeping purposes and for which are

Amended by Bylaw 286, 2014

Replaced by Bylaw 286, 2014

Added by Bylaw 286, 2014

I&F - 29


provided cooking facilities, or the facilities for installation of cooking facilities, and one or more bathrooms having a sink or wash‐basin, a water closet, and a shower or bath;

(g) “Effective Date” means the date this bylaw comes into force and takes effect;

(h) “Floor Area” means:

(i) the floor area of the building or structure (measured from the outside edge of all exterior walls of the building or structure), less the number of square feet of the floor area of the building or structure that is used or is intended to be used for the parking of motor vehicles and the storage of bicycles; or

(ii) in the case of an alteration or extension of less than the entire building

or structure, the portion of the building or structure to which the Building Permit applies (measured from the outside edge of any exterior walls in such portion of the building or structure), less the number of square feet of the floor area of the building or structure that is used or is intended to be used for the parking of motor vehicles and the storage of bicycles;

(i) “For Profit Affordable Rental Housing” means Dwelling Units in a Development

comprising Residential Use or Combination Development that will be rented or sublet;

(i) at below market rental rates so that the Rent charged does not exceed

the lesser of: (1) 80% of the average market rent for the Member

Municipality where the Dwelling Unit is located; or (2) 80% of the average market rent for all of the Member

Municipalities

as identified or reported in Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation’s most recent rental market survey;

(ii) to persons who have an annual household income that falls:

(1) at or below 80% of the Median Household Income if the

Dwelling Unit has 3 or more bedrooms; (2) at or below 70% of the Median Household Income if the

Dwelling Unit has 2 bedrooms;

I&F - 30


(3) at or below 60% of the Median Household Income if the Dwelling Unit has 1 bedroom;

(4) at or below 50% of the Median Household Income if the

Dwelling Unit is a bachelor suite.

(j) “Fraser Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by the GVS&DD under the Act as the Fraser Sewerage Area;

(k) “GVS&DD” means the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District; (l) “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act” or “Act” means the

Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act, SBC 1956, c. 59; (m) “Land Title Act” means the Land Title Act, RSBC 1996, c.250; (n) “Local Government Act” means the Local Government Act, RSBC 1996, c. 323;

(o) “Lulu Island West Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by

the GVS&DD under the Act as the Lulu Island West Sewerage Area;

(p) “Median Household Income” means the median household income for the Greater Vancouver Regional District or Vancouver Census Metropolitan Area as reported by Statistics Canada in its most recent census;

(q) “Member Municipality” means a municipality that is a member of the GVS&DD;

(r) “Minister” means the member of the Executive Council appointed under the

Constitution Act charged by order of the Lieutenant Governor in Council with the administration of the Local Government Act;

(s) “Municipal Charges” means development cost charges imposed by a Member

Municipality under either the Local Government Act, Community Charter or the Vancouver Charter;

(t) “Not For Profit Rental Housing” means those Dwelling Units in a Development

comprising a Residential Use or Combination Development that are or will be:

(i) operated as rental housing for tenants who meet eligibility criteria related to income, number of occupants, health or other similar criteria; and

(ii) owned, leased or otherwise held by a Public Housing Body; but does not include:

I&F - 31


(iii) a community care facility under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act, SBC 2002, c. 75;

(iv) a continuing care facility under the Continuing Care Act, RSBC 1996, c.

70; (v) a public or private hospital under the Hospital Act, RSBC 1996, c. 200; (vi) a Provincial mental health facility, an observation unit or a psychiatric

unit designated under the Mental Health Act, RSBC 1996, c. 288; or (vii) a housing based health facility that provides hospitality support services

and personal health care; (u) “Non‐Residential Use” means any building or structure or any portion of any

building or structure that is not Apartment Dwelling Unit, Residential Dwelling Unit or Townhouse Dwelling Unity but for greater certainty, does not include any portion of any Residential Use building or structure that is not part of a Dwelling Unit and is used or is intended to be used solely for the purpose of gaining access to and from Dwelling Units, solely for the maintenance of the building or structure or solely by the occupants of the Dwelling Units in the building or structure;

(v) “North Shore Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by the

GVS&DD under the Act as the North Shore Sewerage Area; (w) “Parcel” means any lot, block or other area in which land is held or into which it is

legally subdivided and for greater certainty, without limiting the foregoing, including a strata lot under the Strata Property Act;

(x) “Public Housing Body” means the British Columbia Housing Management

Commission, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the City of Vancouver, the City of Vancouver Public Housing Corporation, the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation, any housing society or not‐for‐profit municipal housing corporation that has an agreement regarding the operation of residential property with:

(i) the government of British Columbia; (ii) the British Columbia Housing Management Commission; (iii) the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation;

(y) “Rate Schedules” means the schedules of development cost charge rates for each

Sewerage Area that are attached as Schedules A, B, C and D to this Bylaw; (z) “Rent” means money paid or agreed to be paid, or value or a right given or agreed

to be given, by or on behalf of a tenant to a landlord in return for the right to rent a


I&F - 32


Dwelling Unit, for the use of common areas and for services or facilities and includes any and all strata fees, regardless of whether such fees are paid directly to the landlord, but does not include any of the following:

(i) a security deposit;

(ii) a pet damage deposit;

(iii) a fee prescribed under section 97 (2) (k) of the Residential Tenancy Act;

(aa) “Residential Tenancy Act” means the Residential Tenancy Act, SBC 2002, c. 78;

(bb) “Residential Use” means Apartment Dwelling Unit, Residential Dwelling Unit,

Townhouse Dwelling Unit and Townhouse Residential Use; (cc) “Residential Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that

contains or may contain up to three Dwelling Units;

(dd) “Sewerage Area” means any of the GVS&DD’s four sewerage areas, being the Vancouver Sewerage Area, the North Shore Sewerage Area, the Lulu Island West Sewerage Area and the Fraser Sewerage Area;

(ee) “Sewage Facility” means any work, service or plant of the GVS&DD for conveying,

disposing of or treating sewage or waste water; (ff) “Strata Property Act” means the Strata Property Act, SBC 1998, c. 43;

(gg) “Subdivision” includes a division of land into two or more Parcels, whether by plan,

apt descriptive words or otherwise under the Land Title Act or the Strata Property Act, the consolidation of two or more Parcels of land, and phased strata plans;

(hh) “Townhouse Dwelling Unit” means a Dwelling Unit in a building or structure that

contains or may contain four or more Dwelling Units, whereby each Dwelling Unit has a direct exterior entrance;

(ii) “Vancouver Charter” means the Vancouver Charter, SBC 1953, c. 55; (jj) “Vancouver Sewerage Area” means the area established from time to time by the

GVS&DD under the Act as the Vancouver Sewerage Area;

4.0 DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 4.1 Application of Development Cost Charges. Subject to sections 4.2 and 4.3, every person

who obtains:


Replaced by Bylaw 286, 2014


I&F - 33


(a) approval of a Subdivision from a Member Municipality; or (b) a Building Permit from a Member Municipality; must pay the applicable development cost charges set out in this Bylaw to that Member Municipality on behalf of the GVS&DD prior to the approval of the Subdivision or the issuance of the Building Permit.

4.1.1 No Exemption. Without limiting the generality of section 4.1, a Building Permit in section

4.1(b) includes a permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of any building or structure that will, after the construction, alteration, or extension, contain one or more Dwelling Units and be put to no other use than the Residential Use in those Dwelling Units.

4.2 Exemptions from Development Cost Charges. Development cost charges are not payable under this Bylaw if:

(a) the Development is not and will not be capable of being serviced by a Sewerage

Facility of the GVS&DD or by a Sewerage Facility of a Member Municipality that is connected to a Sewerage Facility of the GVS&DD;

(b) the Development will not impose new capital cost burdens on the GVS&DD;

(c) a development cost charge has previously been paid for the same Development

unless, as a result of further Development, new capital cost burdens will be imposed on the GVS&DD;

(d) the Building Permit authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of a building

or structure or part of a building or structure that is, or will be, after the construction, alteration or extension, exempt from taxation under subsection 220(1)(h) of the Community Charter;

(e) deleted

(f) the value of the work authorized by the Building Permit does not exceed $50,000 or

such other amount which the Minister may prescribe by regulation; or (g) the Building Permit authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of self‐

contained Dwelling Units in a building in which:

(i) each Dwelling Unit is no larger in area than 29 square metres [312.153 square feet]; and

(ii) each Dwelling Unit is to be put to no use other than Residential Use in

those Dwelling Units.

Deleted by Bylaw 286, 2014


I&F - 34


4.3 Waiver of Development Cost Charges. The GVS&DD will waive or refund to the applicable Member Municipality on behalf of the registered owner, development cost charges that are otherwise payable under this Bylaw for:

(a) Dwelling Units that meet the definition of For Profit Affordable Rental Housing if the

following conditions are satisfied before an occupancy permit is issued for them:

(i) occupancy of the Dwelling Units is subsequent to the Effective Date; and

(1) the owner covenants with the GVS&DD to use the Dwelling Units as For Profit Affordable Rental Housing for at least 20 years and the covenant is registered under section 219 of the Land Title Act; or

(2) the owner, if the Development is subject to the Strata

Property Act, has filed a Rental Disclosure Statement pursuant to section 139 of that Act that sets out a rental period of at least 20 years and the owner covenants with the GVS&DD to use the Dwelling Units as For Profit Affordable Rental Housing for at least 20 years and the covenant is registered under section 219 of the Land Title Act; or

(3) the owner enters into a lease agreement with a Public

Housing Body pursuant to which the Public Housing Body agrees to sublet and operate the Dwelling Units as Not For Profit Rental Housing for at least 20 years;

(b) Dwelling Units that meet the definition of Not For Profit Rental Housing before an

occupancy permit is issued for them and whose occupancy is subsequent to the Effective Date.

4.4 Calculation of Development Cost Charges. Development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw will be calculated in accordance with the rates set out in the Rate Schedules. The rates set out in the Rate Schedules may be different in relation to one or more of the following:

(a) different Sewerage Areas;

(b) different classes of Sewerage Facilities;

(c) different areas within a Sewerage Area;

(d) different uses;

I&F - 35


(e) different capital costs as they relate to different classes of Development; or

(f) different sizes or different numbers of lots or units in a Development.

4.5 Combination Development. Without restricting the generality of section 4.4, the development cost charges for a Combination Development will be calculated separately for the portion of the Combination Development attributable to each of Apartment Dwelling Unit, Residential Dwelling Unit, Townhouse Dwelling Unit and Non‐Residential Use and will be the sum of the development cost charges for each such use, calculated according to the Rate Schedules.

4.6 Payment, Collection and Remittance of Development Cost Charges. Development cost

charges imposed under this Bylaw must be paid to the Member Municipality of the GVS&DD approving the Subdivision or issuing the Building Permit, as the case may be, as follows:

(a) at the same time as any Municipal Charges as may be levied on the Development

under a bylaw of the Member Municipality are payable to the Member Municipality; or

(b) if no Municipal Charges will be levied on the Development under a bylaw of the

Member Municipality, as follows:

(i) where an application is made only for Subdivision, prior to the issuance of the approval of the Subdivision by the Member Municipality; or

(ii) where an application is made only for a Building Permit or for both

Subdivision and for a Building Permit, prior to the issuance of the Building Permit by the Member Municipality.

4.7 Payment of Development Cost Charges by Instalments. The development cost charges

imposed under this Bylaw may not be paid by instalments unless a regulation under either subsection 58.2(6) of the Act or subsection 933(6) of the Local Government Act applies to the Development and authorizes the payment of development cost charges in instalments.

5.0 COLLECTION AND REMITTANCE OF DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 5.1 Collection of Development Cost Charges by Member Municipalities. Subject to section 6.1,

each Member Municipality must:

(a) collect the development cost charges imposed on a Development under this Bylaw; and


I&F - 36


(b) not issue approval of a Subdivision or issue a Building Permit for any Development unless the development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw have been paid

in accordance with Part 4.0.

5.2 Separate Account. Subject to section 6.1, each Member Municipality must establish and

maintain a separate account for the development cost charge monies collected under this Bylaw and deposit and hold these monies in that separate account, in trust for the GVS&DD, until the monies are remitted to the GVS&DD under section 5.4.

5.3 Remittance of Development Cost Charges by Municipalities. Each Member Municipality,

within 30 days after June 30 and December 31 of each year, must remit to the GVS&DD the total amount of development cost charges collected by the Member Municipality under this Bylaw during the six month period previous to such date, or an amount equal to such development cost charges if the Member Municipality did not collect development cost charges under this Bylaw, together with the statement referred to in section 5.4.

5.4 Statements. Each Member Municipality must provide statements to the GVS&DD, in

respect of each Sewerage Area within the Member Municipality, pursuant to section 5.3, for every six month period comprising January 1 to June 30 and July 1 to December 31, setting out:

(a) the number and type of use of all Residential Use Parcels or Dwelling Units on which

development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw; (b) the aggregate floor area of all Non‐Residential Use buildings or structures on which

development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw (calculated in accordance with the Rate Schedules);

(c) the legal description and civic address of each Parcel on which development cost

charges were levied by it under this Bylaw, whether such development cost charges were levied in respect of a Subdivision or a Building Permit;

(d) the date and amount of each payment of development cost charges levied by it

under this Bylaw and where section 4.7 applies to permit development cost charges levied under this Bylaw to be paid by instalments, the amount of instalment payments remaining to be paid to it and the dates for payment of such remaining instalments;

(e) the total amount of all development cost charges levied by it under this Bylaw and

the total amount of all remaining instalment payments;

I&F - 37


(f) the number, legal description, civic address and type of use of all Parcels in respect of which Subdivisions were approved where no development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw; and

(g) the number and type of use of all Dwelling Units and the aggregate floor area of all

Non‐Residential Use buildings or structures (calculated in accordance with the Rate Schedules) in respect of which Building Permits were required where no development cost charges were levied by it under this Bylaw.

5.5 Records. Each Member Municipality shall retain, for a period of four years, sufficient records to support the statements and payments referred to in sections 5.3 and 5.4.

5.6 Inspection and Review of Municipal Records. The GVS&DD may, at any time, subject to

first giving reasonable notice to any Member Municipality, inspect any and all records of the Member Municipality relating to the information required under section 5.4, the calculation, collection and remittance by the Member Municipality of development cost charges levied under this Bylaw, and the calculation and remittance by the Member Municipality of any payments required under Part 6.0. Each Member Municipality shall permit any employee or agent of the GVS&DD to inspect the records referred to above and to make and take away copies of those records.

6.0 REPLACEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 6.1 Municipal Agreements. Despite any other provision of this Bylaw, the GVS&DD may enter

into an agreement or agreements with any Member Municipality under which:

(a) all, some or some portion of the development cost charges under this Bylaw that would otherwise apply are not required to be collected and remitted by the Member Municipality; and

(b) the Member Municipality agrees to pay to the GVS&DD an amount equal to the

development cost charges that the Member Municipality would have collected under this Bylaw but for such an agreement, in the manner and at the times set out in the agreement, or otherwise in the same manner and at the same times that development cost charges would otherwise have been payable.

6.2 Failure to Remit Development Cost Charges. If a Member Municipality fails, for any reason,

other than under an agreement under section 6.1, to collect any development cost charges payable under this Bylaw or to remit to the GVS&DD any development cost charges collected by it, the Member Municipality must pay to the GVS&DD on demand an amount equal to the development cost charges that the Member Municipality should have collected or remitted under this Bylaw.

I&F - 38


7.0 INTERPRETATION 7.1 Severability. If a portion of this Bylaw is held to be invalid it shall be severed and the

remainder of the Bylaw shall remain in effect. 7.2 Schedules. Schedules “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” are attached to and form part of this Bylaw. 8.0 EFFECTIVE DATE 8.1 The effective date of this Bylaw is [date of adoption].

I&F - 39


SCHEDULE A

FRASER SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES

Description

1. Residential Dwelling Unit 2. Townhouse Dwelling Unit 3. Apartment Dwelling Unit 4. Non‐Residential Use

Rate

$1,731 per Dwelling Unit $1,515 per Dwelling Unit $1,082 per Dwelling Unit $0.811 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.

I&F - 40


SCHEDULE B

LULU ISLAND WEST SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES

Description


Rate

$1,077 per Dwelling Unit $942 per Dwelling Unit $673 per Dwelling Unit $0.505 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.

I&F - 41


SCHEDULE C

NORTH SHORE SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES

Description


Rate

$1,291 per Dwelling Unit $1,129 per Dwelling Unit $807 per Dwelling Unit $0.605 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.

I&F - 42


SCHEDULE D

VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES

Description 1. Residential Dwelling Unit 2. Townhouse Dwelling Unit 3. Apartment Dwelling Unit 4. Non‐Residential Use

Rate

$944 per Dwelling Unit $826 per Dwelling Unit $590 per Dwelling Unit $0.443 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.

I&F - 43

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Carol Mason, Commissioner/CAO Date: April 16, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update

RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board refer the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC to consider and report back on the issues raised in the report dated April 16, 2015, titled “Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update”.

PURPOSE To consider the referral of the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects to staff and to RAAC to explore and report back on whether options may be available for improving and clarifying the language in the Protocol and address some inconsistencies in its application to ensure the equitable application of this Protocol. BACKGROUND On November 22, 2000 the Regional Administrative Advisory Committee (RAAC) endorsed a report that recommended to the GVRD Board that it approve the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects and refer the Protocol to its member municipalities for formal endorsement. The Protocol had been developed by the GVRD CAO and a sub‐committee of RAAC to respond to long‐standing issues that existed regarding both the process and the fees paid to municipalities with respect to building permits, development permits, development cost charges, and other miscellaneous fees. In the absence of a Protocol, RAAC advised that consistency was lacking and there was significant potential for legal disputes to arise between municipalities and the GVRD. On December 15, 2000 the GVRD Board received the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects and circulated the Protocol to member municipalities for their review and to the GVRD Finance Committee for its review of retroactive payments of municipal charges. Over the course of the next year, most municipalities considered and endorsed the Protocol. On January 25, 2002 the GVRD Board endorsed the following resolution:

That the GVRD Board of Directors approve the Capital Protocol Agreement (as attached to the report dated January 15, 2002 titled “Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects”), and approve payment to those member municipalities who enter into the Capital Protocol Agreement of the equivalent amount of municipal charges on regional structures, in accordance with the municipal bylaws in effect at the time, exclusive of interest and with appropriate adjustments for payments already made or for where services were not provided; and further that such payments be considered part of the capital project.

In a subsequent report dated February 8, 2002, the GVRD CAO brought back additional information as requested by the Board relating to the background of the proposed payment of monies equivalent

5.3

I&F - 44

Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update Intergovernment & Finance Committee: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 5

to the municipal development cost charges and permit fees to various municipalities for regional works dating back to 1995. In the staff report it noted that a sub‐committee of RAAC reviewed a variety of options with respect to the method of calculating payments and concluded that the rates in place in the individual host municipalities would be the most appropriate for retroactive payment. The rationale for this conclusion was that regional projects should be treated, for fee calculation purposes like any other major development. The possibility of a municipality levying an excessive rate for regional facilities was considered an unlikely occurrence and was considered best dealt with through a dispute resolution process. PROTOCOL FOR GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECTS (2002) The Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects has been in place since 2002 and establishes the process that the GVRD will follow when initiating a capital project within municipal boundaries. The Protocol includes a number of key elements that are expected to be followed when a capital project is initiated and provides guidance for regional staff to work collaboratively with municipal staff on capital projects. The key elements of the Protocol are identified below (see Attachment 1):

1. Process 1) Planning Stage 2) Design Stage 3) Construction Stage 4) Voluntary Permit Fee System

2. Agreement Voluntary Permit Fee System. Section 4 of Part 1 of the Protocol acknowledges that the GVRD will apply for ‘voluntary permits’ and pay a fee equivalent to regular permits, “as per the established fee schedule of the specific municipality.” The Protocol includes a dispute resolution process that involves a ‘peer review panel’ should the GVRD wish to dispute the application of fees to a specific facility. Decisions of the peer review panel are non‐binding and decisions of the GVRD Board may also be appealed by the Inspector of Municipalities. Protocol Agreement. With respect to Part 2 of the Protocol, it sets out that the GVRD and the local municipalities shall formally agree that the voluntary permit fee system will constitute the full discharge of any responsibilities that may exist for permits or fees and charges. It further notes that the implementation of this Protocol shall be conditional on its endorsement by the regional Board and local municipalities and shall go into effect as soon as both the Board and a particular municipality endorse the Protocol. A table is included in Attachment 1 that identifies the municipalities that endorsed the Protocol. Fourteen municipalities submitted letters of endorsement with Council resolutions supporting the Protocol. The City of North Vancouver and the City of Langley did not obtain Council resolutions. The City of Vancouver only endorsed the Protocol Agreement for a five year period which terminated on November 21, 2006. Metro Vancouver Capital Project DCC Payments. In reviewing the history of DCCs payment by Metro Vancouver, it appears that DCC payments have only been applied to a small number of Metro Vancouver capital works since the Protocol was introduced in 2002. Much of Metro Vancouver’s

I&F - 45


Page 3 of 5

infrastructure consists of underground works and while Metro Vancouver pays municipal permits and fees and charges related to these works, in accordance with the Protocol, there have been very few instances of DCC charges being applied. The most recent example of a DCC payment that has been made to a municipality was initiated in the fall of 2014 following the completion of the Coquitlam UV Facility capital project. Based on Coquitlam’s municipal policy of applying DCCs on a city‐wide basis, the City submitted an invoice to Metro Vancouver to apply DCCs on the construction of new works (UV plant and 3 ancillary buildings) under the category of ‘civic use’. Municipal calculations of total floor area for the 4 structures and resulted in the following amount being submitted to Metro Vancouver (GVWD) for payment:

Transportation ($41.57) $163,286 Drainage ($11.79) $46,311 Water ($5.15) $20,229 Sewer ($1.64) ___$6,441

City DCC’s 3928 sq. m. x 60.15 $236,267 GVS&DD 42285 sq. ft. x 0.881 __$34,293 Total DCC chargeable $270,560

In subsequent discussions, the City of Coquitlam acknowledged that the UV facility did not reside within the GVS&DD sewer area and removed the GVS&DD charge from the invoice; however, it maintained that the remaining charges (including sewer and water charges) were reasonable as its municipal policy is to apply DCCs on a ‘municipal‐wide basis’ regardless of a development’s proximity to municipal services. In accordance with section 4 (6) of the Protocol, it states that “The GVRD would voluntarily pay DCCs and other fees according to local municipal schedules and this cost would form part of the capital project costs.” As such, given the municipal policy of applying DCCs on a city‐wide basis and given the terms of the Protocol Agreement, the GVWD has paid this invoice. Future Capital Project Protocol Considerations The Province’s Best Practices Guide advises that while DCCs are permitted to be applied on a ‘municipal‐

wide basis’, DCCs are not payable if it can be proven that the development does not impose a new capital cost burden on the municipality. When factoring in the potential capital cost burden, consideration should be given to future servicing plans that are linked directly to a municipality’s OCP and Financial Plan. On the example noted above, the location of the Coquitlam UV plant is well within the GVWD watershed and a significant distance from the municipal sanitary and water service area (4 km south of the watershed gate) – the facility is not imposing nor is it anticipated to impose a capital cost burden on the municipality for municipal water and sewer services. This example highlights the potential for conflict between a municipality with a ‘city‐wide’ DCC policy and the best practices guidelines that require DCC collection to align with future servicing plans. Consequently, the current Protocol language is likely to be applied inconsistently within municipalities in the future. Furthermore, the current Protocol is not all encompassing, as the municipalities of Vancouver, North Vancouver and Langley are not signatories to the Protocol

I&F - 46


Page 4 of 5

Agreement and therefore, the provisions of this Agreement would not apply to capital projects that occurred within those boundaries. Given the inconsistencies noted above, the Board may wish to refer the Protocol to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC for further consideration on the options that may be available for improving and clarifying the language in the Protocol to address these potential concerns. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board refer the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects

to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC to consider and report back on the issues raised in the report dated April 16, 2015, titled “Capital Projects Protocol – Policy Update”.

2. That the GVRD Board receive the report for information. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications related to referring the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects to Metro Vancouver staff to review with RAAC. The financial implications of any changes to the application of DCCs will likely be minor in scale on a regional basis but could have an impact on individual municipal members who are paying towards municipal DCCs for services that are not contemplated to be provided to a regional facility within a municipal long range plan. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION In response to long‐standing issues that existed between the Regional District and its member municipalities regarding both the process and the fees paid to municipalities with respect to building permits, development permits, development cost charges, and other miscellaneous fees, on January 25, 2002 the GVRD Board approved the Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects. The Protocol has existed for a number of years and recognizes that the GVRD will voluntarily apply for municipal permits and pay a fee equivalent to regular permits, “as per the established fee schedule of the specific municipality.” The Protocol includes a dispute resolution process and further states that the voluntary permit fee system will constitute the full discharge of any responsibilities that may exist for permits or fees and charges. The implementation of this Protocol was conditional on its endorsement by the regional Board and local municipalities. Fourteen municipalities submitted letters of endorsement with Council resolutions supporting the Protocol. The City of North Vancouver and the City of Langley did not obtain Council resolutions and the City of Vancouver only endorsed the Protocol Agreement for a five year period which terminated on November 21, 2006. While the Protocol has helped to clarify the process by which Metro Vancouver undertakes capital works within its member municipalities, over time it appears that the Protocol has been applied inconsistently to capital projects. Some municipalities have applied a policy of ‘city‐wide’ DCCs regardless of alignment with long range servicing plans, while others have applied DCCs that align with their municipal policies on future servicing. In addition, three GVS&DD member municipalities do not have resolutions that apply the Protocol to development within their boundaries.

I&F - 47


Page 5 of 5

Given the varied interpretations outlined above, the Board may wish to refer the Protocol to Metro Vancouver staff and to RAAC for further consideration to explore whether options may be available for improving and clarifying the language in the Protocol to address these concerns and to ensure the equitable application of this Protocol. Staff recommend that the Board approve alternative one. Attachments and References: 1. Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects

I&F - 48

Dated: November 10, 2000

Protocol for Greater Vancouver Regional District Capital Projects

1. Process

1. Planning Stage

1) At the earliest practical opportunity in the planning stage of any project, the GVRD (staff) will communicate with the area municipality(s) in which the project is to be located, advising of the general nature and purpose of the proposed project.

2) The area municipality (staff) will respond by advising of any issues that may be of

concern to the municipality in carrying out the proposed project.

3) The GVRD will strive to ensure the project complies with municipal land use bylaws and official plan provisions.

4) Based on the information generated at this stage, the municipality will advise the

GVRD whether there is a need for a public consultation process at the planning stage.

5) If a public consultation process is to be undertaken at the planning stage, the GVRD will consult with local area municipality staff in the design and scope of this process. Where appropriate, as determined by local area municipal staff, GVRD staff will meet with the local area municipal council to provide information and receive advice on the need for, scope and design of a local public consultation process.

6) As necessary, the GVRD will conduct the public consultation process. Local area

municipality staff will provide assistance and advice, as appropriate.

2. Design Stage

1) At the earliest practical opportunity, in the design stage of any project, the GVRD will transmit draft designs to the local area municipality in which the project is to be located.

2) The area municipality (staff) will respond by advising of any concerns the design poses

for the local municipality/community and of any further information/analysis that may be needed to allow the municipality to satisfy itself with regard to the proposed design.

3) Based on the information generated at this stage, the GVRD, in consultation with the

municipality will determine whether there is a need for a public consultation process at the design stage. This will follow a similar procedure as 1(d).

4) GVRD staff will make their best efforts to respond to concerns raised by local

municipal staff. In the event that GVRD staff decide it cannot or is inappropriate, to make design changes requested by local area staff, the GVRD will provide a reasoned account for this decision to the local municipality.

5) If local municipal staff deem it appropriate, the final agreed upon design or any

disagreement between the GVRD and local area staff shall be presented to the local

5.3Attachment

I&F - 49

area council or development review committee for their comment. 6) If the local municipal council or development review committee deem it appropriate,

any outstanding disagreement on design shall be referred to the dispute resolution process outlined in the Voluntary Permit Fee System of this Policy (Section 4).

3. Construction Stage

1) At the earliest practical opportunity in the design stage, of any project, the GVRD will

transmit, to the local municipality in which the project is located, an outline construction plan, describing how construction of the project is envisaged to take place and how local impacts are expected to be mitigated/communicated to the public.

2) A parallel process to the design stage will then follow, following steps 2.b) through

2.f). 3) Where it is possible to combine the processes for design and construction, this should

be done. 4. Voluntary Permit Fee System

A critical part of this policy involves a voluntary permit fee system which would parallel the regular permit system. It includes the following elements: 1) The GVRD would apply for ‘voluntary permits’ and pay a fee equivalent to the fee

paid for regular permits, as per the established fee schedule of the specific municipality.

2) In the event of a dispute that is not resolved during this application/municipal review

process, the item would be referred to a ‘peer review panel’ by either the affected municipality or the GVRD. An example of when the GVRD might wish to use this review panel process would be if they dispute the application of fees to a specific facility. This panel would comprise of 3 members and would be appointed by the GVRD and the municipality disputing the permit but would be at arms length from both. Present or past municipal officials, or similarly qualified people would be likely panel members. Any costs which are incurred by the panel are not expected to be large and would be shared by both the GVRD and the affected municipality.

3) The peer review panel’s non binding recommendations would be presented to the

GVRD Board, which would then rule on the dispute. 4) Municipalities could appeal GVRD Board decisions to the Inspector of

Municipalities. The GVRD and Municipalities would agree that prior to entering into this process the decision of the Inspector of Municipalities would be binding and would not be pursued further in the courts.

5) Where the GVRD and the municipality agree that the local municipality will not apply

any formal building permit process, the GVRD would execute a liability waiver to the member municipality saving them harmless from consequences of the absence of such a process;

I&F - 50

6) The GVRD would voluntarily pay DCCs and other fees according to local municipal

schedules and this cost would form part of the capital project costs. 7) In the case of permits where the municipalities are exercising delegated Provincial

responsibilities e.g. electrical permits, the GVRD would follow the normal prescribed procedures.

8) In the case where the GVRD already seeks and receives Provincial permits, e.g. tree-

cutting permits, local municipal requirements would not apply.

2. Agreement

a) The GVRD and the local municipalities shall formally agree that this voluntary permit fee system will constitute the full discharge of any responsibilities that may exist for permits or fees and charges.

b) The implementation of this policy shall be conditional on its endorsement by the

regional Board and local municipalities and shall go into effect as soon as both the Board and a particular municipality endorses this policy.

I&F - 51

Municipalities that have endorsed the Capital Project Policy

Updated: September 3, 2003

* 5 – year trial period

Municipality Adopted Date of Letter Endorsement

Anmore, Village of ‐ Resolution did not go to Council

Bowen Island NO (not in Utility Districts) February 27, 2001 Burnaby, City of Yes March 19, 2001 Coquitlam, City of Yes May 20, 2003 Delta, Corporation of Yes January 10, 2001 Langley, City of ‐ Resolution did not go

to Council

Langley, Township of Yes November 2, 2001 Maple Ridge, District of Yes February 23, 2001 New Westminster Yes October 4, 2001 North Vancouver, City of ‐ Resolution did not go

to Council

North Vancouver, District of Yes January 16, 2001 Pitt Meadows, District of Yes October 6, 2001 Port Coquitlam, City of Yes May 31, 2001 Port Moody, City of Yes November 27, 2001 Richmond, City of Yes March 14, 2001 Surrey, City of Yes May 26, 2003 Vancouver Yes* November 21, 2001 West Vancouver, District of Yes April 22, 2003 White Rock, City of Yes March 14, 2001

I&F - 52

11063932

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Greg Smith, Senior Director, Corporate Services Date: March 31, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement

Project – Funding Request

RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board approve a capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre.

PURPOSE To consider a request from the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society for a capital grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre (Attachment 1). BACKGROUND On December 3, 2014, the Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society sent correspondence to Metro Vancouver requesting a grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. Coquitlam Search and Rescue provides services to the Metro Vancouver municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, and their area of responsibility includes in excess of half of Metro Vancouver’s Electoral Area A. FUNDING REQUEST Coquitlam Search and Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre, in which search and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed, is 20 years old and due for retirement. Although the team is reimbursed by Emergency Management BC for its operating costs, it is dependent upon fundraising for the capital cost of new vehicles and equipment. In addition to providing command centre capability for the next 20 years, a new Mobile Command Centre will provide a more robust vehicle to meet the needs of one of the fastest growing areas of the Lower Mainland. It will have the capability to travel on more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency, transport additional field equipment, and enhance search and rescue management through new technology and additional floor space for work stations and briefings. Ordering of command centre components will begin in January 2015, with an in service date for the new Mobile Command Centre of December 2015, at a total estimated cost of $407,300, including sales taxes and a 5% contingency. Annually, Metro Vancouver offers operating grants of $1,000 to each of Lions Bay Search and Rescue, North Shore Search and Rescue, Coquitlam Search and Rescue, Ridge Meadows Search and Rescue and Surrey Search and Rescue.

5.4

I&F - 53

Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement Project Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 2

A detailed review of the command center, its costs, benefits and capabilities are included in Attachment 2. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board approve a capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and Rescue

Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. 2. That the GVRD Board receive this report for information and take no further action. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board supports alternative one, funds would be allocated from within the 2015 General Government budget to provide a one‐time capital grant of $5,000 to the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. As noted above, the total cost of the Mobile Command Centre including components is estimated at $407,300. This funding request can be accommodated in the General Government budget as a one‐time capital cost and for a specific piece of equipment. Additionally, Metro Vancouver provides annual operating grants of $1,000 to Lions Bay Search and Rescue, North Shore Search and Rescue, Coquitlam Search and Rescue, Ridge Meadows Search and Rescue and Surrey Search and Rescue. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION On December 3, 2014, the Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society sent correspondence to Metro Vancouver requesting a grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. Coquitlam Search and Rescue provides search and rescue services to the Metro Vancouver municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, and their area of responsibility includes in excess of half of Metro Vancouver’s Electoral Area A. The funding request can be accommodated in the 2015 General Government budget as a one‐time capital cost and would be in addition to annual operating grants of $1,000 provided to Coquitlam Search and Rescue, Lions Bay Search and Rescue, North Shore Search and Rescue, Ridge Meadows Search and Rescue and Surrey Search and Rescue. A financial contribution towards the financing of Coquitlam Search and Rescue’s Mobile Command Centre Replacement Project will assist in enabling enhanced up‐to‐date command centre capability for the Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society that will service the broader region for the next 20 years. Staff recommend that the Board support the funding request as presented under alternative one. Attachments (Orbit #11157803) 1. Letter from Coquitlam Search and Rescue dated December 3, 2014 re: Request for Funding 2. Coquitlam Search and Rescue Society Mobile Command Centre Replacement Prospectus

I&F - 54

www.coquitlam-sar.bc.ca

COQUITLAM SEARCH AND RESCUE SOCIETY

1300 Pinetree Way, Coquitlam B.C. V3B 7S4

December 3, 2014

Metro Vancouver Corporate Services 4330 Kingsway Ave. Burnaby BC V5H 4G8 Attention: Greg Smith Senior Director Dear Greg, The Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society is requesting a grant of $5,000 to assist with the acquisition of a new Mobile Command Centre. In addition to providing search & rescue services to the Metro Vancouver municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s area of responsibility includes in excess of half of Metro Vancouver’s electoral area “A”. Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre, in which search and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed, is 20 years old and due for retirement. Although the team is reimbursed by Emergency Management BC for its operating costs, it is dependent upon fundraising for the capital cost of new vehicles and equipment. In addition to providing command centre capability for the next 20 years, a new Mobile Command Centre will provide a more robust vehicle to meet the needs of one of the fastest growing areas of the Lower Mainland. It will have the capability to travel on more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency, transport additional field equipment, and enhance search and rescue management through new technology and additional floor space for work stations and briefings. Ordering of command centre components will begin in January 2015, with an in service date for the new Mobile Command Centre of December 2015, at a total estimated cost of $407,300, including sales taxes and a 5% contingency. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Yours truly, Sandy Burpee, Coquitlam Search & Rescue

I&F - 55

DDavis

Text Box

5.4 Attachment 1

15 August ‘14


COQUITLAM SEARCH AND RESCUE SOCIETY

MOBILE COMMAND CENTRE REPLACEMENT

PROSPECTUS

I&F - 56

DDavis

Text Box

5.4 Attachment 2

2.

15 August ‘14


TOPIC Page #

About Coquitlam Search & Rescue 3

The Role of the Mobile Command Centre 5

Why is the Mobile Command Centre being Replaced? 6

Mobile Command Centre Components 7

4.1 Cab and Chassis 9

4.2 Command Centre Module 9

4.3 Command Centre Technology 10

Project Timeline 10

Project Budget 10

Funding strategy 11

Sustainability 11

Project Outcomes 11

Conclusion 12

Appendix A: Project Management

Appendix B: Letters of Recommendation

Appendix C: Project Timeline

Appendix D: Specification & Estimate: Cab & Chassis

Appendix E: Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Module

Appendix F: Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Technology

Coquitlam Search and Rescue (SAR) serving the communities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody

Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, BC has been providing emergency services in both

urban and wilderness settings since 1972. The team’s current Mobile Command Centre, in which search

and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed, is 20 years old and due for replacement.

In addition to providing command centre capability for the next 20 years, a new Mobile Command

Centre will provide a more robust vehicle to meet the needs of one of the fastest growing areas of the

Lower Mainland, with the capability to travel on more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency,

transport additional field equipment, and enhance search and rescue management capability through

new technology and additional floor space for work stations and briefings. With the successful

completion of fundraising, ordering of command centre components will begin in January 2015, with an

in service date for the new Mobile Command Centre of December 2015, at a total estimated cost of

$407,300, including sales taxes and a 5% contingency.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

I&F - 57

3.

15 August ‘14


Coquitlam Search and Rescue (SAR) serving the communities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody

Anmore, Belcarra, Burnaby and New Westminster, BC has been providing emergency services in both

urban and wilderness settings since 1972.

The services provided by Coquitlam Search and Rescue include:

Wilderness search and rescue

Wilderness medical rescue

Swiftwater rescue

Mountain rescue

Rope (high angle and slope) rescue

Avalanche rescue

Inland waters rescue

Helicopter External Transport System (HETS or “long line”) rescue

Missing children and adults with dementia searches

Police evidence searches

Animal rescue

Disaster assistance

Evacuation due to flooding earthquake, landslide and interface forest fire

Tracking

Community education

The team, based at Coquitlam’s Town Centre Fire Hall, operates under the provincial Emergency

Management BC (EMBC) and performs inland water, wilderness and urban search and rescue in an area

bounded by Indian Arm on the west, Pitt Lake on the east, Garibaldi Park to the north, and the Fraser

River to the south. This primary area is over 1000km² and includes some of the most rugged and

inaccessible terrain in the southwest region of the Province of British Columbia. The team also assists

About Coquitlam Search and Rescue

I&F - 58

4.

15 August ‘14


the RCMP with evidence searches and searches for missing persons, responds to requests for mutual aid

from other SAR teams in the province, and can provide assistance during natural disasters such as

floods, forest fires, and earthquakes. In addition to emergency response, members of the team also

provide wilderness public safety education in the community.

Coquitlam SAR currently has 54 active members, all volunteers. Team members are on call 24 hours a

day, 7 days a week, on a year-round basis and are often called to work in darkness and inclement

weather. Team members frequently take time off from their jobs to attend searches, and pay for much

of their own gear. Professional emergency service providers – police, BC ambulance and the provincial

Coroner’s Office – and the community have come to rely upon Coquitlam SAR for the essential services

it provides. In 2013, Coquitlam SAR responded to 38 operations for a total of 3,044 volunteer hours

resulting in the rescue or recovery of 29 persons. In addition, each member commits to a minimum of

200 hours per year for training and community education. At $25/hour, the total time volunteered by

Coquitlam SAR members amounts to an “in kind” contribution of almost $350,000 a year, a significant

cost benefit to both professional emergency service providers and the communities we serve.

The team contributes to public education through free outdoor education programs and participating in

community fairs and events. Coquitlam SAR delivers the Hug-a-Tree program (how to survive if you get

lost) to about 200 to 300 children per year, including school groups, Scout or Girl Guide groups, and

organized youth camps.

Members of Coquitlam SAR are committed to maintaining the skills necessary to perform to a

professional standard. Team members are constantly training for eventualities they hope will never

occur. The team maintains a rigorous training program which includes navigation, technical (rope)

rescue, swift water rescue, boat operations, advanced first aid, mountain travel, avalanche rescue and

helicopter long line rescue. Specific search and rescue training is developed and administered through

the Emergency Management Division at the Justice Institute of BC, including course curriculum

development and evaluation standards. Other courses such as avalanche skills training, first aid and

HETS are delivered to standards established by other professional organizations. Training is conducted

every Tuesday evening at Town Centre Fire Hall or in the field, and augmented with a full day field

training session typically one weekend a month. Team members also bring skills to the team from their

own professional and recreational pursuits which include firefighting, policing, medical and first aid,

mountaineering, rock climbing, mountain biking, kayaking, snowshoeing and backcountry skiing.

Underlying individual member’s skills and training is the teamwork which is essential to the safe and

efficient completion of search and rescue tasks. Team members depend on each other to act with

integrity, respect, accountability and professionalism. Teamwork is fostered through training and

recreation with other team members, and team members are selected with this attribute in mind.

The members of Coquitlam SAR are proud of the team’s history and look forward to continuing to play

an important role in community safety.

I&F - 59

5.

15 August ‘14


Search and rescue activities are planned, implemented and managed in the Mobile Command Centre.

The Mobile Command Centre allows the team to deploy where needed with the aid of pre-plans, maps,

radio and satellite communications, internet access and search and rescue equipment for the team’s full

range of technical rescue skills. Command centre activities include all aspects of the provincial Incident

Command System:

INCIDENT COMMANDER

FINANCE/ADMINLOGISTICSPLANNINGOPERATIONS

SAFETY

LIAISON

PUBLIC INFORMATION

Specific activities include:

Planning:

Creating the initial plan for a SAR operation, including areas to be searched and search methods to be

employed

Interviewing persons with knowledge of the subject(s) of a search

Updating the SAR plan as the operation progresses and new information becomes available

Operations:

Assigning team leaders and personnel for specific tasks within a SAR operation

Briefing team leaders prior to start of assignments

Communicating with and directing field teams

Maintaining a log of all radio communications

Debriefing team leaders at the completion of assignments

Interviewing subject(s) at completion of a SAR operation

Logistics:

Coordinating rescue activities and providing resources (e.g. long line extraction) once the subject(s) of a

SAR operation have been located

Finance/Administration

Recording task assignments, preparing task reports and submitting claims for equipment damaged or lost

Safety:

Ensuring that all activities in a SAR operation are carried out with safety as the top priority

Liaison:

Liaising with other agencies including the police, BC Ambulance Service and local fire departments

Public Information

Briefing media at key points in a SAR operation

The Role of the Mobile Command Centre

I&F - 60

6.

15 August ‘14


To perform these activities, the following Command Vehicle features and equipment are required:

Work stations to plan SAR operation strategy

Counter space to lay out maps

Meeting space to facilitate briefing team leaders, police and media, and to interview persons with

knowledge of the subject(s), and the subjects themselves once evacuated from the field

Computers to run software programs which aid development of the search strategy, and to access digital

maps and track search progress.

VHF and UHF radio console to communicate with field teams and aircraft assisting in a search

Cellular phones to access the public telephone network

Internet access for search aids such as Google Earth

Video monitors and a smart board

Large scale colour plotter to print out maps for operations planning and field team assignments

Electric generator to power Mobile Command Centre technology, lighting, air conditioning and heating

Wiring for 12 VDC and 120 VAC electrical distribution

Batteries, chargers and UPS (uninterruptable power supply) to power Mobile Command Centre

electronics

Air conditioning and space heating systems

Emergency lights and siren

Exterior (scene) lighting and awnings for protection from weather

Storage for reference manuals, maps and stationery

Storage for equipment to support field teams, such as stretchers, ropes and rope rescue kits, HETS kits,

first aid kits, hypothermia kits and oxygen and nitrous oxide cylinders as well as consumables such as

batteries, glow sticks, flares, water and energy bars.

Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre, a Grumman panel truck, has a chassis

that is commonly used for delivery of bulky - but light - goods. While adequate for cargo such as bakery

products or parcels, SAR operations require a vehicle which can not only support command centre

operations but also transport heavier cargo such as stretchers, ropes, generators, fuel, batteries, rescue

equipment and an array of computer equipment.

The current Mobile Command Centre, which is maintained by the City of Coquitlam’s Vehicle Services,

was ordered in 1994 and scheduled for replacement in 2014. Although the mechanical condition is

consistent with a vehicle of this age, the vehicle does have serious limitations:

Weight:

Over time as the team has responded to an increasing call volume and tasks have become more

complex, additional equipment has become necessary to support rescue operations. Also, as

technology has been adopted to improve search efficiency, the Mobile Command Centre has been fitted

with multiple computers, routers, wireless access points, satellite phones and printers. All of this

Why is the Mobile Command Centre being Replaced?

I&F - 61

7.

15 August ‘14


equipment adds weight to the vehicle and it is now operating close to the gross vehicle weight (GVW)

for the chassis. It has often been necessary to remove gear in the past to remain underweight. Mobile

Command Centre weight limitations compromise the team’s response capability.

Performance:

The engine and transmission were not designed for the manner in which the team uses the Mobile

Command Centre today. Hills are a challenge, both ascending (engine power) and descending

(transmission and brake capability). The Mobile Command Centre is not suitable for “off-pavement”

travel and therefore limited in the locations to which it can travel to set up command.

Space:

The interior space has been filled to capacity with computers, printers, video screens, mapping and so

on. Limited work space presents an ongoing challenge for command centre operation. Typically, 2 to 3

managers plus a radio operator are required to manage a SAR operation. At best, the current interior

space and layout is small and awkward to work in, and there is inadequate space for search team,

police, family and media briefings. On larger operations it has many times become necessary to use

other team’s Mobile Command Centres to provide additional space.

Technology:

The Command Centre wiring has been modified by different technicians over the years as required to

power new technology. The result has been a loss in wiring consistency such that correcting problems is

now time consuming and expensive. The electrical system also doesn’t adequately support the

technology now being used – for instance, the auxiliary generator marginally carries the electrical load

placed on it.

The Mobile Command Centre consists of 3 major components:

Cab & Chassis

Command Centre Module

Command Centre Technology

See Figure 1, following, for a photo gallery of the Mobile Command Centre components.

Mobile Command Centre Components

I&F - 62

8.

15 August ‘14


Figure 1

Photo Gallery: Mobile Command Centre Components

I&F - 63

9.

15 August ‘14


Cab & Chassis

A Freightliner M2-106 Extended Cab with a Cummins 6.7L turbo diesel engine or equivalent cab &

chassis has been determined to meet the needs of the new Mobile Command Centre and address

the shortcomings of the current vehicle.

Although more expensive, a diesel-fuelled engine was selected over a gasoline-fuelled engine for the

following reasons:

Only a single fuel source will be required for both the vehicle and the diesel-powered

auxiliary generator (gasoline-driven generators of the required capacity are not

manufactured)

Diesel fuel is one of the most efficient and energy dense fuels available today. Diesel

engines typically deliver 25% - 35% better fuel economy than similarly performing gas

engines

Diesel engines typically deliver longer engine life and are more reliable. They have no spark

plugs or distributors, and therefore never need ignition tune-ups.

A diesel engine provides far more drive shaft torque than does a gasoline engine

The supplier estimate for the Freightliner M2-106 Extended Cab plus chassis is $82,100 plus sales

taxes.

The supplier specification and detailed estimate are included as Appendix D


The Command Centre Module is the heart of the Mobile Command Centre, containing the

infrastructure and equipment necessary to support the effective management of all phases of a SAR

operation. The Command Centre Module includes:

Metal enclosure

Access doors

Flooring

Desks, cabinets and shelves

Wiring

Lighting

Auxiliary generator

UPS (uninterruptable power supply)

Air conditioning and space heating systems

The estimate for the Command Centre Module is $159,355 plus sales taxes.

The Module specification and cost estimates are included as Appendix E

I&F - 64

10.

15 August ‘14


Command Centre Technology

The Command Centre Technology comprises the electronic technology which directly supports

search and rescue management. Replacement of the current Mobile Command Centre provides an

opportunity to upgrade the current aging technology systems to “state of the art” with enhanced

capabilities and effectiveness, and includes:

Computer hardware

Video monitors and a smart board

Colour printer and plotter

Software

Batteries

Communications systems, including VHF and UHF radios, cell and satellite phones, and internet

connectivity

The estimate for the Command Centre Technology is $106,715 plus sales taxes.

The equipment list, specifications and cost estimates are included as Appendix F

With fundraising complete by December of this year, the Mobile Command Centre Cab & Chassis and

the Command Centre Module will be ordered in January 2015 following the completion of a tendering

process. Delivery of the Cab & Chassis is expected mid-April 2015, while the Command Centre Module

with the interior layout, wiring and auxiliaries is anticipated by November 2015. Command Centre

Technology will be purchased to coordinate with the Command Centre Module construction schedule.

The new Mobile Command Centre is scheduled to be in service 31 December 2015.

For the full project timeline, see Appendix C.

Item Supplier

Estimate

Sales Tax

(12%)

Total

Estimate

Cab & Chassis $82,100 $9,850 $91,950

Command Centre Module $159,355 $19,120 $178,475

Command Centre Technology $106,715 $12,800 $119,515

Sub-Total $348,170 $41,770 $389,940

Contingency @ 5% $17,400 $17,400

Total Project Budget $365,570 $41,770 $407,300

Project Timeline

Project Budget

I&F - 65

11.

15 August ‘14


Funding in the amount of $100,000 has been already committed to the replacement of the Mobile

Command Centre:

Source Amount

CSAR Endowment Fund 35,000

City of Coquitlam 65,000

Total $100,000

Funding sufficient to complete the Mobile Command Centre Replacement project is being solicited from

the following sources:

Source Amount

Spirit of Coquitlam Grant $50,000

BC Gaming Grant $150,000

City of Port Moody $10,000

City of Port Coquitlam $10,000

City of Burnaby $10,000

Metro Vancouver $5,000

Corporate Sponsors $72,300

The projected life span for the new Mobile Command Centre is 20 years, commensurate with the

command centre that is to be replaced. The City of Coquitlam will maintain and repair as necessary the

Cab and Chassis over the life span of the Mobile Command Centre as an “in kind” donation, while

Coquitlam Search & Rescue will maintain, repair and upgrade as necessary the Command Centre

Technology as part of its operating budget and from future grant applications.

Replacement of Coquitlam Search & Rescue’s current Mobile Command Centre with the command

centre proposed in this prospectus will deliver the following benefits:

Funding Strategy

Sustainability

Project Outcomes

I&F - 66

12.

15 August ‘14


A Mobile Command Centre to plan, implement, and manage search & rescue operations for the next 20

years

Enhanced reliability for the expected increase in call volume with population growth in the region

Improved vehicle fuel efficiency

Increased engine power and a more robust transmission and chassis to provide for limited off-pavement

travel, allowing the command centre to be set up closer to search & rescue operations

Increased vehicle Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) capacity, allowing the transport of additional equipment

for use by field teams – for example, a HETS kit.

Increased reliability of the command centre electrical system

Increased auxiliary generator capacity, allowing the use of additional electronic technology while

increasing the margin between generator capacity and load

Air conditioning and space heating

Upgraded and new technology to more effectively manage search & rescue operations

Increased command centre floor space and volume, allowing an increase in workstations for search

managers and supporting staff, an increase in reference material storage capacity and additional briefing

space for search teams, police, family and media

Attainment of these benefits will be determined using the measures listed in Table 1, following.

In addition to providing command centre capability for Coquitlam Search & Rescue for the next 20 years,

the new Mobile Command Centre will provide a more robust vehicle with the capability to travel on

more challenging roads and with greater fuel efficiency, transport additional field equipment, and

enhance search and rescue management capability through new technology and additional floor space

for work stations and briefings. With the successful completion of fundraising, ordering of command

centre components will begin in January 2015, with an in service date for the new Mobile Command

Centre of December 2015.

Conclusion

I&F - 67

13.

15 August ‘14


Benefit Old MCC New MCC Notes

Fuel efficiency 35 TBD Liters per 100 Km


volume

588 cubic feet 1,536 cubic feet


open floor area

30 square feet 111 square feet


work stations

3 6

Field equipment storage

volume

198 cubic feet 293 cubic feet

New Command Centre

Technology

N/A Upgraded

communications

capability (phone

and radio)

Enhanced AV

capability including

multiple flat screen

video monitors and

smart board

Wide format colour

plotter for maps

30’ pneumatic radio

mast

Generator capacity margin

(% of max. load)

0% TBD

SAR Manager satisfaction TBD Testimonials:

Enhancement of

SAR management

capability

Efficiency of layout

Stress reduction

Table 1

Measurable Project Outcomes

I&F - 68

Appendix A

Project Management

Mobile Command Centre Replacement Project

Project Manager Liz Clyne

Cab & Chassis Lead Liz Clyne

Command Centre Module Lead Kelly Yates

Command Centre Technology Lead Mike Coyle

Fundraising Lead Sandy Burpee

Project Management Liaison Mike Coyle

Executive

Coquitlam Search & Rescue Society

President Bob Hetherington

Vice-President Darren Timmer

Past President Garry Mancell

Treasurer Mechthild Kellas-Dicks

Cabin Jordan Wycherley

Community Education Al Thomas

Equipment Garry Lum

First Aid Thomas Zajac

Membership Karen Woo

Safety Tai McLavy

SAR Management Mike Coyle

Social Shakuntla Sharma

Technology Robert Sell

Training John Simpson

Truck & Transport Liz Clyne

I&F - 69

Appendix B

Letters of Recommendation

I&F - 70

Appendix C

Project Timeline

2014 2015

Activity Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Prelim Layout & Specification

Develop Cost Estimates

Finalize Spec & Estimates

Fundraising

Final Layout & Specification

Issue Module Tender

Evaluate Module Tenders

Issue Cab & Chassis Tender

Evaluate Cab & Chassis Tenders

Order Cab & Chassis

Cab & Chassis Delivery

Order Module

Module Delivery

Order Technology

Technology Delivery

Command Vehicle In-Service

I&F - 71

Appendix D Specification & Estimate: Cab & Chassis

I&F - 72

Appendix E Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Module

I&F - 73

Appendix E

Proposed Command Centre Module Layout

I&F - 74

Appendix E

Proposed Command Centre Module Layout

I&F - 75

Appendix E

Note: Specifications and estimates based on comparable units built by Intercontinental Truck Body

Category Item Detail Qty Cost Total

Module

Frame Construction

All aluminum frame with 4x3 tube long sills, 3" channel cross members, 3x2 side angles, and rubber frame rails spacers 3"x4" aluminum tube full-width rear bumper

1 $4,200 $4,200

Wall Construction

Extruded aluminum Snap-Lock panel construction with .100" thick skin and integrated ribs @ 12" on center. Extruded aluminum rub rail on all sides with large-radius aerodynamic extruded front corners and 24" skirt (integral part of sidewalls).

$1,800

Doors and Stairs

32"Wx84"H side doors with 2" insulation; lined same as unit. 2 $1,400 $2,800

c/w 18"x36" tinted fixed windows, key lockable stainless steel freezer handles with push-releases & rubber sweeps.

2 $475 $950

c/w fold-out aluminum staircase w/safety channel treads 2 $1,500 $3,000

c/w flip-out Stromberg-Carlson AC-544 commercial hand-rails (stainless steel rail with milled aluminum mounting blocks)

2 $375 $750

stainless steel grab horizontal grab handle on inside of door 2 $75 $150

Exterior Work Surface / Awning

93"W x 42"H x 8"D PS monitor compartment Passenger side. with double doors, top PVC Centraflex waterproof continuous hinge & (4) bottom 5" SS hinges. 2-point SS D-handle with (2) gas shocks for top "awning" door and (2) HD 90-degree retention chains for bottom "work surface" door (removable to allow work surface to fold down flat) including rubber stoppers. (see EXTERIOR COMPARTMENTS section for fabrication details) - compartment to be above floor, insulated & lined as interior

$2,300

Flooring / Insulation / Lining

Heavy-duty 1-piece Lonseal Lonplate II Gunpowder Grey (424TX)

$3,325

Over 3/4" marine grade plywood subfloor.

$525

Molded 2-3" vinyl cove base in dark gray to match flooring

$1,500

2" urethane insulation walls/ceiling.

$3,800

3" urethane insulation under floor, covering cross members.

$1,200

Complete interior lined in 3/8" plywood (backer board)

$2,350

Overlaid in white Kemlite glued to backer; no rivets.

$4,750

All butt-seams and corners to be trimmed with painted aluminum trim

5" drop false ceiling w/5 sections;

$3,750

I&F - 76

Appendix E


(1) center HVAC section, with fixed panels and 18 adjust. vents (2) middle lighting sections, with fixed panels and removable opaque lenses. (2) outer wiring sections, with nutserted removable panels for access to wiring. Fixed panels over cabinets with cable pass-throughs as required. Includes ladder-style support straps for tying down all wiring in plenums. (2) cross-trailer plenums (one at very rear, one in middle between A/C units)

$400

NOTE: false ceiling will be painted white after plywood is installed & before glass-board lining & cabinetry.

Exterior Compartments

All compartments fabricated of 1/8" aluminum, with sweep-out-style bottoms (except generator compartment), doors fabricated of extruded aluminum edge and frame with rubber automotive seals. door faces to be 10ga aluminum, with 1.5" styrofoam insulation, & 14ga interior skins. With rubber-gasketed SS 5" strap hinges, aluminum 180-degree holdups & SS 2-point deadbolt D-handles.

Above frame 90"W x 28"H x 26"D compartment 2 $1,400 $2,800


Compartment to be through-frame

$300

2" Roxul mineral wool insulation lining w/perf. galv. steel to be insulate and lined on the interior of the body- houses QD12 diesel generator

$980

Below frame 15"W x 30"H x 7.5' D full-through compartment w/side-hinged door 2 $1,250 $2,500


Compartment to be through-frame To be insulated and lined on the interior of the body. - for long item storage (up to 8'L x 30"W)

$600

69"W x 28"H x 26"D compartment 4 $1,250 $5,000

Passenger Side Exterior Compartments

14"W x 14"H x 4"D patch panel into communications equipment rack area. Top-hinged door includes exterior latch brackets which allow D-handle to be locked either in closed position or in slightly opened position.

1 $1,400

48"W x 22"H x 24"D compartments (2) for misc. storage (1) for HWH hydraulic pump & pneumatic pump for mast

4 $1,200 $4,800

(1) for batteries includes vent in rear wall

$125

500# capacity aluminum battery slide-out tray

$575

Interior Divider Walls

insulated partition wall w/double 16"W lacquer birch pocket (to match cabinetry) by Vander Bros, w/bungee retention cord.

1 $1,200 $1,200

Windows 36"Wx24"Hx2.5"D light tint T-slider Thermopane windows. 1 $700 $700

DS to include emergency exit hardware 2 $5,150 $10,300

24"Wx24"Hx2.5"D light tint fixed Thermopane windows. 2 $450 $900

See door section for (2) 18"Wx24"Hx2.5"D light tint fixed windows

Roof and Accessories

Extruded roof edge walk-on roof (roof bows @ 12" o.c. with 12ga aluminum overlapping sheeting).

$750

I&F - 77

Appendix E


Zico Quic-Ladder swing-out fold-down angled rooftop access ladder with 15"W useable width. Includes high-traction side handrails.

$2,250

Framing in roof for (2) A/C units

$300

Reinforce roof edge for Apex roof-mounted awning with (8) 3/16" alum plates welded between roof bows.

$600

Reinforce roof for Auto-Track satellite dish, with 24"L 3/16" aluminum plate fastened to roof bows, w/(2) 3" channels welded legs-down to plate with pre-drilled bolt holes to suit VR7b dish.

$850

Thin UHMW reflector touch-down protection plate

$250

Traction tape on lower section of roof with 1/3 coverage pattern

$400

(24) Hammond 1590Z120GY flanged die cast aluminum weatherproof junction boxes, installed on roof, for customer-installed antennae. (1) Blue Sea #1002 Medium Cable Clam from each junction box down into electrical cabling plenum are included.

$6,000

120 / 240V AC Electrical

Supply Onan CMQD diesel 120/240V 12000W Generator (HDKCD2209)

$14,250

installed in driver side insulated compartment.

$1,500

Includes 7" exhaust extension (155-2424)

Includes EC30 remote control panel (018-02030) with 10' harness; features auto-start to maintain batteries, service & diagnostic messages, start/stop, hour meter, battery condition gauge & DC voltage gauge.

$675

Tap diesel genset into chassis fuel tank

$650

Reroute diesel genset exhaust over to driver side

Blue Sea VSM 422 Vessel Systems Monitor; monitors the following: - primary battery charge level (DC current shunt 8255 included) - primary battery temperature (temp. sensor 1820 included) - DC voltage (two battery banks) - AC voltage (AC current transformer 8256 included)

$1,800

NOTE: 360 panel mounting kit module 1325 included w/custom panel

50A 120/240V rack-mount primary panel wired to generator with (2) 50A 120/240V subpanel breakers, wired to transfer switches.

$3,100

(2) 50A 120/240V rack-mount subpanels; wired to transfer switches NOTE: Subpanels to be powered by 50A automatic transfer switches fed by 30A shore power plugs and 50A main panel breakers. * includes full rear protective enclosure for all panels * NOTE: all loads to be evenly distributed between (2) subpanels, and all outlets to be labelled with pane l# and breaker #. NOTE: (3) 15A "UPS" rack outlets will be powered by inverter.

2 $1,200 $2,400

I&F - 78

Appendix E


(1) Rack-mount blank panel for EC30 genset control panel, inverter on/off switch & sub-panel digital amp meters.

1 $100

Blue Sea digital AC ammeters for subpanels (8238) with 360 panel system mount (1476 for 2 meters or 2x 1475)

2 $150 $300

50A 120/240V automatic transfer switches wired to 50A 120/240 breakers in main panel and to 30A 120/240V shore power plugs.

2 $638 $1,275

30A 120/240V exterior shore power plugs w/weatherproof covers 2 $450 $900

30A 120/240V 50' weatherproof shore power cables 2 $200 $400

30A 120/240V to 15A 120V adaptor plugs 2 $100 $200

Samlex SA-2000K-112 2000W PSW Inverter with optional remote on/off switch with battery voltage and output meters (S-R6-12)

1 $1,250

Remote ammeter (BS#8238) with 360 panel system mount (1475) - includes CFB2-400 400A class "T" fuse & holder - located inside communications rack (above battery compt.) - provides power to (3) "UPS" outlets; one per rack.

$250

Samlex SEC-1280A converter/2 or 3-stage selectable chargers with remote control panels (#900-EC-30; includes 30' cable)

$1,800

Air Conditioning

8"H Low-Profile High Capacity air conditioning units (15000 BTU) with ducted ceiling packages wired to (2) wall-mounted heat/cool thermostats.

$4,000

750W 120V Stelpro forced-air wall-mount heaters, wired to (2) A/C units, controlled by wall-mounted A/C unit thermostats.

$1,000

Mid Atlantic 4" exhaust fan (FAN) w/95CFM & 39dBA & 2000 RPM

$350

- 1 in battery compartment with metal finger guard (GUARD) and exterior splash cover.

$100

(1) 20'Lx10"W Carefree Apex 120V roof-mount awning for passenger side with Direct Response Electronics control panel installed near front side door. R127 MoonRock acrylic fabric; black case painted white same as body.

$6,750

120V/240V Scene Lights

ROM Corporation Magnafire 5000 900W 240V scene lights on exterior-mount deluxe 1100 Series Kwik-Raze poles with pan/tilt/turn control handle (KR-SBP-1139-W7) custom-ordered with 36" extra pole length and 24" extra travel.

4 $1,725 $6,900

Bottom 7" pole supports (KR-7-SB-R-P) 4 $150 $600

OPTION: upgrade to Command Light KL465 120/240V Knitgh Halogen folding light tower with 6x 650W scene lights with backlight option, green beacon & hand-held controller - add $5000

Lighting 6" LED dome lights (300 lumens; Grote 61411) w/built-in motion sensors; 1 per compartment. 10 $175 $1,750

4'x2' recessed high-output LED light panels- mounted in drop ceiling throughout module for complete low- voltage dimmable lighting system.

12 $400 $4,800

Switches for LED ceiling lights. 3 $110 $330

I&F - 79

Appendix E


18" LED strip lights (500 lumens; Grote 61F01) w/built-in switches; below upper cabinets for workstation task lighting.

9 $225 $2,025

12V Whelen M9ZLC surface-mount LED scene lights (6500 lumens) with chrome bezels (M9FC); 3 per side.

8 $413 $3,300

Switches for scene lights at side door. 3 $110 $330

Switches for scene lights in Cen-Com 3 $110 $330

Rear scene lights to be activated by backup signal

$110

(1) Whelen L31HGF GREEN LED 360-degree Beacon with optional cast aluminum branch guard kit, on rear PS corner, switched @ CenCom

$975

Zone Defence Night Vision heated shutter backup camera with (18)iInfra-red LED's, wired to plug at front of module.

$750

Backup alarm installed at the rear of the trailer (Grote #73080 - Smart backup alarm 87-112dB), wired to backup signal from tow vehicle through secondary module plug.

$225

Interior Cabinetry (by Vander Bros):

All cabinetry to be lacquer birch ply, with Lexan inserts in all cabinet doors, hidden hinges & non-locking trigger latches. All Pewter Brush Swirl countertops trimmed with oak. (20) 2" plastic cable pass-throughs (2 per flip-up workstation)

$400

Desks L-shaped desk; 4"Lx4'Wx22"Dx30"H

$1,250

Fixed desks; 4'Lx30"Dx30"H 3 $300 $900

Cabinets 6 $250 $1,500

Mid-back Safeco Soft-Tough Workbench Chairs with adjustable backrest, pneumatic height-adjustment, 5-foot spider base, black polyurethane seat and back & chrome foot ring.

4 $300 $1,200

3'x2' magnetic white board (in monitor compartment) 4 $175 $700

Sliding Map Boards

6'x4' magnetic white board attached to rear wall

$450

NOTE: build-out rear wall behind white board to suit video/SMART monitor size/location/wall-mount bracket.

$800

6'x4' magnetic white boards attached to 1/2" lacquer birch plywood sliding bypass boards trimmed with 1"x1"x1/8" channel & UHMW bottom guide tracks & extruded aluminum top track with low-profile roller trolleys & retention pin for storage.

2 $900 $1,800

Briefing Area 6'x4' magnetic white board attached to rear wall

$150

NOTE: build-out rear wall behind white board to suit video/SMART monitor size/location/wall-mount bracket.

$800

Fold down table

$800

Bench / storage

$2,000

Under storage compartment

TOTAL

$159,355

I&F - 80

Appendix F Specification & Estimate: Command Centre Technology

I&F - 81

Appendix F


Computer Hardware

Computer workstations

Computer workstation, mouse, keyboard, dual 20" monitors 2 $1,500 $3,000

Computer Server

Rack mount server with DVI/HDMI video 1 $2,500 $2,500

Dual 20" monitors, mouse, keyboard 1 $400 $400

NEC MultiSync P461-AVT 46" LCD Display w/Digital TV tuner 1 $3,300 $3,300

SMART BOARD PX346 46" Interactive Display Overlay 1 $ 4,450 $4,450

heavy-duty low-profile wall-mount (w/in-wall reinforcements) 1 $750 $750

Server Rack Middle Atlantic equipment rack; full-height with (2) hinged smoked lexan doors 1 $2,000 $2,000

Colour Laser Printer

HP Color LaserJet Enterprise M750n Colour Large Format (11x17) Two drawers allows 8x10 and 11x17 printing

1 $2,700 $2,700

Plotter HP Designjet T120 ePrinter For printing large maps, status, and field mapping support 1 $4,000 $4,000

Electrical

12 Volt DC DC rack mount power supply - 50 Amps, 12 VDC, 1 $1,020

DC fuse distribution, main battery breaker, relays, connectors & lugs 1 $1,500

Auxiliary batteries, wiring and accessories 2 $1,200

Battery charger - smart type dual bank; & accessories 1 $800

DC equipment and wiring installation (hours) 70 $85 $5,950

Installation supplies 1 $500

120 Volt AC AC distribution panels for primary, secondary, night plug, genset - with circuit breakers 4 $600 $2,400

AC shore/genset selection and protection panel 1 $700 $700

Installation supplies: conduit; electrical boxes; etc. 1 $1,200

AC wiring and equipment installation (hours) 70 $85 $5,950

Networking Infrastructure

Workstation Outlets

With AC Power, Cat 6 cabling for 5x RJ45 jack, 1x HDMI 9 $230 $2,070

Cat 6 Patch Panels

48 port cat 6 patch panel 1 $200

I&F - 82

Appendix F


Cat 6 Patch Panels

12 port cat 6 patch panel 1 $125

Installation supplies: conduit; electrical boxes; etc. 1 $1,000

Wiring installation (hours) 70 $85 $5,950

Audio/Visual

HDMI Cabling

Incl.

HDMI Controller Patch Panel

Rack-mounted HDMI switch for (16) outlets from (4) sources including (13) HDMI jumper cables from switch to rack-mounted distribution panel.

1 $2,200 $2,200

Communications

VHF Radios Vertex EVX-5400 512 channel VHF; digital/analog; display 4 $600 $2,400

UHF Radios Vertex VX-2200 512 channel UHF; analog; display 1 $600 $600

HAM Vertex EVX-5400 512 channel VHF; digital/analog; display 1 $600 $600

Air Band Icom IC-A210 1 $1,200

Main Radio Console

Zetron radio console with channel boards; telephone interface; programming kit and related accessories. Includes 7 tone remote adapters for radios

1 $19,000

Antennas Antennas: radios, cellular, avionics, amateur, wireless data, WiFi with mounts cabling and connectors 13 $200 $2,600

Auxiliary radio consoles

Gaitronics single-line tone remote console 4 $1,100 $4,400

Radio matrix switch for remote consoles 1 $1,500

Rack mounting shelves and hardware 1 $1,000

Radio system wiring and installation (hours) 100 $85 $8,500

Telular Cell to Landline Interface

Telular unit to provide landline via cellular network. 2 $900 $1,800

Iridium Satellite Phone

RST-100 1 $1,500

V-SAT Satellite Dish System

Reinforce roof for Auto-Track satellite dish, with 24"L 3/16" aluminum plate fastened to roof bows, w/(2) 3" channels welded legs-down to plate with pre-drilled bolt holes to suit VR7b dish.

1 $850 $ 850

Wireless data Cellular Wireless LTE Router 1 $500 $500

Wireless N Router 1 $400 $400

Internet

$400

I&F - 83

Appendix F

Pneumatic Mast

Mast Will-Burt Hurry-up mast 1 $1,800 $1,800

Conduit for Mast Cabling

50'L Nycoil 1"ID flexible conduit with (2) 90-degree end connectors. Customer to supply and install communications equipment on top of mast, and install cabling inside Nycoil.

1 $1,800 $1,800

Software

Radio control software

To control radio from remote workstations 1

$1,000

Total

$106,715

I&F - 84

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations Date: April 7 2015 Meeting Date: April 23 2015 Subject: Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy

RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board approve the Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy as presented in the report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”.

PURPOSE To provide the Board with a Metro Vancouver sponsorship policy for its consideration. BACKGROUND At its regular meeting of November 30 2012, the GVRD Board of Directors endorsed the following resolution directing staff to develop a policy that provides guidance on sponsorship requests:

…to develop a policy for Metro Vancouver to fund or support municipally hosted events that have a regional benefit and report back to the Intergovernmental and Administration Committee.

The attached Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy (Attachment 1) responds to the Board’s direction; however, the policy extends beyond municipally hosted events to include any event or program being hosted by external organizations or by a Metro Vancouver member municipality. An overview of the policy is presented below. METRO VANCOUVER SPONSORSHIP POLICY The Sponsorship Policy provides specific criteria for determining the circumstances under which Metro Vancouver sponsorship support, either direct or in‐kind, is appropriate for events and programs. Its intent is to facilitate Metro Vancouver support for events and programs that achieve one or more of the following broad objectives:

(1) Provide a clear, positive community benefit to the Metro Vancouver region overall; (2) Build community capacity and social cohesion; (3) Promote dialogue and community participation; (4) Contribute to the long‐term livability and sustainability of the Metro Vancouver region; (5) Clearly advance Metro Vancouver’s corporate goals and objectives.

The policy applies to all sponsorships regardless of their value or the type of contribution (i.e., cash or any in‐kind contributions), and includes separate review procedures for sponsorships with a total value of under $10,000 and $10,000 or more. It does not apply to grants or the provision of other forms of assistance, which are referenced in other Metro Vancouver policies.

5.5

I&F - 85

Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 3

The policy establishes that for consideration, a sponsorship proposal must meet ALL of the following criteria:

(1) It must offer specific benefits to Metro Vancouver or its members and must clearly outline the specific roles and responsibilities of each party in a formal agreement.

(2) The event or program for which sponsorship is being sought must: a) have an overall community objective and purpose that is consistent with Metro

Vancouver’s vision, mission and roles; and b) have operating guidelines and procedures that are consistent with Metro Vancouver’s

Sustainability Framework and Board Strategic Plan. (3) Metro Vancouver must receive benefits having a fair value that is consistent with the cost

of the sponsorship to be provided. The sponsorship policy also stipulates that sponsorship opportunities which involve or promote four or more Metro Vancouver members will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver, and states that Metro Vancouver will not consider any sponsorship proposals for events or programs that:

(1) Primarily promote a private or commercial interest; (2) Promote or support political or religious organizations; (3) Exclude or marginalize minority community groups; (4) Pose potential environmental hazards; (5) Involve the taking of unnecessary risks, or that put the general public at risk.

While the Policy, if approved, would delegate to staff the authority to consider proposals within the criteria with a total value less than $10,000, such applications may be brought to the Board for review. All applications over $10,000 would be brought to the Board through the appropriate standing committee for consideration. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board endorse the Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy as presented in the

report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”. 2. That the GVRD Board refer the sponsorship policy outlined in the report dated April 7, 2015,

titled “Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy” back to staff for further review. 3. That the GVRD Board receive for information the report dated April 7, 2015, titled “Metro

Vancouver Sponsorship Policy”.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no immediate financial implications for Metro Vancouver related to the endorsement of a sponsorship policy. Individual sponsorship submissions will be considered in future on a case‐by‐case basis within existing departmental budgets. Funds allocated for sponsorship requests will be included in the individual department budgets for consideration by the appropriate standing committees at the time that the annual budgets are presented. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Metro Vancouver is periodically presented with opportunities to build awareness of Metro Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver brand “Services and Solutions for a Livable Region” and to showcase specific Metro Vancouver projects, programs and initiatives and those of its members

I&F - 86

Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 3 of 3

through sponsorship of local and regional events. However, at the current time, specific criteria does not exist to guide decision making with respect to external funding requests. The attached Sponsorship Policy is intended to provide clear guidelines as to the type of sponsorship opportunities that will be considered and how they will be given that consideration. The Sponsorship Policy as presented will address this gap; therefore, staff recommend that the Board endorse the Sponsorship Policy as presented in Alternative 1. Attachment: Metro Vancouver Sponsorship Policy

I&F - 87

BOARD POLICY

Sponsorship Policy Page 1 of 4

SPONSORSHIP POLICY

Effective Date: May 1, 2015

Approved By:

PURPOSE

This policy provides specific criteria for determining the circumstances under which Metro Vancouver sponsorship support, either direct or in‐kind, is appropriate for events and programs being hosted by external organizations or by Metro Vancouver’s members. DEFINITIONS

“Metro Vancouver” refers to any of the four legal entities that comprise the organization: the GVRD, GVS&DD, GVWD, and MVHC. “Sponsorship” refers to the provision of cash or in‐kind contributions by Metro Vancouver in exchange for a defined set of benefits, such as logo placement, speaking opportunities by Metro Vancouver directors or senior staff, advertising in event publications or on event websites, etc., for any local or regional events. “In‐kind contributions” are specific contributions that Metro Vancouver may provide in lieu of a cash contribution to an event or program, including:

a) Goods, such as: supplies (printed promotional materials); use of Metro Vancouver facilities (waived fees for hosting events at Metro Vancouver venues/facilities); use of Metro Vancouver proprietary supplies or materials (e.g., water for event participants supplied via the Metro Vancouver water wagon) and food/catering;

b) Services, such as: staff support (assignment of Metro Vancouver staff to provide expert advice or professional services in support of the sponsored event or program, e.g., event web casting/live streaming, etc.).

POLICY

Overview: Metro Vancouver is periodically presented with opportunities to build awareness of Metro Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver brand “Services and Solutions for a Livable Region” and to showcase specific Metro Vancouver projects, programs and initiatives and those of its members through sponsorship of local and regional events. This policy is intended to provide clear guidelines as to what sort of sponsorship opportunities will be considered and how they will be given consideration.

5.5 Attachment

I&F - 88

BOARD POLICY


Overall, Metro Vancouver seeks to support events and programs that achieve one or more of the following broad objectives:

(1) Provide a clear, positive community benefit to the Metro Vancouver region overall; (2) Build community capacity and social cohesion; (3) Promote dialogue and community participation; (4) Contribute to the long‐term livability and sustainability of the Metro Vancouver region; (5) Clearly advance Metro Vancouver’s corporate goals and objectives.

This policy applies to all sponsorship proposals regardless of their cost or the type of contribution (i.e., cash or any in‐kind contributions), although a separate review procedure has been put in place for sponsorships with a total value of $10,000 or more. In addition to the eligibility criteria set out below, sponsorship opportunities associated with Metro Vancouver’s members and events and programs that recognize and uphold positive and inclusive community values, and that provide opportunities for Metro Vancouver to promote its brand, projects, programs and initiatives will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver. Sponsorship opportunities that involve or promote four or more Metro Vancouver members will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver. This policy does not apply to grants or the provision of other forms of assistance. Eligibility Criteria: To be considered, a sponsorship proposal must meet ALL of the following criteria:

(1) It must offer specific benefits to Metro Vancouver or its members and must clearly outline the specific roles and responsibilities of each party in a formal agreement.

(2) The event or program for which sponsorship is being sought must: a) have an overall community objective and purpose that is consistent with Metro

Vancouver’s vision, mission and roles; and b) have operating guidelines and procedures that are consistent with Metro

Vancouver’s Sustainability Framework and Board Strategic Plan. (3) Metro Vancouver must receive benefits having a fair value that is consistent with the cost of

the sponsorship to be provided. Sponsorship opportunities that involve or promote four or more Metro Vancouver members will be considered as providing higher value to Metro Vancouver. Metro Vancouver will not consider any sponsorship proposals for events or programs that:

(1) Primarily promote a private or commercial interest; (2) Promote or support political or religious organizations; (3) Exclude or marginalize minority community groups; (4) Pose potential environmental hazards; (5) Involve the taking of unnecessary risks, or that put the general public at risk.

I&F - 89

BOARD POLICY


Notwithstanding any of the criteria or procedures outlined in this policy, Metro Vancouver has no obligation to provide sponsorship and may, at its sole discretion, decline to sponsor any event or program for any reason, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing:

(1) The stated purpose of the event or program for which sponsorship is being sought; (2) Metro Vancouver budgetary or financial considerations at the time of the sponsorship

request; (3) The projected reach of the event or program and its visibility in communities that make up

the Metro Vancouver region. Sponsorship Budgets The annual budgets for the Metro Vancouver sponsorship program are included within the individual department budgets and are approved annually by the designated Standing Committee that has oversight of these budgets. Application and Review Procedure: 1. Funding Requests Greater than $10,000

Organizations seeking a sponsorship with a total value of $10,000 or more must submit their request to Metro Vancouver in writing and must provide the following details with respect to the event or program for which sponsorship is being sought:

a) The official name of the event or program; b) The date(s) and times(s) of the event or program, as applicable; c) A general description of the event or program, including its overall objective(s); d) The overall budget for the event or program and the total cash or cash equivalent

amount of sponsorship being sought; e) An accounting of how event organizers plan to allocate the cash or in‐kind contributions

provided by Metro Vancouver should the sponsorship application be approved; f) A listing of other stakeholders that will be approached to provide sponsorships for the

event or program; g) A listing of the specific benefits that will accrue to Metro Vancouver should it proceed

with the sponsorship being sought; h) A detailed description of how and to what degree Metro Vancouver’s members will be

involved in the event or program; i) A description of the anticipated outcomes of the event or program and how this will be

measured and reported. For proposals seeking sponsorship with a total value of $10,000 or more, Metro Vancouver staff will prepare a Committee report for consideration by the appropriate standing committee (including a recommendation on the proposal), which will assess the proposal based on the criteria included in this policy. If endorsed by the standing committee, the report and attached sponsorship proposal will be forwarded to the relevent Metro Vancouver Board for its consideration.

I&F - 90

BOARD POLICY


2. Funding Requests Less than $10,000

Organizations seeking a sponsorship with a total value of less than $10,000 must submit their request to Metro Vancouver in writing and must provide the following details with respect to the event or program for which sponsorship is being sought:

a) The official name of the event or program; b) The date(s) and times(s) of the event/program, as applicable; c) A general description of the event or program, including its overall objective(s); d) The overall budget for the event or program and the total cash or cash equivalent

amount of sponsorship being sought; e) A listing of the specific benefits that will accrue to Metro Vancouver should it proceed

with the sponsorship being sought. For proposals seeking sponsorship with a total value of less than $10,000, the proposal will initially be assessed by Metro Vancouver’s Senior Management Committee based on the criteria included in this policy. On behalf of Metro Vancouver, the Committee may either approve the sponsorship proposal, reject the sponsorship proposal, or refer it to the appropriate Metro Vancouver standing for further consideration.

I&F - 91

11182334

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Heather Schoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations Department Date: April 13, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: National Zero Waste Council Update

RECOMMENDATION That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive for information the report titled National Zero Waste Council Update dated April 13, 2015.

PURPOSE To provide the Intergovernment and Finance Committee with an update on National Zero Waste Council activities and initiatives. BACKGROUND As part of its approved Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP), Metro Vancouver set aggressive waste reduction and diversion targets, some of which require advocacy beyond local jurisdictions to influence the design of products toward “cradle‐to‐cradle” approaches, and to create greater public awareness of the need to reduce and prevent waste. The ISWRMP commits Metro Vancouver to: “Developing a national zero waste marketing council so that cities across Canada can pool resources and develop common messaging, with national impact, on the need to reduce waste, resulting in informed and educated citizens on waste reduction opportunities”. At its regular meeting of July 26, 2013 the Metro Vancouver Board adopted a recommendation approving additional funds of $110,000 in 2014 and $110,000 in 2015 for a total of $220,000 to supplement existing in kind support for the National Zero Waste Council. NATIONAL ZERO WASTE COUNCIL Founded by Metro Vancouver in collaboration with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Council was launched at the 2013 Metro Vancouver Zero Waste Conference. In its first year of operation, the Council established a governance structure, four working groups and an administrative Secretariat housed within the External Relations Department at Metro Vancouver. In 2014 regular updates were provided to the Committee and focused on the Council’s first year priorities: recruitment, working group advancements, and ongoing organizational and business development. The Council hosted its first AGM on September 17, 2014. The Committee last received an update on the Council at its regularly scheduled meeting on November 6, 2014. Since the last update to the Committee, the Council has had three regularly‐scheduled Board meetings: November 26, 2014, December 4, 2014, March 3, 2014 with a special meeting hosted on March 25, 2014. This report summarizes the key directions and actions arising from these Board meetings.

5.6

I&F - 92

National Zero Waste Council Update Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 5

Governance and Organizational Development Changes At its March 3, 2015 meeting, the Council approved collapsing the Management and Collaboration Boards into one executive leadership board – the National Zero Waste Council Management Board (Attachment 1) with oversight of all Council activities. Streamlining the board structure is intended to maximize efficiency, and simplify administration, while also maintaining accountability. The operating guidelines for the new Management Board reflect additional guidance on composition to ensure a balanced ratio of business/industry associations/government and not‐for‐profits at the board level. 2015 Budget Allocation The Council, at its March 3, 2015 meeting (and subsequent special meeting on March 25), approved the allocation of funds to various projects against its 2015 operating budget (see Attachment 2). The 2015 budget operating budget totals: $388,274 including unspent funds from 2014 of $13,624; revenue from the BC Ministry of Environment in the amount of $7,800; salary and administrative costs associated with the management and implementation of the Council and Secretariat $256,850 (supported by in‐kind resources from Metro Vancouver); and project development support of $131,424. Included in the project development budget allocation are two strategic initiatives. These strategic projects, as well as working group projects are outlined in greater detail below. Strategic Projects National Roundtable on Waste Prevention: The Council is co‐hosting with the City of Toronto and the Packaging Association of Canada (PAC), a national roundtable on waste prevention and reduction on the shoulder of PAC EX – the Canadian Packaging Summit June 16‐17. This event will leverage leading industry stakeholders from government, industry and the not‐for‐profit community who are attending PAC EX. Such industry stakeholders include, for example, senior leaders from Canadian Tire, Loblaws, Tim Hortons, Unilever, etc. The national event will feature a focused roundtable discussion on developing and implementing strategies for enhancing collaboration and coordination between industry stakeholders and government in reducing waste at source, through both improved communication and harmonization of regulation. Three specific streams – packaging, food waste, and the circular economy ‐ will be the focus of break‐out discussions. The national roundtable aligns with the Council’s goal to convene national conversations on critical waste prevention issues. The Council is also exploring hosting a networking recruitment session alongside FCM’s AGM, June 5, 2015 in collaboration with the cities of Edmonton, Calgary and Metro Vancouver. This event would work in tandem with the national roundtable two weeks later. Strategic Planner: The Council has approved terms of reference for hiring a strategic planner, or similar, to work with the Management Board in 2015. The scope of work for this contract is to:

1. Help the NZWC understand the environment within which it is operating, and identify the strategic and unique ways in which the Council can contribute to and effect systems‐change around waste prevention and reduction across Canada.

2. Identify a business model, including specific financing strategies, that help evolve and strengthen the NZWC‘s organizational structure, and that supports the Council in becoming a self‐sustaining national entity capable of effecting change and bringing governments, businesses and non‐governmental organizations together.

I&F - 93


Page 3 of 5

3. Develop a Strategic Five Year Plan Implementation Plan (i.e. a concrete action plan) that will allow the National Zero Waste Council to identify and more deeply engage with a network of influential and collaborative partners, and that will secure the financial and other resources needed to enable the Council to pursue its mission and vision.

Working Group Updates and 2015 Projects Working groups continue to be the key mechanism to advance priority projects to deliver on the Council’s mandate – first projects are now completed, and near completion, and will be the focus of a website re‐launch in April.

1. National Communication Campaigns Working Group A key priority in 2014 was the creation of a web‐based sharing platform for successful communication campaigns focused on waste prevention. Two campaigns are currently featured on the site – Metro Vancouver’s Christmas Campaign, and City of Edmonton’s Go Bagless campaign. A contractor was secured to promote the sharing platform to municipalities and NGO’s across the country, and identify additional campaigns to place on the website. Work to date has discovered that while there are many recycling campaigns, there are very few reduce campaigns. Final results from this nation‐wide search are pending. The working group also completed a number of small research projects, including a literature review of behavioral change campaigns related to food waste; conducting analysis of how food scraps are disposed of, and how much of that food waste was avoidable (final analysis will be available spring 2015); and initial research through a collaboration with UBC’s Department of Psychology to determine current behavior related to dairy products with Best Before dates.

Work in 2015 includes populating and then promoting the web‐based sharing platform with appropriate campaigns, supporting the communication needs of other working groups as they complete/proceed with knowledge transfer/best practice/advocacy projects, and completing a best practices guide for municipalities around waste reduction and behavior change.

2. Food Working Group

Since its formation in 2014, the Food Working Group has been positioning to advance a policy that re‐positions and supports a tax incentive plan for businesses wishing to donate food. To this end, the working group secured the Conference Board of Canada to prepare a business case analysis of tax incentives, and additional supporting strategies. This report is complete and forms the foundation for the development of a policy platform to be presented to the Federal Finance Committee in 2015 in addition to building institutional and public support for the incentive. The Working Group is currently seeking a policy writer to prepare this policy platform, which includes collating a number of additional supporting documents including waste audits prepared by other Council member local governments. Once the policy platform has been prepared, an advocacy campaign will be crafted and implemented that will include FCM federal meetings in November 2015.

3. Product Design and Packaging Working Group

The Product Design and Packaging Working Group undertook a knowledge‐sharing initiative in 2014 that included a series of webinars focusing on lifecycle assessment and waste prevention, and the development of an on‐line portfolio featuring product and packaging

I&F - 94


Page 4 of 5

design that delivers on waste prevention: Celebrating Canadian Design for Waste Prevention and Systems‐thinking. Guest speakers in the webinars ranged from the University of Calgary’s Athena Chair in Lifecycle Assessment in the Faculty of Environment Design, to DuPont’s Global Marketing Manager, Steelcase’s Manager of Design for the Environment, C2C’s Director of Technical Development, and more.

The online portfolio is almost completed, and is part of the NZWC’s new web presence. It features products ranging from Nature’s Path to Steelcase.

For 2015, the Working Group will continue to maintain and grow the current web portfolio of businesses, products and packaging from Canada, working with external reviewers from Emily Carr University of Art and Design, University of Calgary, UL Environment, etc.; conduct a scan of Awards programs that the Council might support/participate in/partner with to highlight and further recognize excellent design for waste prevention; and establish a compostable packaging design and assessment program. The latter will entail identifying best practices in compostable packaging design, and clarifying what constitutes compostable, and/or biodegradable packaging. The working group will share best information, create a common ground of knowledge around the possibilities and limitations of different materials, and what considerations and claims could/should be made when designing products and packaging.

The working group will also deliver a set of webinars, a white paper, and build out the online design portfolio.

4. Circular Economy Working Group

The Circular Economy Working Group completed a series of business case studies set within a North American context. These will be available shortly on the website and supported by an outreach initiative. With this core research completed, focus is now on business engagement – to identify key business challenges and opportunities at the industry‐level. A first event is planned for April 14, profiling Steve Creed, Director of Business Development for WRAP UK. Other public engagement events with a circular economy focus are listed in outreach and engagement.

Council Outreach and Engagement The Council continues to host events to facilitate knowledge sharing as well as publishing a bulletin (see Attachment 3). Recent activities include:

Webinar, December 4, 2014 LifeCycle Designs that Work in the Marketplace. Featuring guest speakers from Mother Park's Tea & Coffee, Solegear Bioplastics Inc., and Steelcase Inc.

Webinar, January 30, 2015 The Business Case for the Circular Economy, showcasing recently completed circular economy case study findings.

Webinar, April 13, 2015 Innovation and the Circular Economy, hosted in collaboration with the Conference Board of Canada and featuring Dell, Accenture and sharing economy expert David Van Seters.

Sustainability Dialogue, April 29, Advancing the Circular Economy – Innovations from Canada and the Netherlands, featuring the National Zero Waste Council, two Dutch subject matter experts and Luke Smeaton for Lighthouse Sustainable Centre and the National Industrial Symbiosis Program.

I&F - 95


Page 5 of 5

In addition to these events, a spring bulletin is planned and the Council is looking at opportunities to develop and implement a broad social media strategy. The Council now has a fully developed LinkedN page and twitter account: @nzwcouncil. The Council’s new website will go live in April. Next Steps The Council has Board meetings scheduled for May and July. The focus for the next six months is on delivering on the strategic projects identified above, as well as continuing working group delivery and identifying key milestones to be achieved for the Council’s second AGM, to be hosted in conjunction with Metro Vancouver’s fifth annual Zero Waste Conference scheduled for October 29, 2015. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS At its regular meeting of July 26, 2013 the Metro Vancouver Board adopted a recommendation approving additional funds of $110,000 in 2014 and $110,000 in 2015 for a total of $220,000 to supplement existing in kind support to cover project delivery and meeting/Annual General Meeting costs for the establishment of the National Zero Waste Council. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Since the fall of 2012, Metro Vancouver, in collaboration with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, has taken a leadership role in the development, launch and now implementation of the National Zero Waste Council. Formally launched at Metro Vancouver’s 2013 Zero Waste Conference, the Council’s membership base and partners’ network continues to grow. The Council’s governance structure also continues to evolve as the organization matures – and the Council’s strategic delivery on its mission will be enhanced in 2015 with the assistance of a strategic planner. Important work continues to be accomplished through the leadership of the Council’s working groups. Projects such as national communication campaigns, a policy to support a tax incentive plan for businesses wishing to donate food, prominent webinars, a Canadian design portfolio, and a series of business case studies are significant in scope, goals and objectives, with members active in project development and delivery and the potential to place the Council in a strong, national position to advocate for and support design and behavior change. Membership continues to grow with a national roundtable to be hosted with the City of Toronto and the Packaging Association of Canada. Council efforts for 2015 will focus on strategic development; cross‐sector, industry‐level collaboration; knowledge‐sharing and harmonized understanding of waste prevention strategies and approaches; and project delivery. Attachments: (Orbit #11182644) 1. National Zero Waste Council Management Board 2. 2015 Council Budget 3. National Zero Waste Council Membership 4. National Zero Waste Council Fall Bulletin

I&F - 96

ATTACHMENT 1

National Zero Waste Council Management Board GOVERNMENT and GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATIONS

Malcolm Brodie, Mayor, City of Richmond, Chair, Metro Vancouver Zero Waste Committee

Dan Casselman, Senior Policy Advisor, Federation of Canadian Municipalities Shelley Carroll, City Councillor ‐ Ward 33, City of Toronto Bill Karsten, Councillor, Halifax Regional Municipality and Vice‐chair of FCM’s

Standing Committee on Environmental Issues and Sustainable Development TBC, BC Ministry of Environment

BUSINESS and BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS

Corinne Atwood, Executive Director, BC Bottle and Recycling Depot Association Alan Blake, Executive Director, PAC NEXT Nancy Coulas, Director, Environment & Energy Policy, Canadian Manufacturers and

Exporters David Lawes, EPR Business Consultant Maury McCausland, Retail Operations Sustainability Specialist, London Drugs Nathalie St‐Pierre, Vice‐President ‐ Sustainability and Quebec, Retail Council of

Canada

NON PROFIT Frank Came, Senior Advisor, Globe Foundation Renee Gratton, Founding President, Construction Resource Initiatives Council Allen Lynch, Representative, International Board of Directors, Solid Waste

Association of North America

Brock Macdonald, Chief Executive Officer, Recycling Council of British Columbia Christina Seidel, Executive Director, Recycling Council of Alberta Vanessa Timmer, Executive Director, One Earth

I&F - 97

ATTACHMENT 2

REVENUES

Metro Vancouver Revenue ‐ External Relations $ 110,000

External Revenues ‐ MOE 7,800

Metro Vancouver Corporate Support (In Kind) 256,850

Surplus Carryforward ‐ 2014 13,624

TOTAL REVENUES $ 388,274

EXPENDITURES

Management Board $ 43,000

Food Waste 30,000

Circular Economy 15,000

Product Design and Packaging 15,000

National Communication Campaigns 14,500

Outreach and Support 4,000

Administration Department Support (In‐Kind) 256,850

Unallocated 9,924

TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 388,274

NATIONAL ZERO WASTE COUNCIL

2015 BUDGET

2015

BUDGET

I&F - 98

MEMBERS GOVERNMENT BC Ministry of Environment City of Burnaby City of New Westminster City of North Vancouver City of Port Coquitlam City of Richmond City of Toronto

City of Vancouver Granville Island Office, CMHC Metro Vancouver Town of Cochrane Township of Langley Vancouver Board of Education Ville de Gatineau

BUSINESS AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS BC Bottle and Recycling Depot Association BSI Biodegradable Solutions ECODAS Ecoinspire Green Chair Recycling Green Spark Group

Immacutec Systems Technologies Inc. London Drugs One Earth SymbiAudit Inc. West Coast Reduction Ltd.

NON PROFIT/ACADEMIA Catalyst Agri‐Innovations Society Construction Resource Initiatives Council Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM)Food Banks Canada Globe Group Kwantlen Student Association Light House PAC NEXT Retail Council of Canada

Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Control Strathcona Business Improvement Association Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) Recycling Council of Alberta Recycling Council of British Columbia Thompson River University

ADVISORS Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment

Canadian Stewardship Services Alliance Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM)

ATTACHMENT 3

I&F - 99

CHAIR’S NOTESeptember 17th, 2014, marked a significant milestone in the evolution of the National Zero Waste Council (NZWC) – our inaugural Annual General Meeting, where we welcomed the new Vice Chair of the National Zero Waste Council, Brock Macdonald, the CEO of the Recycling Council of British Columbia. Brock brings with him over 14 years of valuable waste management, Extended Producer Responsibility and recycling experience. We also welcomed Corinne Atwood, BC Bottle and Recycling Depot Association; Maury McCausland, London Drugs; and, Vanessa Timmer, One Earth to

their new positions on the Collaboration and Management Boards.

In the Council’s first year, we have seen remarkable progress in the maturation of the Council, and in the development of some concrete strategies for helping reduce the amount of waste produced in Canada.

One aspect of the Council that I am extremely proud of is attracting national attention, with the active involvement on our two Boards and among our advisory group organizations from across the country – from Winnipeg to Toronto to Ottawa and on to Halifax.

And as our membership continues to grow, the Council has also gained national, international and federal recognition thanks in part to the ongoing NZWC webinar series and to appearances at numerous events (see Council Calendar), including presentations to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development and the Australian Zero Waste Conference.

Having initially established a strong foundation through its membership and governance, work is now well underway on the important projects being developed by the Council’s four working groups to champion waste prevention and promote changes in the design, production and use of products in Canada (see Working Groups).

As the end of the year rapidly approaches, I look forward with anticipation to 2015, and the achievements the Council is on course to deliver, as we work together to address waste generation in Canada.

Sincerely,

Malcolm Brodie Chair, National Zero Waste Council

COUNCIL BULLETIN

NEW MEMBERS We are pleased to welcome the following organizations to the Council:

Catalyst Agri-Innovations Society www.aces-bc.ca

City of Burnaby www.burnaby.ca

City of Port Coquitlam www.portcoquitlam.ca

City of North Vancouver www.cnv.org

City of Vancouver www.vancouver.ca

ECODAS www.ecodas.com

Immacutec Systems Technologies Inc. www.immacutec.com

Kwantlen Student Association www.kusa.ca

Light House Sustainable Building Centre www.sustainablebuildingcentre.com

London Drugs www.londondrugs.com

One Earth www.oneearthweb.org

Ridge Meadows Recycling Society rmrecycling.org

Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Council www.saskwastereduction.ca

Thompson Rivers University www.tru.ca

WE

LCO

ME

FALL 2014Canada united in the achievement of zero waste, now and for future generations

continues next page

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 100

http://www.ecodas.com/en/index.php?menu=7&lang=en

http://www.immacutec.com

http://rmrecycling.org

COUNCIL WORKING GROUPS – GET INVOLVED!

PRODUCT DESIGN AND PACKAGING WORKING GROUPThe Product Design and Packaging Working Group is advancing a project titled Celebrating Canadian Design for Waste Prevention and Systems-thinking to influence behavior change and product design. Using an internally developed assessment criteria for designs that deliver on waste prevention and reduction, the working group is creating a portfolio of case studies and success stories. Experts in the fields of lifecycle thinking, sustainability assessment and accreditation, and leading edge businesses already designing with waste prevention in mind have also been recruited to assist with criteria, portfolio development, and webinar-based knowledge transfer. This web-based portfolio will be launched in early 2015.

Webinars can be viewed here and here, and feature experts ranging from Louis St. Pierre, Emily Carr University of Art and Design to Yasmin Siddiqi, Dupont Packaging.

CIRCULAR ECONOMY WORKING GROUPThe Circular Economy Working Group is undertaking exploratory research and engagement to better understand business needs, and to demonstrate the business case, for a circular economy. As part of this work, five case studies are being completed in the areas of: circular supplies; resource recovery; product life extension; sharing platforms; and product as a service. An additional set of cases studies along the theme of textiles are also being completed by the SFU Beedie School of Business, and business engagement is underway to build support for a cross-Canada network of businesses and organizations interested in furthering circular approaches. The outcome of this work will form part of an online platform of information on the circular economy, early in 2015.

NATIONAL COMMUNICATION CAMPAIGNS WORKING GROUPThe National Communication Campaigns Working Group is focused on sharing proven, replicable waste prevention campaigns with governments, NGO’s and businesses across Canada who share the goal of fostering a new social norm where citizens are increasingly mindful of how their choices and behaviours can reduce waste. The Working Group is about to launch an interactive web portal that will feature waste reduction campaigns proven to be effective and aligned with Council objectives. Members will be able to repurpose the campaigns and communication collateral for their own use, taking advantage of work others have done and saving valuable internal resources. Metro Vancouver’s Create Memories – Not Garbage (see right) and Edmonton’s Go Bagless campaigns will be amongst the first campaigns shared.

In 2015, the Working Group will begin exploring opportunities to develop a truly national waste prevention campaign.

WO

RK

ING

GR

OU

PS

NEW MEMBERS Town of Cochrane www.cochrane.ca

Township of Langley www.tol.ca

Vancouver Board of Education (Vancouver School Board) www.vsb.bc.ca

Ville de Gatineau www.gatineau.ca

SHARING CAMPAIGNS: CELEBRATING THE HOLIDAY SEASON For the past five years Metro Vancouver’s popular holiday campaign – Create Memories Not Garbage – has successfully encouraged residents to reduce waste during the festive period. Create Memories Not Garbage is now available for others from across Canada to adopt for their own use.

Resources and artwork range from bus shelter ads and posters to radio, television and print campaign materials. Create Memories, Not Garbage is easy to scale according to time and budget.

All of the creative work associated with the campaign, including videos, are now available to download and can be re-branded with your logo.

For more information, contact [email protected].

CREATE MEMORIES, NOT GARBAGE.

RYAN artwork, Black Press = 4 5/16” x 8”h

You can be a #GreenAngel too. For ideas, go to www.metrovancouver.org

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 101

http://meet66017093.adobeconnect.com/p621rjl2fqr/

http://bcove.me/qxtj2w59

http://www.metrovancouver.org/christmas/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.edmonton.ca/for_residents/composting_grasscycling/grasscycling.aspx



mailto:lena.zordan%40metrovancouver.org?subject=

FOOD WORKING GROUPThe Food Working Group is undertaking policy development that focuses on removing organics from the waste stream and bringing them to food communities in need, with one tool being a tax incentive plan for businesses wishing to donate food. Initial research is being undertaken by the Conference Board of Canada, with the intention of preparing a policy proposal in the new year, and a policy change campaign to commence later in 2015.

The Group is also pleased to report a significant increase in its active membership, which now includes Metro Richelieu Inc., Food Banks Canada, Halifax Regional Municipality, Canadian Councils of Ministers for the Environment, Solid Waste Association of North America, City of Toronto, BC Ministry of Environment, and Metro Vancouver.

CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE GROUP – FORMING Renée Gratton, Collaboration Board Member, is leading efforts to establish a working group on construction and building waste. If interested in participating as a co-lead, or as member, of this working group please contact the Secretariat.

The Working Groups welcome input from other businesses, local governments and community organizations from across the country. If your organization has a campaign or circular economy case study to share or an excellent Canadian product or packaging design to recommend, contact the Secretariat at [email protected].

INSIGHT AND COMMENTARY

DESIGNING FOR WASTE PREVENTION With the rapidity of advances in resource efficiency, deciding which path to follow in the pursuit of sustainability is not always obvious. But, both eco-efficiency and/or circular economy-based strategies can offer benefits, in terms of financial and environmental performance.

Recent Developments Include:

• Four key considerations for developing a sustainable packaging strategy, suggested by the Sustainable Packaging Coalition and PE International, around the themes of leadership, lifecycle, stakeholder expectation and sales impact.

• An in-depth report from Australia The Role of Packaging in Minimising Food Waste in the Supply Chain includes discussion of balancing the trade-offs which exist in relation to packaging and food waste.

• The growth of design for disassembly and the commitment of businesses to facilitating perpetual as opposed to single use. For example, the Steelcase chair, as presented by Matteo Kausch of the Cradle-to-Cradle Product Innovations Institute and as discussed by Joseph Chiodo, at the Zero Waste Conference.

WO

RK

ING

GR

OU

PS

COUNCIL NEWS

NZWC KEY IN DELIVERY OF UPSTREAM WASTE PREVENTION AND REDUCTIONThe report State of Waste Management in Canada, recently prepared for the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment makes several recommendations for furthering waste prevention and reduction in Canada, including industry and government collaboration through the NZWC.

ZERO WASTE CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 16, 2014Last month, the National Zero Waste Council presented at Metro Vancouver’s Fourth Annual Zero Waste Conference in Vancouver. More than 500 delegates heard inspiring keynote and panel presentations, including:

• Jeremy Rifkin, author of The Zero Marginal Cost Society

• Dayna Baumeister, Biomimicry 3.8,

• Tim Brooks, The LEGO Group,

• Markus Laubscher, Philips

• Nadine Gudz, Interface

• Mike Biddle, MBA Polymers Inc.

All presentations now available online.

CBC RADIO FEATURE In August, the Council was featured on CBC Radio podcast series “What a Waste”.

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 102

http://www.packagingdigest.com/sustainable-packaging/4-key-questions-about-2-sustainable-packaging-paths140814

http://www.packagingdigest.com/sustainable-packaging/4-key-questions-about-2-sustainable-packaging-paths140814

http://www.chep.com/foodwaste

http://www.chep.com/foodwaste

https://extranet.metrovancouver.org/sites/NZWC/Pages/default.aspx

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid775238908001?bckey=AQ~~,AAAAtIJh4TE~,Ey0zR91VLdulgADKKY_pykPL2-vBHv9u&bclid=0&bctid=3799129846001

http://www.metrovancouver.org/zwc/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/State_Waste_Mgmt_in_Canada.pdf

http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/State_Waste_Mgmt_in_Canada.pdf



http://www.metrovancouver.org/ZWC/PRESENTATIONS/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.cbc.ca/whatawaste/popupaudio.html?clipIds=2493322599

SPO

TLIGH

THOUSE OF COMMONS STANDING COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT JUNE 12, 2014Raymond Louie, Vice Chair, Metro Vancouver Board, and First Vice-President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities, presented to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development as part of their study of the management of municipal solid waste and industrial materials. Further dialogue with the federal government is anticipated as the Council continues to advocate nationally.

JOIN US ON LINKEDIN – NEW COUNCIL GROUP DISCUSSION PAGE The Council has a new LinkedIn group discussion page. Please invite your colleagues and networks to join along with you.

COUNCIL NEWS

MEMBER SPOTLIGHT

LONDON DRUGS Started in 1945 as a single pharmacy store, London Drugs now comprises 78 stores across four provinces, selling everything from MP3 players to shampoo, greetings cards and cameras. Since introducing expanded recycling programs in 2006, London Drugs has experienced a 90 percent reduction in waste chain wide, with a goal to reach 95 percent in 2015.

Today, London Drugs is tackling waste in their own supply chains. They are working with suppliers and manufacturers at the design stage to reduce packaging while maintaining functionality and product protection and specifically finding alternatives to Styrofoam. For example, Styrofoam packaging for their glass watering bulb product was redesigned out of recyclable cardboard, providing a more sustainable solution from the factory itself. London Drugs’ home brand Certified Data Computers has replaced Styrofoam packaging with molded blown fibre. Styrofoam has also been eliminated as a packaging material from their imported furniture.

London Drugs is also committed to closing-the-loop with their suppliers. They currently have a partnership with Cascades Recovery where the company processes cardboard from warehouses, stores and customers, and uses the material to manufacture Cascades brand toilet tissue and antibacterial towels which are in turn, sold on London Drugs shelves.

http://www.londondrugs.com/

CONSTRUCTION RESOURCE INITIATIVES COUNCILLed by the building industry, the Construction Resource Initiatives Council (CRI Council) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization, which was founded in 2011 as a platform for knowledge sharing and to drive change in the way that building resources are used and perceived.

A partner of the United Nation Environment Programme Global Partnership on Waste Management, the CRI Council seeks to support, develop and implement initiatives which will ultimately eliminate building waste. This mission has given rise to the CRI Council International Summit, which this year will focus on ‘Creating Zero Waste and Living Communities’, and to the CRI Council’s pioneering, Mission 2030, which aims to end construction, renovation and demolition waste to landfill by 2030. This ambitious goal is intended as a call to action for the global building industry; making tackling waste and improving resource efficiency a matter of priority.

As part of Mission 2030, the CRI Council is launching its ‘Integration Project’, an initiative designed to foster collaboration throughout the building and construction value chain, as well as a development stewardship program and protocol to motivate and support waste reduction in the sector.

http://www.cricouncil.com/

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 103

https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6785738&trk=vsrp_groups_res_name&trkInfo=VSRPsearchId%3A1566403051414771845459%2CVSRPtargetId%3A6785738%2CVSRPcmpt%3Aprimary

https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6785738&trk=vsrp_groups_res_name&trkInfo=VSRPsearchId%3A1566403051414771845459%2CVSRPtargetId%3A6785738%2CVSRPcmpt%3Aprimary

http://www.londondrugs.com/

http://www.cricouncil.com/

NEW AND NOTEWORTHY

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMYA recent report from JWT Intelligence explores the trend of corporations shifting away from traditional business models to alternative and more circular approaches to generating profits. The Circular Economy “…examines how brands from Puma and Ford to Ikea and Starbucks are upending various elements of the status quo: leasing rather than selling products, remanufacturing goods, seeking ways to extend the life of products or their components, finding more value in waste, or designing for circular use…”

Accenture’s strategy report The Circular Advantage, was also published in June. Based on the analysis of 120 companies which have innovatively addressed resource efficiency, the report identifies five new business models and the technologies which support them, and how businesses can make the move to more circular models.

FOODA multi-million dollar, cross-sectoral, research project, NOSHAN, is currently being conducted in the EU to identify “…the process and technologies needed to use food waste for [animal] feed production at low cost, low energy and with maximal valorization of starting wastes”. If successful the NOSHAN project, which is expected to conclude in 2016, will facilitate the efficient substitution of feed with food waste; reducing not only waste but also the cost of feed and the competition between food and feed production – both of which need land and water. A Canadian example of this work is Enterra, which has developed a method which uses insects to upcycle the nutrients contained within surplus food sourced collected from grocery stores and food distributors into sustainable protein and oils, to feed fish and livestock.

Provision Coalition recently released a report on Developing an Industry-Led Approach to Addressing Food Waste in Canada. The report, based on a mapping-exercise of food waste in the context of Ontario’s and Canada’s agri-food industry, identifies opportunities for businesses in the food supply chain to streamline their operations, reduce food waste and environmental impact, whilst increasing profit. However, the research highlights that tackling food waste is hampered by the lack of an agreed definition and metrics to measure scale and impact. A follow up report that quantifies the value of waste generated in the commercial sector is anticipated in November 2014.

Launched in France earlier this year, the Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables Campaign, is a private-sector led initiative which aims to challenge consumers’ shopping habits by making purchasing “differently beautiful” produce more acceptable and affordable. Offering a 30 percent discount on atypical fruits and vegetables, Intermarché (the third largest supermarket chain in France) hopes to reduce the waste of perfectly edible food from its stores. Watch Canadian Food Retailers for any signs of following this lead.

NE

W A

ND

NO

TEW

OR

THY

RE

CYCLING SECTOR

PRODUCTION

DISTRIBUTIO

N

CONSUMPTION

RE-USE

/REP

AIR

/REC

YCLE

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 104

http://www.jwt.com/en/worldwide/thinking/thecirculareconomy/

http://www.accenture.com/us-en/Pages/insight-circular-advantage-innovative-business-models-value-growth.aspx

http://noshan.eu/index.php/en/

http://www.enterrafeed.com

http://provisioncoalition.com/Assets/website/PDFs/Provision-Addressing-Food-Waste-In-Canada-EN.pdf

http://provisioncoalition.com/Assets/website/PDFs/Provision-Addressing-Food-Waste-In-Canada-EN.pdf

http://itm.marcelww.com/inglorious/

PRODUCT DESIGN AND PACKAGINGInnovation around packaging, or rather to get around packaging, has been taken to a new level with the release of products in edible packaging. Examples include WikiPearls, a range of foods contained within edible ‘skins’ such as frozen yoghurt in an edible fruit skin and Loliware biodegradable, edible cups. However, whilst these may function as well as more traditional packaging, the challenge remains in convincing consumers and retailers.

INDUSTRY AND NEW BUSINESS MODELSThe sharing economy, where individuals and organizations share human and/or physical resources, is on the rise. The latest example, Stuffstr, is a retailer-branded app designed to help consumers maximize the lifetime of everything they buy through repair, recirculation and reuse.

THE COUNCIL CALENDAR

Our profile continues to grow following a summer of successful events including presentations by Council Chair Malcolm Brodie at the Recycling Council of British Columbia 40th Annual Zero Waste Conference, in Whistler, on May 29 and by the Chair of the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors and Port Coquitlam Mayor, Greg Moore, at the Australian Waste & Recycle 2014 Conference, as well as the previously mentioned presentation to the House of Commons Standing Committee and at the annual Zero Waste Conference in Vancouver.

Malcolm Brodie and Vice Chair Brock Macdonald, were also keynote presenters speaking on the topic of Circular Economy at the Simon Fraser University Public Square Event on October 21.

UPCOMING EVENTS INCLUDE:

• Construction Resource Initiatives Council 2014 Summit - Creating Zero Waste and Living Communities, Ottawa, ON, November 17 – 19

• Canadian Waste to Resources Conference, Mississauga, ON, November 18 – 21

• NZWC Joint Board Meeting, November 26

• Circular Economy Business and Industry Roundtable, December 3

• Product Design and Packaging Working Group Webinar, December 4 (see over)

CA

LEN

DA

R

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 105

http://www.wikipearl.com/#wikipearl

http://www.loliware.com

http://www.stuffstr.com

http://rcbc.ca/events/annual-conference

http://rcbc.ca/events/annual-conference

http://www.wasteandrecycle.com.au


http://www.sfu.ca/publicsquare/aboutus.html

http://www.sfu.ca/publicsquare/aboutus.html

http://www.cricouncil.com/?ai1ec_event=2014-summit-transforming-to-succeed-community-forum

http://www.cw2rc.ca

MEMBER SERVICES:

NZWC is pleased to announce an upcoming webinar, hosted by the Product Design and Packaging Working Group. Council webinars support dialogue, knowledge transfer, and collaboration toward a waste prevention agenda in Canada.

UPCOMING WEBINAR - DESIGNS THAT WORK IN THE MARKETPLACEDecember 4, 9:00AM – 10:00AM PST

• Paul Yang, Manager of Packaging Development and Sustainability, Mother Parkers

• Additional speakers TBC

This is the third and final webinar from the Product and Packaging series. To participate please register at www.nzwc.ca. Members of the NZWC can view webinar details, including speaker bios on the NZWC Extranet. If you are not already a member, please contact the Secretariat at [email protected]

The two previous webinars, described below, can be viewed on the NZWC website www.nzwc.ca.

PAST WEBINAR – LIFECYCLE THINKING FOR WASTE PREVENTION: WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW?October 29, 2014 The use of lifecycle thinking and assessment tools (LCAs) to define a ‘sustainable’ product or package can be challenging, especially when looking for specific outcomes like solid waste prevention. Experts in business and from certifying bodies who apply lifecycle thinking presented what they believe are the possibilities, limitations, and considerations for applying lifecycle thinking to zero waste.

• Yasmin Siddiqi, Global Marketing Director, DuPont Packaging

• Matteo Kausch, Director of Technical Development, Cradle-to-Cradle Product Innovations Institute

• Bill Hoffmann, Senior Scientist - Sustainability Standards, UL Environment

PAST WEBINAR – MAKING THE MOST OF DESIGN FOR WASTE PREVENTION AND REDUCTIONOctober 8, 2014 Giving a broad-stroke introduction to considerations in applying Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), the webinar not only introduced the concept of LCA but also discussed how the results of an LCA might be realized within an organization and/or across a supply chain. From highlighting the major role that executives and designers have in determining the environmental impact of a product and its production, to reducing the risk of unintended consequences and the need for a whole-system approach.

• Getachew Asefa Wondimagegnehu, Associate Professor and Athena Chair in Life Cycle Assessment in Design, Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary

• Wendy Jedlička, President, Jedlička Design and founding faculty member, Sustainable Design Program, MCAD

• Louise St. Pierre, Associate Professor, Emily Carr University of Art and Design

This news bulletin is developed by the National Zero Waste Council Secretariat. Contact us at [email protected]

ME

MB

ER

SER

VIC

ES

ATTACHMENT 4

I&F - 106

http://www.nzwc.ca

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.nzwc.ca



https://meet66017093.adobeconnect.com/_a1125030597/p621rjl2fqr/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal

https://meet66017093.adobeconnect.com/_a1125030597/p621rjl2fqr/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal

mailto:admin%40nzwc.ca?subject=

11168826

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Allan Neilson, General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment

Ann Rowan, Sustainability Strategist, Planning, Policy and Environment Date: April 9, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance

RECOMMENDATION a) That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to send a draft submission to the

Chair of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to reiterate Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing objections concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and the rule that prohibits the appointment of local elected officials as local representatives; and

b) That the Board ratify the Metro Vancouver submission.

PURPOSE This report summarizes the elements of the Canada Transportation Act Review and identifies an opportunity for Metro Vancouver to provide input on the governance of port authorities through the review process. Submissions related to governance must be received by April 30, 2015; however, a draft submission will be accepted by the Review Panel. BACKGROUND On June 25, 2014, the Minister of Transport launched a statutory review of the Canada Transport Act. The Act is the umbrella economic legislation for Canada’s national transportation system. The review was triggered by the backlog in grain deliveries from the 2013‐14 crop year, but was structured to include an examination of the Act’s broad goal of a “commercially based, market‐driven, multi‐modal transportation system that delivers the best possible service in support of economic growth and prosperity.” The Review Panel leading the review is chaired by David Emerson and includes five advisors, one of whom is Marcella Szel, Chair of the TransLink Board. The review was brought to the attention of the Regional Planning Committee on February 27, 2015, in a presentation by Port Metro Vancouver. In her comments to the Committee, Penny Priddy, the sole municipal representative on the Port’s Board of Directors, drew attention to the scope of the review and to the review process. Staff met with officials from the Review Secretariat on March 20, 2015, to better understand the purpose of the exercise, and the opportunity to make a submission to the Review Panel.

5.7

I&F - 107

Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 4

CANADA TRANSPORTATION ACT REVIEW Scope The review will examine whether the national transportation system has the capacity and adaptability to allow it and its users to respond effectively to changing conditions and markets at the domestic and global levels. In keeping with this scope, the Panel is expected to provide advice to the federal Minister of Transportation on “steps to help ensure that the national transportation system has the capacity and nimbleness to support economic activity across all sectors over the medium‐ and long‐term.” In performing its work, the Panel has been asked to consider a number of specific issues, including:

how strategic transportation gateways can be developed and leveraged to support Canadian prosperity through linkages to global markets;

how the improved alignment of transportation policies, regulations and/or use of innovative financing mechanisms can be used to optimize the quality and utilization of transportation infrastructure capacity;

whether adjustments to transportation safety and environmental regimes are need to continue to achieving high standards for safe and sustainable transportation, given increasing system volumes/demands;

how safety and well‐being concerns related to rail transportation (including the movement of dangerous goods) through communities can be addressed; and

whether current governance and service delivery models for key federal operations, assets and agencies – including port authorities – can be improved.

A link to the review website can be found at the end of this report. Governance in the Context of the Review As set out in a federal discussion paper that was prepared for the review, it is important to “assess existing governance frameworks and practices of the transportation network in order to determine whether they continue to meet the evolving needs of Canadians and businesses.” The paper comments on the governance structure of federal transportation agencies by noting that, “recognizing the importance of these entities for the oversight of diverse aspects of transportation in Canada, from resolving competition complaints, to overseeing safe shipping, to operating billions of dollars’ worth of infrastructure, it is important to ensure they are structured to enable rigorous oversight, and balanced, timely decisions.” Timeline The launch date for the review was June 25, 2014; the Chair of the Review Panel is responsible for submitting the final report to the Minister on December 24, 2015. A review website has been set up to receive submissions from interested parties. Submissions continue to be accepted despite a posted deadline that has already passed. Submissions will be incorporated into the Review Panel’s analysis, which is also being informed by contracted research and on‐going stakeholder consultations. According to officials from the review secretariat, input from industry associations, think tanks and the public continues to be received. Metro Vancouver staff have learned that input on the topic of governance will be accepted only until April 30, 2015, a deadline that falls before the next Metro Vancouver Board meeting. Staff have confirmed with the review secretariat that a draft submission reflecting the ideas and concerns of

I&F - 108


Page 3 of 4

Metro Vancouver will be accepted if received by the end of April, 2015. Ratification of the draft submission by the Board can follow in May, 2015. PORT METRO VANCOUVER GOVERNANCE There are eleven members on the Port Metro Vancouver Board of Directors: seven appointed by the federal government based on the recommendations of industry; one appointed by the federal government without industry input; one appointed by the BC government; one appointed by the other Western Provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba); and one appointed by the sixteen port municipalities within Metro Vancouver. The sole municipal representative is not allowed to be a local elected official. When Port Metro Vancouver’s governance structure was being established in 2007 and 2008, Metro Vancouver raised strong objections with the Minister of Transport, concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port’s Board, and the rule that prohibited the appointment of local elected officials. Metro Vancouver requested that the structure be amended to allow for three local government appointees, and to eliminate the restriction on elected official participation. Metro Vancouver requested, specifically, that the federal government amend the legislation to state that “three locally elected officials, selected by the Minister from a list submitted by the Chair of Metro Vancouver, be appointed as voting members of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Board”. Metro Vancouver’s requested amendments were not endorsed by the Minister. The current Canada Transportation Act Review provides an opportunity to reassert Metro Vancouver’s original concerns, all of which remain valid today. The inclusion of a greater local representation on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and of local elected officials as Board members, is appropriate given that sixteen of Metro Vancouver’s member municipalities are port cities – a unique situation in Canadian centres with federal port authorities. Greater representation would allow, most importantly, for a balance of perspectives at the decision‐making table. Under the current structure, local government and community interests are too easily eclipsed by national economic considerations, efforts to promote international trade, and the interests of industry. These considerations and interests are important, but should not be given disproportionate weight in decisions made on the expansion of port activities, on changes to the variety of commodities and products handled, on the acquisition and use of lands in the region, and on other Port matters. Decisions on these matters have implications for the region’s quality of life, its growth management efforts, the safety of local communities and the natural environment across Metro Vancouver. Additional local government representation at the Board table, and the inclusion of local elected officials, would help to ensure that these implications received proper consideration. A draft submission expressing Metro Vancouver’s ongoing concerns with Port Metro Vancouver’s current governance model is attached to this report.

I&F - 109


Page 4 of 4

ALTERNATIVES 1. a) That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to send a draft submission to

the Chair of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to reiterate Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing objections concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and the rule that prohibits the appointment of local elected officials as local representatives; and b) That the Board ratify the Metro Vancouver submission.

2. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee provide alternative direction to the staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications to this recommendation. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION On June 25, 2014, the Minister of Transport launched a statutory review of the Canada Transport Act. The Act is the umbrella economic legislation for Canada’s national transportation system. The review was triggered by the backlog in grain deliveries from the 2013‐14 crop year, but was structured to include an examination of the Act’s broad goal of a “commercially based, market‐driven, multi‐modal transportation system that delivers the best possible service in support of economic growth and prosperity.” The Review Panel leading the review is chaired by David Emerson and includes five advisors, one of whom is Marcella Szel, Chair of the TransLink Board. The review will include an assessment of whether current governance and service delivery models of key federal agencies, including port authorities, can be improved. When Port Metro Vancouver’s governance structure was being established in 2007, Metro Vancouver raised strong objections with the Minister concerning the inadequate number of municipal representatives on the Port’s Board, and the rule which prohibited the appointment of local elected officials. The current Canada Transportation Act Review provides an opportunity to reassert Metro Vancouver’s original concerns, all of which remain valid today. The window for providing input is limited. Input on the topic of governance will be accepted only until April 30, 2015, a deadline that falls before the next Metro Vancouver Board meeting. Staff have confirmed with the review secretariat that a draft submission reflecting the ideas and concerns of Metro Vancouver will be accepted if received by the end of April, 2015. Ratification of the draft submission by the Board can follow in May, 2015. Attachment: Letter to David Emerson, Chair of the Canadian Transportation Act Review Reference: Canadian Transportation Act Review

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/ctareview2014/canada‐transportation‐act‐review.html

I&F - 110

Executive Offices

Tel. 604 432‐6215 Fax 604 451‐6614

File: CR‐07‐04‐TRA The Honourable David L. Emerson, Chair Canada Transportation Act Review Panel secretariat@reviewcta‐examenltc.gc.ca Dear Chair Emerson: Re: Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance Please accept this submission by Metro Vancouver to the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel. The Panel, we understand, has been asked to examine a range of issues as part of the Canada Transportation Act Review, including models of governance for key federal operations, assets and agencies such as port authorities. Metro Vancouver’s submission to the Review Panel focuses on the issue of governance. The submission, more specifically, reiterates Metro Vancouver’s long‐standing concerns with the governance structure of Port Metro Vancouver. When Port Metro Vancouver’s governance structure was being established in 2007 and 2008, Metro Vancouver raised strong objections with the federal Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities concerning the inadequate number of local government representatives on the Port’s Board, and the rule that prohibited the appointment of local elected officials. Metro Vancouver asked that the structure be amended to allow for additional local government appointees, and to eliminate the restriction on elected official participation. Metro Vancouver requested, in particular, that the federal government amend the legislation to state that “three locally elected officials, selected by the Minister from a list submitted by the Chair of Metro Vancouver, be appointed as voting members of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Board”. Metro Vancouver’s objections raised in 2007 and 2008 were not addressed at the time. They remain valid today. The inclusion of a greater local representation on the Port Metro Vancouver Board, and of local elected officials as Board members, is appropriate given that sixteen of Metro Vancouver’s member municipalities are port cities – a unique situation in Canadian centres with federal port authorities. Greater representation would allow, most importantly, for a balance of perspectives at the decision‐making table. Under the current structure, local government and community interests are too easily eclipsed by national economic considerations, efforts to promote international trade, and the interests of industry. These considerations and interests are important, but should not be given disproportionate weight in decisions made on the expansion of port activities, on changes to the variety of commodities and products handled, on the acquisition and use of lands in the region, and on other Port matters. Decisions on these matters have implications for the region’s quality of life, its growth management efforts, the safety of local communities and the natural environment across Metro Vancouver. Additional local government representation at the Board table, and the inclusion of local elected officials, would help to ensure that these implications received proper consideration.

5.7Attachment

I&F - 111

Canada Transportation Act Review Team Canada Transportation Act Review and Port Governance

Page 2 of 2

Metro Vancouver urges the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel to recommend that the federal government change the governance structure of Port Metro Vancouver to allow for an increase in the number of local government representatives on Port Metro Vancouver’s Board of Directors, and to allow for the appointment of local elected officials to those positions. Please accept this submission in its draft form, as adopted by Metro Vancouver’s Intergovernment and Finance Committee at its April 23, 2015 meeting. The submission will be considered and ratified by the Metro Vancouver Board at its next meeting on May 15, 2015. Confirmation of the Board’s ratification will be sent to you after that meeting. Sincerely, Greg Moore, Chair Metro Vancouver GM/AN/ar

I&F - 112

11171595

To: GVRD Board of Directors From: Chris Plagnol, Director Board and Information Services/Corporate Officer, Legal and

Legislative Services Date: April 13, 2015 Meeting Date: May 15, 2015 Subject: GVRD Nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors

RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board designate Raymond Louie as Metro Vancouver nominee to the E‐Comm Board of Directors for the 2015‐2016 term.

PURPOSE To seek a Board designate as Metro Vancouver’s nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors pursuant to the provisions of the E‐Comm Members’ Agreement. BACKGROUND On November 30, 2012 the Board adopted Greater Vancouver Regional District E‐Comm Members’ Agreement Authorization Bylaw No. 1181, 2012 to authorize the subscription by GVRD for a Class B1 Share (for public works) of E‐Comm and entry into the E‐Comm Emergency Communications for Southwest British Columbia Incorporated Members’ Agreement. E‐Comm is a non‐profit agency that supplies emergency communications and related services to emergency service organizations, municipalities, regional districts, provincial government, federal government, and government agencies. The main responsibilities of E‐Comm are to maintain the wide‐area radio system for police, fire and ambulance services; operate the regional 9‐1‐1 call centre, and provide dispatch services for various police and fire departments. A 19 member Board of Directors, elected annually by the E‐Comm shareholders, provides governance to E‐Comm and is responsible for overseeing the Corporation’s strategic direction, finances and operating results. The E‐Comm Board of Directors meets five times a year in addition to two strategic planning and education sessions. METRO VANCOUVER NOMINEE E‐Comm has requested GVRD (Metro Vancouver) to designate its nominee to the E‐Comm Board of Directors for the 2015‐2016 year by May 28, 2015. Under section 4.2.1.6 of the E‐Comm Members’ Agreement, GVRD is the lone shareholder in the Class B group at this time. Pursuant to the Members’ Agreement, GVRD is entitled to designate one individual for election to the E‐Comm Board of Directors annually. The 2015‐2016 Board will be elected by the shareholders at the Annual General Meeting in June. E‐Comm has advised while shareholders are required to elect directors every year, there is no limit on the number of terms any

1 Class B shares are issued for each service that intends to use the radio system but is not participating at the present time.

5.8

I&F - 113

GVRD Nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2015

Page 2 of 2

one director can serve, and E‐Comm believes it is in all shareholders’ best interest when a director can serve multiple terms. Director Gayle Martin is currently the Board’s designated nominee. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board designate Raymond Louie as its nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of

Directors. 2. That the Board designate an alternative nominee to the 2015‐2016 E‐Comm Board of Directors. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications to Metro Vancouver as E‐Comm remunerates its board members for meeting attendance. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION Under the E‐Comm Members’ Agreement, GVRD is the lone shareholder in the Class B Public Works group at this time. E‐Comm will be holding its Annual General Meeting in June and, in preparation, has requested Metro Vancouver to nominate one individual to the E‐Comm Board of Directors. Alternative 1 is recommended by the Metro Vancouver Board Chair. Attachment: Correspondence dated March 30, 2015 from Jody Robertson, E‐Comm Corporate

Secretary, regarding E‐Comm Board of Directors Designate for the 2015‐2016 term

I&F - 114

5.8ATTACHMENT

I&F - 115

I&F - 116

11193744

To: Intergovernment and Finance Committee From: Utilities Committee Date: April 16, 2015 Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 Subject: Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a Standby/Emergency Power Generation Source

RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Province of BC and to BC Hydro requesting that the decision to close the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant be reconsidered and that it be maintained as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver.

PURPOSE To forward for consideration the concerns raised by the City of Port Moody regarding the closure of the Burrard Thermal power plant. BACKGROUND At the April 1, 2015 Utilities Committee meeting, members were informed about the City of Port Moody’s concerns related to the decision by BC Hydro and the Province to close the power generating facility at the Burrard Thermal Plant leaving the Lower Mainland reliant upon power from outside of the area. The City of Port Moody requested that Metro Vancouver encourage BC Hydro and the Province to keep the plant open and capable of generating power to 750,000 homes, based on its current capacity. Staff was directed to:

refer to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee for consideration the City of Port Moody’s concerns, and request that the GVRD Board encourage the Province and BC Hydro to preserve the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver.

The attached correspondence provides additional information regarding the City of Port Moody Council’s request for support in this matter. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Province of BC and to BC Hydro requesting that the

decision to close the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant be reconsidered and that it be maintained as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver.

2. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee provide alternate direction. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION

5.9

I&F - 117

Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a Standby/Emergency Power Generation Source Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: April 23, 2014

Page 2 of 2

At the April 1, 2015 Utilities Committee meeting, members were informed about the City of Port Moody’s concerns related to the decision by BC Hydro and the Province to close the power generating facility at the Burrard Thermal Plant. The matter was referred to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee for consideration. It was requested that the GVRD Board support Port Moody Council’s petition to preserve the BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver. Alternative 1 is recommended. Attachment: Correspondence from the City of Port Moody dated March 31, 2015 re: Preservation

of Burrard Thermal as a standby/emergency power generation source. (Orbit # 11193847)

I&F - 118

March 31, 2015 File No. 303198 Mayor Mussatto Chair, Metro Vancouver Utilities Committee c/o Metro Vancouver 4330 Kingsway Burnaby, BC V3H4G8 Dear Mayor Mussatto; Re: Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a standby/emergency power generation source As we discussed, please find attached information in regards to Port Moody City Council seeking support for preserving BC Hydro Burrard Thermal Plant as a backup/emergency power generation source for Metro Vancouver. As you will see, BC Hydro and the Provincial Government are moving to close the power generating facility at the Burrard Thermal Plant, and relying 100% for power to the Lower Mainland to come from far outside of our area. In fact, the reports indicate they will be relying on power coming from the Interior or further away, through hundreds of kilometers of transmission lines. We don’t feel that this gives residents of the Lower Mainland the power security that we currently have, with Burrard capable of providing power to up to 700,000 homes, relatively ‘clean’ and efficiently. BC Hydro’s own Integrated Resource Plan (2013) shows a shortage of generating capacity on the grid as imminent as 2018 – we should not be taking existing power generation offline when we know we will be needing to increase generation in the near future. You will also notice that the operating costs of Burrard Thermal are much lower than one of the proposed alternatives, currently operating at Campbell River. Attached is a copy of our motions to petition Hydro and the Provincial Government to keep the plant operatonal, and we would like to put before the Metro Board a resolution : THAT the Board , in support of the petition from the City of Port Moody, respectfully requests that BC Hydro and the Province commit to maintaining the generating function of Burrard Thermal as a backup/emergency power source for the Greater Vancouver area.

I&F - 119

DDavis

Text Box

5.9 Attachment

Preservation of Burrard Thermal as a standby/emergency power generation source March 31, 2015

2

Appreciating that this is a draft I am preparing very much last minute in an attempt to have this item on table at tomorrow’s Utility Committee meeting, I would welcome any feeback or amendment to the motion for clarity. I understand that this may need to be considered a Notice of Motion, but wonder alternately if a motion to refer to staff to bring back to the next meeting could instead be made, to avoid an extra month of delay in the process. My apologies for the late preparation of this document, and I appreciate your kind attention. Yours truly, Mike Clay Mayor & Metro Director CC: Attached: Letter, LMLGA re motion and supporting documents

I&F - 120

I&F - 121

I&F - 122

I&F - 123

I&F - 124

I&F - 125

I&F - 126

11151083 April 7, 2015

Intergovernment and Finance Committee

2015 Work Plan The Intergovernment and Finance Committee is the standing committee of the Metro Vancouver Board that provides advice and recommendations on policies, bylaws, plans, programs, budgets and issues related to general government and corporate activities for the governing bodies of Metro Vancouver. In addition, it serves as the Board Executive Committee and provides guidance and oversight on all personnel matters. While the activities of the Committee will vary throughout the year depending upon issues that arise, an overview of some of the key actions in the 2015 work plan for the Committee are described below:

External Relations

International Program and Event Authorizations

University of British Columbia – MOU

Finance

Regional District Service Area, General Government and Corporate Support Annual Budgets Oversight

Overall Annual Budget and Five Year Financial Plan approval for all legal entities

Long term financial plan policy direction Human Resources

Exempt Employee Annual Performance Review Policy Legal & Legislative

Legal Updates and Advice as required

Board Policy Development – ongoing Utilities Services

Impact of Provincial and Federal Transportation Projects on utilities’ existing infrastructure and long‐term capital plan

Given the broad scope of this Committee, it is expected that the work plan will be amended throughout the year to respond to intergovernment and finance issues as they arise.

6.1

I&F - 127

10595471 January 7, 2015

Intergovernment and Finance Committee

Terms of Reference The Intergovernment and Finance Committee is the standing committee of the Metro Vancouver Board that provides advice and recommendations on the annual and long‐term budgets for Metro Vancouver’s Districts, the financial policies for the Districts, and Metro Vancouver’s strategic relationships with other governments, with agencies and communities. Committee Responsibilities Within the scope of the Board Strategic Plan, Metro Vancouver management plans, and Board policies, the Committee provides guidance and oversight to staff in the development of annual and long‐term budgets, development and application of financial policies, and development of strategies and positions to manage inter‐governmental relations and address specific initiatives that are undertaken by other agencies. Specific Committee responsibilities include the following:

Guide and monitor the development of annual and long‐term financial plans for consideration by the Board;

Guide the development of financial policies for consideration by the Board;

Oversee the development and implementation of communications strategies and other strategies to manage relations with other orders of governments, and with other agencies;

Develop, for consideration by the Board, Metro Vancouver’s positions on initiatives taken by other governments and agencies;

Review senior government policy and legislative initiatives that affect, or that may affect, governance of the region;

Review and recommend action to address initiatives that do not fall within the purview of another Metro Vancouver standing committee; and

Oversee revisions to and implementation of Metro Vancouver’s International Engagement Program.

Committee Membership and Meetings The Chair, Vice Chair and members are appointed annually by the Chair of the Metro Vancouver Board. The Committee meets monthly, except for August and December, and holds special meetings as required. A quorum of 50% plus one of the Committee membership is required to conduct Committee business.

6.2

I&F - 128

Committee Management The Committee Chair, or in the absence of the Chair the Vice‐Chair, is the chief spokesperson on matters of public interest within the Committee’s purview. For high profile issues the role of spokesperson rests with the Metro Vancouver Board Chair or Vice Chair. On technical matters or in cases where an initiative is still at the staff proposal level, the Chief Administrative Officer or a senior staff member is the appropriate spokesperson. Where necessary and practical, the Board Chair, Committee Chair and Chief Administrative Officer confer to determine the most appropriate representative to speak. The Chief Administrative Officer serves, or assigns a General Manager to serve, as Committee Manager for the Committee. The Committee Manager is responsible for coordinating agendas and is the principal point of contact for Committee members.

I&F - 129

greater vancouver regional district intergovernment and … · 2015-04-20 · greater vancouver...

Documents