GVSDD Board Agenda Package - November 27, 2009€¦ · Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director...
Transcript of GVSDD Board Agenda Package - November 27, 2009€¦ · Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director...
AGENDA
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT
(GVS&DD) REGULAR MEETING
Friday, November 27, 2009
9:00 a.m. 2nd Floor Boardroom
4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC
Board Members: Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Vice Chair, Director Richard Walton, North
Vancouver District Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director George Chow, Vancouver Director Derek Corrigan. Burnaby Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Judy Dueck, Maple Ridge Director Catherine Ferguson, White Rock Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Director Rick Green, Langley Township Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby
Director Raymond Louie, Vancouver Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Mae Reid, Coquitlam Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Director Gregor Robertson, Vancouver Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Director Dianne Watts, Surrey Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster Commissioner, J. Carline*
Please advise Kelly Weilbacher at (604) 432-6250 if you are unable to attend.
* Non-voting member
This page left blank intentionally.
November 18, 2009
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT (GVS&DD)
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
9:00 a.m. Friday, November 27, 2009
2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.
A G E N D A A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1. November 27, 2009 Regular Meeting Agenda Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for November 27, 2009 as circulated.
B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
1. October 16, 2009 Special Meeting Minutes Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the minutes for its special meeting held October 16, 2009 as circulated.
2. October 30, 2009 Regular Meeting Minutes Staff Recommendation: That the Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held October 30, 2009 as circulated.
C. DELEGATIONS
No items presented.
D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.
E. CONSENT AGENDA Note: Directors may adopt in one motion all recommendations appearing on the Consent Agenda or, prior to the vote, request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda for debate or discussion, voting in opposition to a recommendation, or declaring a conflict of interest with an item.
Section A 1
SDD-1
1. WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORTS
Note: The following items will be considered by the Waste Management Committee on November 23, 2009. Any resulting changes to recommendations will be presented on table at the board meeting.
1.1 Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results
Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated October 30, 2009, titled “Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results”.
1.2 Liquid Waste Management Plan
Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board adopt the Liquid Waste Management Plan, November 2009 (Attachment 1), and direct staff to forward the Plan to the GVS&DD member municipality councils for their endorsement prior to submitting the Plan to the B.C. Ministry of Environment for their approval.
1.3 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson
Crescent, Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the footprint of the residential building at 24845 Robertson Crescent in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 49 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson Crescent, Township of Langley”.
1.4 Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th
Ave., Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the building footprint of the structures proposed to be built on the properties described as LT 2 & 3, SEC 2, TWP 7, NWD, PL BCP11402 in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 48 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th Ave., Township of Langley”.
2. ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY REPORTS 2.1 Discharge of Grease into the Sewer System
Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Board send a letter to the Treasury Board Cabinet Committee, the Ministry of Community and Rural Development, and a copy to the Premier’s office, underscoring the importance of amendments to provincial legislation which would provide the GVS&DD with ticketing powers and the ability to increase the level of fines available under the Sewer Use Bylaw; and highlighting both the economic and environmental reasons why the legislative amendments are required.
SDD-2
3. OTHER REPORTS 3.1 Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – November
2009 Staff Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated November 18, 2009, titled “Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – November 2009”.
F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
G. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT AGENDA
Note: The following item will be considered by the Waste Management Committee on November 23, 2009. Any resulting changes to recommendations will be presented on table at the board meeting.
1. Amendment to GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007
Waste Management Committee Recommendation: That the Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver
Sewerage and Drainage District Amending Bylaw No. 252, 2009”; b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and
Drainage District Amending Bylaw No. 252, 2009”.
Note: The following item will be considered by the Housing Committee on November 20, 2009. Any resulting changes to recommendations will be presented on table at the board meeting.
2. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost
Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Housing Committee Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to the Greater
Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009; and
b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009.
H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN
No items presented.
I. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.
SDD-3
J. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING Note: The Board must state by resolution the basis under section 90 of the Community Charter on which the meeting is being closed. If a member wishes to add an item the basis must be included below. Staff Recommendation: That the Board close its regular meeting scheduled for November 27, 2009 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (g) (h) (i) and (k) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a board meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter
being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; (h) an administrative tribunal hearing or potential administrative tribunal
hearing affecting the regional district, other than a hearing to be conducted by the board or committee or a delegate of board or committee;
(i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; and
(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.”
K. ADJOURNMENT
Staff Recommendation: That the Board conclude its regular meeting of November 27, 2009.
SDD-4
MINUTES
SDD-5
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-6
Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 16, 2009 Page 1 of 3
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Minutes of the Special Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held at 9:25 a.m. on Friday, October 16, 2009 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Vice Chair, Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Alternate Director Mary Wade Anderson,
White Rock for Catherine Ferguson Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director George Chow, Vancouver
(arrived at 9:32 a.m.) Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Judy Dueck, Maple Ridge Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby Director Raymond Louie, Vancouver Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows
Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Alternate Director Geoff Meggs, Vancouver
for Gregor Robertson Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Alternate Director Barinder Rasode, Surrey
for Linda Hepner Director Mae Reid, Coquitlam Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Alternate Director Barbara Steele, Surrey
for Dianne Watts Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster Commissioner Johnny Carline*
MEMBERS ABSENT: Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Director Rick Green, Langley Township
Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City
STAFF PRESENT: Paulette Vetleson, Corporate Secretary, Corporate Secretary’s Department
Priya Rai, Assistant to Regional Committees, Corporate Secretary’s Department
A. WAIVE SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board waive notice of the October 16, 2009 special meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Board in accordance with Section 3.5 (Calling and Conduct of Meetings) of the Procedure Bylaw.
CARRIED
* Non-voting member.
Section B 1
SDD-7
Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 16, 2009 Page 2 of 3
B. MEETING PURPOSE
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) hear the invited presentation from Chief Robert Pascoe; and b) resolve to close its special meeting scheduled for October 16, 2009, pursuant to
the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (2)(b) as follows: “90 (2) A part of a board meeting must be closed to the public if the subject
matter being considered relates to one or more of the following: (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, or between a provincial government or the federal government or both and third party.”
CARRIED C. INVITED PRESENTATION
1. Chief Pasco, Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council Chief Robert Pasco, Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council and Grand Chief Doug Kelly, Soowahlie First Nation, were present to speak to the Board on the issue of the Solid Waste Management Plan and interior land filling. Chief Pascoe raised the importance of the environment for future generations, extended his appreciation to the Board for their efforts in providing solutions to waste management and highlighted the 2010 economic boost to the economy and resulting impacts.
9:32 a.m.
Director Chow arrived at the meeting.
Chief Kelly reflected on past First Nation history, the evolution of changes in government relations and the importance of conflict resolution and connectivity in discussion. Discussion ensued on the following: • senior government and First Nations jointly designing a consultation
process • ability of First Nations to express views in their language • need for solutions to waste management • need for education on current waste-to-energy technologies An invitation was extended to Chief Pasco to attend future Waste Management Committees as a non-voting observer.
SDD-8
Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 16, 2009 Page 3 of 3
D. ADJOURNMENT
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board conclude its special meeting of October 16, 2009.
CARRIED Director Chow absent at the vote.
(Time: 10:14 a.m.) CERTIFIED CORRECT
Paulette A. Vetleson, Corporate Secretary
Lois E. Jackson, Chair
004982068 DRAFT
SDD-9
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-10
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 30, 2009 Page 1 of 5
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held at 9:17 a.m. on Friday, October 30, 2009 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Vice Chair, Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Alternate Director Mary Wade Anderson, White Rock for Catherine Ferguson Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director George Chow, Vancouver Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Director Judy Dueck, Maple Ridge Director Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, West Vancouver Director Rick Green, Langley Township Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Marvin Hunt, Surrey Director Colleen Jordan, Burnaby Director Raymond Louie, Vancouver
Alternate Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam for Richard Stewart Director Don MacLean, Pitt Meadows Director Gayle Martin, Langley City Alternate Director Geoff Meggs, Vancouver for Gregor Robertson Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Mae Reid, Coquitlam Alternate Director Barbara Steele, Surrey for Dianne Watts Director Tim Stevenson, Vancouver (arrived at 9:18 a.m.) Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Joe Trasolini, Port Moody Director Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Alternate Director Lori Williams, New Westminster for Wayne Wright Deputy Commissioner Delia Laglagaron*
MEMBERS ABSENT: Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver
STAFF PRESENT: Johnny Carline, Commissioner Paulette Vetleson, Corporate Secretary, Corporate Secretary’s Department
Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees, Corporate Secretary’s
Department
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1. October 30, 2009 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for October 30, 2009 as presented.
CARRIED Director Martin absent at the vote.
* Non-voting member.
Section B 2
SDD-11
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 30, 2009 Page 2 of 5
B. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
1. September 11, 2009 Special Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the minutes of the special joint meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD), Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD), and Greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD) Boards of Directors (Greater Vancouver District Boards) held September 11, 2009 as circulated.
CARRIED Director Martin absent at the vote.
2. September 25, 2009 Regular Meeting Minutes
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the minutes for its regular meeting held September 25, 2009 as circulated.
CARRIED Director Martin absent at the vote.
C. DELEGATIONS
No items presented.
D. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.
E. CONSENT AGENDA
9:18 a.m. Director Stevenson arrived at the meeting. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board adopt the recommendations contained in the following items presented in the October 30, 2009 GVS&DD Board Consent Agenda: 1.1 Solid Waste Management Communications Strategy Update 1.2 Additional Regional Organic Waste Management Facilities 1.3 GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement – 2008 Financial Results 2.1 GVS&DD Temporary Borrowing Authority 2.2 Draft Metro Vancouver Districts’ 2010 Budget
CARRIED The items and recommendations referred to above are as follows: 1.1 Solid Waste Management Communications Strategy Update
Report dated October 4, 2009 from David Hocking, Corporate Communications Division Manager, Corporate Relations Department, informing on the progress to date on implementing the communications strategy in support of the development of the Solid Waste Management Plan that was endorsed by the Waste Management Committee on August 28, 2009.
SDD-12
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 30, 2009 Page 3 of 5
Recommendation: That the GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated October 4, 2009, titled “Solid Waste Management Communications Strategy Update”.
Adopted on Consent
1.2 Additional Regional Organic Waste Management Facilities Report dated October 13, 2009 from Toivo Allas, Manager, Policy and Planning Department, informing the Board of the process to identify municipalities interested in hosting organic waste management facilities. Recommendation: That the Board receive the report dated October 13, 2009, titled “Additional Regional Organic Waste Management Facilities”.
Adopted on Consent
1.3 GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement – 2008 Financial Results Report dated September 8, 2009 from Carol De La Franier, Senior Engineer, Engineering and Construction Department, providing the 2008 financial results for the GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement. Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated September 8, 2009, titled “GVS&DD/Wastech Comprehensive Agreement – 2008 Financial Results”.
Adopted on Consent 2.1 GVS&DD Temporary Borrowing Authority
Report dated September 14, 2009 from Phil Trotzuk, Financial Planning and Operations Division Manager, Finance and Administration Department, seeking renewal of the authority for 2010 which permits temporary borrowing, should it be required, in anticipation of revenues during the year. Recommendation: That the Board authorize the borrowing from the District’s Banker or others in the course of the calendar year 2010 in anticipation of the collection of its revenue, of a sum or sums of money, the outstanding total of which shall not exceed $12 million at any one time, by the issue of promissory notes or by such other means as are appropriate.
Adopted on Consent
2.2 Draft Metro Vancouver Districts’ 2010 Budget Report dated October 20, 2009 from Johnny Carline, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer, seeking approval of the 2010 revenue and expenditure budgets, use of reserves, and capital expenditures, and to set the solid waste tipping fee.
SDD-13
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 30, 2009 Page 4 of 5
Recommendation: 1) That the Board approve the 2010 Revenue and Expenditure Budgets,
use of Reserves, and Capital Expenditures as shown in the following schedules: A1 Revenue and Expenditure Summary A4 2010 Budget - Proposed Application of Reserves B14 GVS&DD 2010 Budget B15-B16 GVS&DD Capital Programs & Project Details B17 Solid Waste 2010 Budget B18-B19 Solid Waste Capital Programs & Project Details B20 Solid Waste – Wastech Services Capital Plan
2) That the Board set the regional Solid Waste Tipping Fee at $82 per tonne.
Adopted on Consent
F. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA No items presented.
G. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF NOT INCLUDED IN CONSENT
AGENDA
1. 2010 Tipping Fee Bylaw No. 250 Report dated October 15, 2009 from the Waste Management Committee, together with report dated September 30, 2009 from Carol De La Franier, Senior Engineer, Engineering and Construction Department, seeking authorization to adopt the Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 250, 2009, which outlines the tipping fees for 2010. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 250, 2009”.
CARRIED It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Tipping Fee and Solid Waste Disposal Regulation Bylaw No. 250, 2009”.
CARRIED
2. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District 2010 Cost Apportionment Bylaw 251, 2009 Report dated September 15, 2009 from Phil Trotzuk, Financial Planning and Operations Division Manager, Finance and Administration Department, seeking approval of the Cost Apportionment Bylaw 251, 2009. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board give leave to introduce “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District 2010 Cost Apportionment Bylaw No. 251, 2009”, being a
SDD-14
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) Board of Directors held on Friday, October 30, 2009 Page 5 of 5
bylaw governing the distribution of the GVS&DD tax levy for 2010, and that it be read a first, second and third time.
CARRIED It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District 2010 Cost Apportionment Bylaw No. 251, 2009”.
CARRIED
H. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN No items presented.
I. OTHER BUSINESS
No items presented. J. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board close its regular meeting scheduled for October 30, 2009 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e), (g), (i), and (k) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a board 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; (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege,
including communications necessary for that purpose; and (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.”
CARRIED
K. ADJOURNMENT It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board conclude its regular meeting of October 30, 2009.
CARRIED (Time: 9:25 a.m.)
CERTIFIED CORRECT
Paulette A. Vetleson, Corporate Secretary
Lois E. Jackson, Chair
004986773 FINAL
SDD-15
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-16
CONSENT AGENDA
SDD-17
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-18
004953711
Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
To: Waste Management Committee From: Marie Griggs, Public Involvement Division Manager Engineering and Construction Department Date: October 30, 2009 Subject: Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results
Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated October 30, 2009, titled “Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results”. 1. PURPOSE This report summarizes the consultation program and the input received on the Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) between May 31, 2008 and October 30, 2009. 2. CONTEXT On February 29, 2008, the Board approved a consultation program to review the discussion document, Strategy to Update the Liquid Waste Management Plan. Consultation took place between March and May 2008, and included public meetings, municipal workshops, municipal advisory committee meetings, LWMP Reference Panel meetings, correspondence and discussions with agencies and First Nations. The results of the consultation process were reported to the Waste Management Committee (WMC) and Board in July 2008. Guided by the input received on the Strategy to Update the LWMP, Metro Vancouver drafted a Liquid Waste Management Plan. The draft LWMP was presented to the Regional Administrators Advisory Committee, Regional Engineers Advisory Committee, the WMC and the Board in the fall of 2008. Metro Vancouver staff was given authorization to proceed with consultation on the draft LWMP by the WMC and Board on October 31, 2008, with a modification indicating that the draft LWMP should contain three timeline options for the secondary treatment upgrades of the Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants. Metro Vancouver proceeded to consult with key advisory committees, including the LWMP Reference Panel, on the draft plan. A subsequent modification to the draft plan was proposed to the Board in March of 2009. The amended draft contained changes that would better align the Metro Vancouver LWMP with provincial programs and initiatives, a new focus on integrated resource management, and other Metro Vancouver management plans. At its March 27, 2009 meeting, the Board authorized staff to consult on the modified draft plan.
Section E 1.1
SDD-19
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 2 of 15
The purpose of this most recent phase of consultation was to gain feedback on the modified draft plan before final consideration by the Board later in 2009. The results of these consultations were considered in the drafting of the final LWMP. The final LWMP is also contained in the meeting agenda for the Committee and Board approval. Following an approval of the final LWMP by the Waste Management Committee, Board and Metro Vancouver member Councils, Metro Vancouver will submit a final consultation report and the final LWMP to the Minister of Environment for approval. 2.1 Program Overview The consultation and communications program for this phase was implemented to inform a range of audiences about issues and options within the LWMP. The consultation program was structured to encourage the Metro Vancouver public, Metro Vancouver members, First Nations, adjacent regional districts, government agencies and ministries, LWMP committees and other key interest groups to participate and provide input. The next section of this report outlines the consultation activities by audience, the variety of methods for submitting comments and common themes of comments received. See Attachment 1 for a diagram of the consultation framework, outlining the phases of the process. 2.2 Components 2.2.1 Public Five public meetings, attended by a wide range of community representatives, were held throughout the region between April 15 and April 28, 2009 to gather input on the draft LWMP. Participants at the meetings included residents and elected representatives, as well as members of business, community and environmental organizations. Environmental organizations in attendance included: T. Buck Suzuki Foundation, David Suzuki Foundation, Ecojustice, Fraser River Coalition, Fraser River Sturgeon Conservation Society, Georgia Strait Alliance, Habitat Insurance, Silver Creek Streamkeepers, and Sustainable Community Initiative. Community associations included: Burquitlam Community Association, Edgemont Community Association, Norgate Park Community Association, Quayside Village Cohousing and West End Residents Association. Also present were representatives from the Semiahmoo First Nation. Business was represented by nine different organizations affected by liquid waste management issues. In total, approximately 70 participants were in attendance. Note that the number of meeting participants referred to in this report is approximate as registration forms were used as the basis of measurement. Each meeting followed the following format: welcoming and closing remarks by a member of the Waste Management Committee, a presentation by local municipal staff on innovative liquid waste management activities taking place in their municipality, an overview by Metro Vancouver staff of the draft LWMP and a presentation about relevant liquid waste management topics related to that sewerage area, and a question-and-answer session.
SDD-20
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 3 of 15
The following table is a summary of public meetings held in Metro Vancouver on the LWMP during this phase of consultation: Meeting Locations (and Geographic Areas) Date (2009) Vancouver (Vancouver Sewerage Area) April 15 Richmond (Lulu Island Sewerage Area) April 21 Coquitlam (Fraser North Sewerage Area) April 22 Surrey (Fraser South Sewerage Area) April 23 North Vancouver (North Shore Sewerage Area) April 28
2.2.2 Metro Vancouver Members At the initiation of the consultation program, correspondence was sent to Mayors and Councils of Metro Vancouver member municipalities to update them on the draft LWMP development process, inform them of the public meeting schedule and technical forum (an intergovernmental workshop designed to share perspectives on the opportunities and challenges related to managing the region’s liquid waste) and solicit input on the draft LWMP. Member municipalities were also specifically requested to provide Metro Vancouver with Council resolutions regarding their response to the draft LWMP. Similar correspondence was also sent separately to members of the Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC), REAC liquid waste sub-committee (REAC LW), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and Sewerage Area Technical Committees. When the Tsawwassen First Nation became a member of Metro Vancouver on April 3, 2009, Metro Vancouver staff contacted them and offered to provide the necessary support for them to input on the draft LWMP process. In addition, the Tsawwassen First Nation was sent a letter with information on the draft LWMP development process, the public meeting schedule and technical forum, and an offer to provide presentations or other appropriate opportunities for receiving input. This letter was followed up with phone calls and a second letter. The tables below include a summary of Metro Vancouver member and municipal committee meetings where the draft LWMP was discussed. By request, Metro Vancouver staff attended some member council meetings to answer questions on the draft LWMP. In addition, a meeting among Metro Vancouver, Delta, Tsawwassen First Nation and BC Ferries took place on July 14, 2009 to discuss liquid waste planning in the area. A number of municipal committee meetings took place throughout the summer of 2009 to finalize specific details and actions contained in the LWMP.
SDD-21
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 4 of 15
Metro Vancouver Member Council and Committee Meeting Date (s) (2009) City of North Vancouver May 25 Coquitlam June 1 Surrey May 25 Richmond May 4, May 25 Burnaby May 14, May 19, June 1 Delta April 27 Langley City May 25 Langley Township May 25 Maple Ridge May 4, May 25 City of Port Coquitlam June 1 New Westminster April 20 District of North Vancouver May 25 Pitt Meadows May 19, April 30 Port Moody May 26 Vancouver June 2 White Rock May 25, June 15 West Vancouver May 25 Tsawwassen First Nation (meeting with Metro Vancouver) June 5
Municipal Committee Meetings Regional Administrators’ Advisory Committee (RAAC): September 14, 2008; February 25, 2009 (REAC invited) REAC: September 5, October 24, 2008; April 3, May 9, July 17, August 14, 21, September 11, October 2, 2009 Joint REAC & REAC LW LWMP Workshop: July 24, 2008 REAC LW: June 3, 19, December 11, 2008; February 26, April 2, June 18, July 9, 2009 Vancouver Sewerage Area Technical Committee: November 12, 2008; April 14, 2009 Fraser Sewerage Area Technical Committee: December 2, 2008; May 14, 2009 North Shore Sewerage Area Technical Committee: December 5, 2008; April 24, 2009
2.2.3 First Nations During the consultation period, letters were sent to First Nations bands, councils, nations and treaty groups in Metro Vancouver to provide information on the draft LWMP development process, inform them of the public meeting schedule and technical forum, and to offer presentations or other appropriate opportunities for receiving input. These letters were followed up with phone calls and second letters. Meetings with First Nations to discuss the LWMP occurred as follows: Tsawwassen First Nation (June 5, 2009); Musqueam Indian Band (July 21, 2009); Tsleil-Waututh Nation (October 27, 2008, March 25, 2009 and September 1, 2009); Squamish Nation (September 8, 2008), Sto:lo First Nation (May 5, 2009); Kwikwetlem First Nation (May 30, 2009 and July 8, 2009). A member of Semiahmoo First Nation attended and provided feedback at the public meeting in Surrey (April 23).
SDD-22
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 5 of 15
2.2.4 Government Agencies and Ministries Discussions regarding the draft LWMP and the consultation program took place at meetings with the Ministry of Environment (Surrey office) before and during the consultation process. Letters were also sent to federal, provincial, and regional departments, ministries and agencies that may have an interest in Metro Vancouver’s Liquid Waste Management Plan, asking how they would like to be consulted. Second follow-up letters were sent asking for input on the draft LWMP. The Ministry of Advanced Education and Labour Market Development provided Metro Vancouver with a list of post-secondary institutions in the region with which to consult and letters were sent to these institutions. The following table is a summary of meetings with government agencies and ministries on the LWMP during this phase of consultation: Government Agency and Ministry Meeting Date (2009) BC Hydro June 22 BC Ministry of Community and Rural Development July 8 BC Integrated Land Management Bureau and the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation August 5 BC Deputy Minister Konkin (Ministry of Environment), Deputy Minister Wall (Ministry of Community and Rural Development) and Assistant Deputy Minister Paine (Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation) October 2 BC Ministers Abbott (Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation), Bennett (Ministry of Community and Rural Development) and Penner (Ministry of Environment) and their Deputy Ministers October 7 BC Deputy Ministry Konkin and senior Ministry of Environment staff October 28
2.2.5 LWMP Committees Four LWMP Committees provided input on the draft LWMP, including the LWMP Reference Panel (RP), and three intergovernmental groups: the Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC), the Stormwater Inter-agency Liaison Group (SILG) and the Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program/Fraser River Estuary Management Program (BIEAP/FREMP). These committees participated in the technical forum, in addition to holding independent meetings to discuss and provide input on the draft LWMP. 2.2.5.1 Technical Forum A technical forum (an intergovernmental workshop designed to share perspectives on the opportunities and challenges related to managing the region’s liquid waste) was held on May 6, 2009. The meeting included the following components: overview of the draft LWMP by Metro Vancouver staff; presentation on “A Different Perspective on Implementing Integrated Resource Management” by Dr. Jon O’Riordan, Director, Fidelis Resource Group; presentations on technical and advisory committee perspectives on the draft LWMP by committee chairs, followed by small group discussions on key themes of liquid waste
SDD-23
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 6 of 15
management. Approximately 30 participants attended, including representatives from the following organizations and committees:
• Organizations/Agencies: University of British Columbia, Ministry of Environment, Port Metro Vancouver, Fraser Health Authority, Indian and Northern Affairs, Environment Canada
• Municipalities: Township of Langley, Port Coquitlam, Coquitlam, City of Vancouver, District of North Vancouver, City of North Vancouver, Surrey
• Committees: LWMP Reference Panel; REAC; REAC LW Sub-committee; Fraser, Vancouver and North Shore Sewerage Area Technical Committees; Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group; and the LWMP Environmental Monitoring Committee.
2.2.5.2 Reference Panel In 2008, a Reference Panel was appointed by the Board to provide additional input during the consultation process for the Liquid Waste Management Plan and report directly to the Waste Management Committee. The panel includes up to thirteen representatives residing or working in Metro Vancouver who bring a variety of perspectives to liquid waste issues, including technical experts, liquid waste management specialists, business representatives and citizens with an interest in liquid waste topics. Eleven meetings and two field trips of the LWMP Reference Panel between November 3, 2008 and September 8, 2009 took place for members to receive presentations, discuss the LWMP and develop recommendations on the draft LWMP. In addition, the Reference Panel reported out to the Waste Management Committee on four occasions (July 9, 2008, May 13, 2009, June 10, 2009 and July 15, 2009). 2.2.5.3 Environmental Monitoring Committee The Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC) was created as part of the 2002 Liquid Waste Management Plan. The mandate of the EMC is to provide scientific advice and recommendations on issues relating to liquid waste discharges and their effects on receiving environments, and related environmental monitoring. The membership of the EMC consists primarily of municipal, academic and relevant senior government representatives. Six EMC meetings where the LWMP was discussed took place during the consultation period (May 31, 2008 to October 9, 2009). 2.2.5.4 Stormwater Inter-agency Liaison Group The Stormwater Inter-agency Liaison Group (SILG) was also created as part of the 2002 Liquid Waste Management Plan. The mandate of SILG is to assist with municipal implementation of actions focused on stormwater/rainwater management, and its membership consists of municipal and relevant senior government representatives. One SILG meeting where the LWMP was discussed took place during the consultation period (May 31, 2008 to October 9, 2009). 2.2.5.5 Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program/Fraser River Estuary Management Program The Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program and Fraser River Estuary Management Program (BIEAP/FREMP) are inter-governmental partnerships established to coordinate the environmental management of two significant aquatic ecosystems in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia - Burrard Inlet and the Fraser River Estuary. It is the forum identified in the 2002 LWMP to resolve environmental issues between Metro Vancouver and regulatory
SDD-24
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 7 of 15
agencies. BIEAP/FREMP held a meeting on May 7, 2009 to develop recommendations on the draft LWMP. At the meeting on July 14, 2009, the biannual progress update report on the LWMP was discussed. 2.2.6 Adjacent Regional Districts During the consultation period, letters were sent to the Fraser Valley Regional District and the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District informing them about the public meeting schedule and the technical forum, soliciting input on the plan and offering to meet regarding the plan, if requested. 2.2.7 Supporting Communication Activities The public consultation was supported by a range of activities aimed at increasing public awareness of the opportunity to become involved in deciding the future of the region and encouraging public input. The deadline for receipt of input was included in all communication activities supporting the consultation process. The following activities supported the consultation program: • Placement of advertisements in region-wide, local and ethnic newspapers with public
meeting details and other opportunities to provide input • Distribution of public meeting invitation flyers via e-mail and mail to individuals and
organizations on Metro Vancouver’s regional dialogue database and the Liquid Waste Management Plan database (approximately 1,100)
• Placement of follow-up phone calls regarding public meetings • Materials posted on the Metro Vancouver web site
(www.metrovancouver.org/services/wastewater/planning): public meeting advertisement and registration, presentation, feedback form, Metro Vancouver contact information for receipt of feedback
• Media relations support • Metro Vancouver Member, First Nation, government agency and ministry, adjacent
regional district and LWMP advisory committee notification as described in Sections 2.2.2 – 2.2.6
• Receipt of correspondence via fax, email, letter or feedback forms. 2.3 Consultation Input A summary of issues and comments raised on the draft LWMP in meetings and correspondence from the public, Metro Vancouver members, First Nations, government agencies and ministries, and LWMP committees, as well as Metro Vancouver’s responses to the input is contained in attachments 2-8. Metro Vancouver received 16 feedback forms, 44 pieces of correspondence (e-mail/fax/letter) and verbal input on the draft LWMP during the consultation program. The following sections provide an overview of key themes arising from input received during the draft LWMP consultation phase.
SDD-25
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 8 of 15
2.3.1 Public Meetings and Correspondence The following common themes regarding the draft LWMP emerged from the public meetings noted in Section 2.2.1 and through public correspondence: Increase public awareness of liquid waste management and water conservation – Participants encouraged Metro Vancouver to provide the public with ongoing education about water conservation measures and liquid waste management practices. Participants also felt it was important to inform the public about innovative technology options for managing liquid waste. It was also suggested that Metro Vancouver develop specific education programs targeting landscapers and nurseries as well as primary and secondary school students. Assist homeowners with private sewer maintenance – Participants recognized the importance of managing private sewer pipes to reduce the amount of stormwater and groundwater leaking into the sanitary sewer system through cracks in private sewer pipes and the subsequent burden on the wastewater treatment system. It was suggested that Metro Vancouver and other levels of government require private pipes in poor condition to be inspected and repaired and that grants or low-interest loans be provided to homeowners to assist with the costs. Provide incentives for water conservation and sustainable stormwater design – Participants suggested that Metro Vancouver offer a range of incentives to encourage residents and businesses to install water saving plumbing fixtures, such as low and dual-flush toilets, and to incorporate roof gardens and permeable surfaces into building design. A high level of support for the use of rain barrels was indicated. Accelerate schedule for replacing combined sewers – Participants raised concerns about combined sewer pipe overflows and their impacts on the environment. Participants were generally supportive of the timeline to replace combined sewers but encouraged Metro Vancouver and its members to accelerate the sewer separation schedule whenever possible. Provide secondary treatment at both the North Shore and Vancouver wastewater treatment plants by 2020 – The majority of participants were supportive of upgrading both treatment plants by 2020, despite the additional costs to taxpayers. Some participants indicated that they would be willing to pay more taxes to achieve secondary treatment. Participants urged Metro Vancouver to make the decision to provide secondary treatment and then approach senior levels of government to request cost sharing. They also suggested that industry discharge fees be increased to assist with costs. Participants inquired as to whether public-private partnerships would be considered and if the upgrade costs could be amortized over a longer period to reduce financial impacts on taxpayers. Consider a variety of innovative liquid waste treatment options – Participants encouraged Metro Vancouver to more proactively review innovative designs and technologies related to liquid waste treatment. It was suggested that tertiary treatment be considered to deal with emerging contaminants. Some participants inquired about innovative treatment solutions currently under consideration by Metro Vancouver.
SDD-26
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 9 of 15
Improve environmental monitoring and reporting to test for emerging contaminants – Participants suggested that Metro Vancouver review and re-evaluate current instruments for environmental monitoring, such as the list of triggers that prescribe specific responses by governments. Some participants felt that there should be increased testing for emerging contaminants such as personal care products and flame retardants. More detailed information about environmental discharges was requested, particularly regarding heavy metals and other toxic compounds. Recover resources and value from liquid wastes – There was widespread support for the LWMP Strategy 2.1 at the community meetings. Some participants felt that Metro Vancouver should be using treated effluent in the marine environment as a nutrient for fish, algae and bacteria. The benefits to agriculture of using treated effluent for irrigation and recovered phosphorus as a fertilizer were also identified. Some participants suggested that liquid waste could be converted into fuel for taxis and buses. In all cases, participants noted the need to ensure full transparency and ongoing public consultation for the planning and implementation of all programs related to resource recovery and use. Continue with current stormwater/rainwater management approach – Participants were supportive of the initiatives Metro Vancouver and members are taking regarding stormwater management and indicated support for increased efforts to return rainwater to the ground. Attendees encouraged Metro Vancouver to continue to play a key role in leadership and support for Metro Vancouver members, who are responsible for developing and implementing rainwater management plans. 2.3.2 Metro Vancouver Member Meetings and Correspondence The following common themes regarding the draft Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) emerged from meetings with Metro Vancouver members noted in Section 2.2.2 and through correspondence: General plan comments – Metro Vancouver members support the LWMP in principle, contingent upon a few items. It was requested that Metro Vancouver provide more context within the LWMP on the region’s 20 year outlook. Members suggested that member staff continue to work with Metro Vancouver and neighbouring members to achieve increased efficiencies and optimal levels of service. It was suggested that the exploration and piloting of alternative system approaches should be included as a specific strategy in the draft plan. Working with member municipalities’ technical staff, a LWMP has been developed which satisfies municipal concerns and meets regional needs. Minimize liquid wastes at their source and decrease inflows and infiltration – Members requested clarification on their obligations associated with source control and outreach programs in the draft LWMP. Members suggested that the allowances set by Metro Vancouver for discharge rates from municipal sewers to regional trunk sewers and wastewater treatment plants warrant further evaluation to consider infrastructure age, land use, density and local conditions. Members recognize the need to require repairing and replacing private sewer pipes (laterals) and will develop strategies that address the unique characteristics of each municipality. Members encouraged Metro Vancouver to work with the province to obtain legislative authority for municipalities to address infiltration from aging, private property sanitary sewer connections.
SDD-27
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 10 of 15
Provide secondary treatment at both the North Shore and Vancouver wastewater treatment plants by 2020 – Metro Vancouver members in the North Shore and Vancouver sewerage areas recommended that treatment plant upgrades in their areas be completed by 2020, subject to senior government cost sharing. Some members requested sequential upgrading of the treatment plants in 2020 and 2030, for financial and logistical reasons. The majority of members suggested accelerating the overall completion of the projects. Seek funding from senior levels of government for treatment plant upgrades – Members recommended that the three levels of government (federal, provincial and regional) should equally fund the upgrading of the Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), as major capital projects have historically been co-funded. It was suggested that Metro Vancouver address concerns of financial implications in the context of regional affordability prior to the adoption of the final LWMP. One member recommended that Metro Vancouver add the costs of upgrading these secondary treatment facilities to accommodate future growth to the Vancouver and North Shore Sewerage Area development cost charges. Recover resources and value from liquid waste – One member suggested Metro Vancouver undertake an Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR) approach on the North Shore as soon as possible, in cooperation with the three North Shore members. Another member suggested that a revised plan include member rights to material and energy recovery. It was recommended that Metro Vancouver prioritize options for recovering energy and nutrients from liquid waste. Continue current stormwater management plan process – Most members were supportive of the current stormwater management plan development and implementation process. One member suggested that stormwater management plans be developed by Metro Vancouver members on a voluntary basis. Tsawwassen First Nation (TFN) interest in the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD) - A letter from Tsawwassen First Nation indicated that they are considering their wastewater management options, including membership in the GVS&DD. In addition, the letter indicated that many of the sustainability goals included in the LWMP are compatible with the stated goals of the TFN and that the TFN is committed to pursuing sustainable integrated resource management goals to provide sewage treatment for its lands. 2.3.3 First Nations The following themes regarding the draft LWMP emerged from First Nations meetings noted in Section 2.2.3 and correspondence. Tsawwassen First Nation themes are captured in the Metro Vancouver member section above. Hwlitsum First Nation - Request for information on capacity funding to participate in the LWMP consultation process. The Hwlitsum First Nation indicated that they have an interest in liquid waste management issues and would like to be involved in the LWMP decision making process. However, the Hwlitsum First Nation has a firm policy that all consultation should take place on a revenue neutral basis. The Hwlitsum First Nation requested information on what capacity funding, if any, is available for them to participate in the LWMP consultation.
SDD-28
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 11 of 15
Musqueam Indian Band - Request for information on the timeline for upgrading and potentially relocating the Iona Island WWTP and capacity funding. The Musqueam Indian Band requested a timeline on the upgrade and potential re-location of the Iona Island WWTP. Also, it was decided that Metro Vancouver would work to engage the province in discussions with Musqueam on consultations over the upgrading of the Iona Island WWTP and capacity funding issues. Musqueam Indian Band – Metro Vancouver liaison appointed to build relationship with Musqueam Indian Band. At the April 9, 2009 Metro Vancouver Board meeting, Director Maria Harris was appointed as a Metro Vancouver “liaison/ambassador” to build relationships with the Musqueam Indian Band. Tsleil-Waututh Nation – Cooperation Protocol in development. Metro Vancouver and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation are currently working on a Cooperation Protocol to strengthen the relationship between the two organizations. 2.3.4 Government Agencies and Ministries Seven government agencies responded to Metro Vancouver’s letters asking how they would like to participate in the process for updating the LWMP. Responses ranged from requesting regular correspondence on the LWMP to interest in attending future meetings about the LWMP. The following summaries regarding the draft LWMP emerged through additional correspondence with the government agencies: Environment Canada – Correspondence from Environment Canada encouraged Metro Vancouver to upgrade the Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants without delay and to participate in the upcoming consultations on the proposed federal wastewater effluent regulation put forward by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Environment Canada also noted the need for continued action to eliminate overflows from combined sewers and reduce the impacts of stormwater. Fisheries and Oceans Canada – A letter from Fisheries and Oceans Canada indicated that updates to the draft LWMP have provided opportunities in a number of areas including improved integration of land use planning and rainwater management to protect or improve watershed and stream health. These policies are complementary to the fish habitat management goals of the agency. Health Canada – A letter from Health Canada indicated support for the goals and strategies contained in the draft LWMP. It was recommended that Metro Vancouver periodically reassess the list of parameters specified in the operating certificates for wastewater treatment plants to allow for consideration of emerging contaminants. Health Canada also suggested that Metro Vancouver should consider outreach programs developed for other jurisdictions when exploring ways to support and improve liquid waste source management initiatives. It was noted that water metering is an important tool to reduce water consumption and that metering is aligned with the plan’s strategy to minimize liquid wastes at their source.
SDD-29
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 12 of 15
B.C. Ministry of Environment – Through ongoing correspondence, the Ministry of Environment acknowledged the significant advances that Metro Vancouver has made in the management of liquid waste. In a 2008 letter, the Ministry declined a Metro Vancouver request to change the title of the LWMP to the Liquid Resource Management Plan, due to the specific language in the Environmental Management Act, while acknowledging the potential value of using a waste as a resource. Subsequent letters identified key areas for further discussion with Metro Vancouver staff regarding the elimination of combined sewer overflows, municipal inflow and infiltration management, the attainment of water quality objective monitoring using the cautions, warnings and triggers approach in both the receiving and ambient environments, and the timely implementation of municipal level Integrated Stormwater Management Plans. The Ministry encouraged Metro Vancouver to adopt a five to eight year term for the LWMP to better implement adaptive management practices, yet still allow sufficient time between formal plan revision cycles. Finally, it was recommended that the scheduling of major treatment facility upgrades be finalized. B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and Lands – Correspondence from the Ministry provided recommendations regarding how agriculture could play a role in the achievement of the draft LWMP goals. It was noted that all fertilizers must meet food safety standards and organic certification requirements and that reclaimed wastewater for agricultural irrigation should meet drinking water standards. BC Hydro – A written submission from BC Hydro indicates support for the Integrated Resource Management vision contained within the draft LWMP and inquired as to whether Metro Vancouver has conducted a highest and best use analysis of biosolids and yard waste, noting an opportunity for integration with Metro Vancouver’s Solid Waste Management Plan and energy recovery. BC Hydro also urged Metro Vancouver to articulate its position on sewer waste heat recovery within the next year rather than by 2014/2016 since many communities are currently considering opportunities in this area. 2.3.5 LWMP Committees 2.3.5.1 Technical Forum The following common themes regarding the draft Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) emerged from the May 6, 2009 Technical Forum: Minimize liquid wastes at their source - Meeting attendees noted the importance of increasing business and industry participation in source control programs to better manage their liquid waste. It was suggested that Metro Vancouver provide incentives for businesses and industry to implement on-site liquid waste treatment. Separate sewers and reduce wet weather overflows - Several meeting participants suggested sewer separation be accelerated while others preferred to continue with sewer separation at a rate of 1% a year. Another participant suggested a business case could be made to separate sewers to accommodate growth. Support for upgrades of Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants - There was widespread support to increase the level of treatment at the Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants to secondary treatment in a timely manner.
SDD-30
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 13 of 15
Conduct Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR) analyses to inform asset management decisions - Attendees encouraged Metro Vancouver to conduct a business and needs analysis to determine if IRR would be successful on the North Shore and to identify potential opportunities for implementation. Attendees suggested Metro Vancouver clarify the commitment to treatment plant upgrades in the draft plan and consider the impact of IRR on the levels at wastewater treatment plants. Continue current monitoring and conduct research on the impact of emerging contaminants Meeting attendees recommended Metro Vancouver continue with the current level of monitoring activities and encouraged research and development at the federal level in regard to the impact of emerging contaminants. Support for approaching senior governments for funding - It was suggested that senior governments should contribute to the cost of maintaining and upgrading current infrastructure. 2.3.5.2 Reference Panel The Liquid Waste Management Plan Reference Panel provided input to the Waste Management Committee on four occasions and submitted a series of recommendations grouped under the themes of the natural environment, built environment, sewage treatment, financing and implementation. These are set out in full together with staff responses in Attachment #8. The Commissioner met with the Reference Panel to discuss the recommendations and staff responses to their mutual satisfaction. 2.3.5.3 Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC) Key topics discussed throughout the consultation period included: site-level rainwater management; Integrated Stormwater Management Plans (ISMPs), reduction of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), climate change, risk-based philosophy, the timeline for wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) upgrades and minimizing the impact of liquid waste on the environment. It was identified that the mandate of the EMC is to play a key role in the following: moving the new LWMP forward; assessing the impacts of the new WWTPs in regard to design and contaminants; open dialogues between different levels of government, including federal, provincial and Port Metro Vancouver (Port). Metro Vancouver was strongly encouraged to discuss the benefits of monitoring and assessing the impacts of stormwater discharge with the EMC and the Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group (SILG) and set goals accordingly. The Port requested to be consulted when overflow locations are identified, and that this need for consultation be indicated in the draft LWMP. 2.3.5.4 Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group (SILG) Issues of importance to SILG included the formation of a research academy, rainwater harvesting and data collection. SILG members discussed how to maintain Metro Vancouver member political engagement in liquid waste issues. 2.3.5.5 Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program/Fraser River Estuary Management Program (BIEAP/FREMP) It was noted that the comments made in April 2008 by BIEAP/FREMP have been incorporated or addressed in the draft LWMP as of May 20, 2009. During consultation, BIEMP/FREMP members discussed source control, outreach programs and public education and also suggested that performance measures and reporting be linked to sustainability within the LWMP. BIEMP/FREMP also recommended that the LWMP require
SDD-31
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 14 of 15
implementation of stormwater and rainwater management measures and plans to address the cumulative negative effects of altered water quality and quantity on area watercourses and receiving waters. It was also suggested that the LWMP should provide more clarification around climate change initiatives, state how the LWMP will address climate change and make reference to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) Strategy. 3. ALTERNATIVES None provided. 4. CONCLUSION In March 2009, the Waste Management Committee approved proceeding with a second phase of consultation to support the draft LWMP. This report outlines the activities and findings of the consultation program, which occurred between May 31, 2008 and October 30, 2009. The consultation process provided opportunities for the Metro Vancouver public, Metro Vancouver members, First Nations, adjacent regional districts, government agencies and ministries, LWMP committees and other key interest groups to provide input for consideration in finalizing the new Liquid Waste Management Plan for Metro Vancouver. Overall feedback received during the consultation process was supportive of the draft Liquid Waste Management Plan, including the new integrated resource recovery focus. Participants encouraged Metro Vancouver to proceed with upgrades to the Vancouver and North Shore wastewater treatment plants and explore the necessary cost-sharing from higher levels of governments. In addition, there was support shown for public education, increased research on the impacts of emerging contaminants and the need for innovative liquid waste management practices. Following the LWMP’s adoption by the Board, the final consultation report and final LWMP will be submitted to the Minister of Environment for approval.
SDD-32
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan: Consultation Program Results Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 15 of 15
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation Phases Diagram dated October 30, 2009
(eRIM # 4978680). 2. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – Public Input: Issues, Comments and
Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM # 4955595). 3. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – Metro Vancouver Member Input:
Issues, Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM# 4955597).
4. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – First Nations Input: Issues, Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM# 4955599).
5. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – Government Agency and Ministry Input: Issues, Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM# 4955600).
6. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – LWMP Committee Input: Issues, Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM# 4976099).
7. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – LWMP Technical Forum Input: Issues, Comments and Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM# 4955601).
8. Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation – LWMP Reference Panel Input: Recommendations and Metro Vancouver Responses dated October 30, 2009 (eRIM# 4972726).
SDD-33
ATTACHMENT 1
004978680
Liquid Waste Management Plan Consultation Phases
PHASE 1
Consultation on Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan
PHASE 2
Consultation on the Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan
DRAFT PLAN
Draft Liquid Waste Management Plan Developed after Phase 1 input
PHASE 3
Final Plan Approval
PHASE 4
Liquid Waste Management Plan Implementation and Monitoring
MAY 2008 – OCTOBER 2009
NOVEMBER – DECEMBER 2009
MARCH - MAY 2008
2010 - 2018
SDD-34
Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan Consultation
Public Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver Responses
004955595
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 2
#
Source Issue/C
omm
ent/Question
Metro Vancouver (M
V) Response
General Plan C
omm
ents 1
Feedback Form
MV
is a leader in Canada in raising
environmental standards and achieving m
ore sustainable practices.
Com
ment noted.
2 Feedback Form
The draft Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan
(LWM
P) is guided by narrow
-minded, business-
as-usual attitudes.
Com
ment noted. R
ealignment w
ith new P
rovincial and N
ational policies and integration with M
V’s S
ustainable R
egion Initiative are significant innovations since the 2002 LW
MP
. 3
Feedback Form
The draft LWM
P lacks the vision of the Livable
Region P
lan of the 1990s. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed by the Vision
Statem
ent and Sustainable R
egion Initiative Section in the
LWM
P.
4 Feedback Form
M
V’s focus on the cost to tax payers ignores
the hidden costs of depleted salmon stocks,
degraded sea water and sea life.
Ongoing environm
ental programs continue to m
onitor for effects from
liquid waste m
anagement on aquatic
ecosystems—
results inform the LW
MP
actions under S
trategy 1.3. 5
Feedback Form
Provide m
ore information on the effects on
coastal waters, fish and w
ildlife. A
ccess to MV
’s related environmental studies is available
through its library. 6
Feedback Form
Consider the large num
ber of other infrastructure projects occurring in the region; w
hat is the tax cost per house listed?
MV
continues to assess liquid waste program
s in the broader regional context along w
ith other regional and m
unicipal services for affordability: annual regional sewers
levy is about $158 per household. 7
Feedback Form
Ensure that input on the LW
MP
is solicited from
the technology comm
unity at large, specifically during concept and specification developm
ent.
MV
’s LWM
P R
eference Panel contained m
embers from
research, science and industry. O
ngoing technical advisory com
mittees (S
trategy 3.5: Collaborative
Managem
ent) provide technical input to policies, concepts and designs.
8 Feedback Form
C
ompensate the D
istrict of North V
ancouver for to the loss of taxable land caused by the purchase of the old B
C R
ail lands.
MV
is not required to pay municipal property tax on its
infrastructure that provides service to municipalities.
SDD-35
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
2
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 9
Feedback Form
Provide "M
ade in BC
" technology a fair opportunity to participate in LW
MP
developm
ent.
Made in B
C technology is treated w
ith equal fairness as others—
criteria are reliable systems to protect public
health and the environment, and value for m
oney. 10
Feedback Form
The BC
clean-tech and wastew
ater industrial clusters are significant stakeholders in the LW
MP
.
Com
ment noted.
11 Feedback Form
Im
measurable benefit devolves to both the
local economy as w
ell as the local technology sector by show
casing local BC
technology to the export m
arket through integration into the LW
MP
.
MV
will continue to partner in the developm
ent and show
casing of local technology under Strategy 2.1.
12 Feedback Form
O
pposed to significant private involvement in
the liquid waste m
anagement process.
Com
ment noted. O
pportunities for private involvement in
liquid waste m
anagement w
ill continue to be assessed w
here relevant. 13
Feedback Form
The Public B
roadcasting Service program
, “P
oisoned Water” should be utilized as a tool
for public education.
Com
ment noted. This docum
entary discusses endocrine disrupting pollutants. M
V w
ill continue with its partnerships
to examine risks and m
itigative options from these
pollutants. M
V education and outreach program
s will continue to
evolve to address these priorities. 14
Feedback Form
Concerns that the technology utilized in the
LWM
P w
ill become outdated unless the
timeline is accelerated.
The LWM
P does not specify technology; instead it sets
performance objectives. O
ngoing and expanded environm
ental monitoring program
s (Strategy 3.3) w
ill continue to assess effectiveness of the LW
MP
. 15
Feedback Form
Request for the LW
MP
to be accelerated. C
omm
ent noted. 16
Feedback Form
The environment is the greatest priority in
regard to liquid waste m
anagement.
Com
ment noted. P
rotecting Public H
ealth and the E
nvironment is G
oal 1.
SDD-36
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
3
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 17
Meeting N
otes D
isappointed in the lack of reference to the C
anadian Council of M
inisters of the E
nvironment (C
CM
E) strategy in the draft
LWM
P w
hen referencing federal and provincial roles and responsibilities.
The CC
ME
strategy, which w
as adopted by CC
ME
February 17
th, indicates that implem
entation has been left to the jurisdictions (provinces) in regard to tim
elines, and quality param
eters to be used. It is going to take several years for the province to update their sew
age regulations in term
s of aligning with the new
national strategy. The LW
MP
aligns with new
standards. 18
Meeting N
otes C
oncern that some of the tim
elines in the draft LW
MP
are not consistent with the tim
elines laid out in the C
CM
E strategy.
The LWM
P tim
elines align within the envelopes of the
CC
ME
strategy. Decisions regarding tim
elines, and quality param
eters to be used have yet to be formalized by the
provinces. 19
Meeting N
otes Tim
elines and associated cost are the main
issue of contention in the draft LWM
P.
Timelines and costs are a significant factor regarding the
upgrades for North S
hore and Vancouver S
ewerage A
rea. These upgrades are a result of Federal-P
rovincial policies. The cost and tim
ing of these upgrades are significant and com
pete with other m
ajor regional initiatives. 20
Meeting N
otes V
ancouver perceived as a leader in advancing green developm
ent and infrastructure. M
V w
ill continue to collaborate with the C
ity of Vancouver
and others to advance green infrastructure. For example,
Vancouver’s N
eighbourhood Energy U
tility in South E
ast False C
reek evolved from joint research by M
V and its
mem
bers. 21
Meeting N
otes C
oncern over the health of the coastal waters
of Georgia S
trait. C
omm
ent noted. MV
’s environmental m
onitoring (ambient
and discharge) will continue w
ith the intention to better integrate data to inform
a better understanding of the relationship betw
een liquid waste m
anagement and the
receiving environments (S
trategy 3.3). 22
Meeting N
otes C
larify that the timeline of 2050 being proposed
in the draft LWM
P is the status quo in the
existing LWM
P.
Yes, the tim
eline of 2050 being proposed in the draft LW
MP
is the status quo in the existing LWM
P.
SDD-37
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
4
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 23
Meeting N
otes The north arm
of the Fraser River no longer
has salmon.
The presence or absence of salmon m
ay be the result of m
any factors. Municipal developm
ent and implem
entation of integrated storm
water m
anagement plans (IS
MP
s) should support im
proved salmon populations in the N
orth A
rm of the Fraser R
iver (Strategy 3.4).
24 M
eeting Notes
Where is industry in the LW
MP
? The 300 largest industries are perm
itted through source control program
s. MV
sets permit lim
its to protect the plant, w
orkers and the environment. They are m
onitored on a regular basis. There are also m
andatory codes of practices for a number
of comm
ercial sectors, such as dental offices that must
have amalgam
separators (Strategy 1.1)
25 M
eeting Notes
Are there specific locations in the w
orld that can be looked to for a program
of steps to reach an ultim
ate solution for liquid waste
managem
ent?
No. A
round the world, em
erging issues are being looked at because there is not yet an ultim
ate solution. The science is being looked at to consider w
hat parameters
are ’safe’. 26
Meeting N
otes A
ll participants at the comm
unity meeting
should watch the “P
oison Water,” television
program.
Com
ment noted. This docum
entary discusses endocrine disrupting pollutants. M
V w
ill continue with its partnerships
in examine risks and m
itigating options from these
pollutants. M
V education and outreach program
s will continue to
evolve to address priorities 27
Meeting N
otes C
oncern expressed that the public does not view
sewage treatm
ent and the marine
environment as im
portant issues.
Com
ment noted. M
V considers these issues im
portant and uses outreach through program
s such as MV
’s S
ustainable Region TV
program to prom
ote awareness.
28 M
eeting Notes
MV
is frustrating to deal with; a conservative
organization with no obligation to respond, just
like Victoria.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-38
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
5
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 29
Meeting N
otes S
candinavian taxes became very high and now
they have incredible renew
able resources; this m
akes the proposed 14% increase in M
V seem
insignificant.
Com
ment noted. S
trategy 3.1 will explore and access the
renewable resource potential of liquid w
astes.
30 M
eeting Notes
Are there other options for how
one billion dollars could be spent to achieve the sam
e or better results for liquid w
aste managem
ent?
MV
is pursuing an Integrated Resource R
ecovery (IRR
) approach.
31 M
eeting Notes
Clarification that a P
3 (public/private partnership) is different than privatization.
Privatization w
ould be the operation and provision of liquid w
aste services by a private, for profit company—
often includes the sale of assets to the private sector. P
3 could use a business to provide specialized services, such as operations, inspection, or m
aintenance contractor—
asset ownership and core functions can be
retained by the public sector. 32
Meeting N
otes M
isconception that water is privatized in M
V.
Opposed to the privatization of drinking w
ater in M
V.
Com
ment noted. W
ater supply has not been privatized in M
V. This issue is addressed in the D
rinking Water
Managem
ent Plan.
33 M
eeting Notes
The degradation of the marine habitat in the
Fraser River has occurred over the last 50
years.
Com
ment noted. O
ver the last 50 years, three Waste
Water Treatm
ent Plants (W
WTP
s) have been built for MV
on the Fraser R
iver—prior to that, liquid w
astes were
discharged untreated into the Fraser River.
34 M
eeting Notes
Surrey used to deposit w
aste directly into the Fraser R
iver; Blaine, W
ashington, continues to do so.
Blaine is not tributary to the Fraser R
iver. Surrey is served
by the Annacis Island W
WTP
.
35 M
eeting Notes
Governm
ents have allowed for fisheries and
crabbing, causing the current health and environm
ental problems.
Strategy 1.3 “M
inimizes im
pacts to the environment—
water, land and air” helps im
prove aquatic ecosystem
health. 36
Meeting N
otes The LW
MP
is a positive project that should receive greater priority.
Com
ment noted. The im
portance of the LWM
P is
considered in relation to other municipal and regional
plans and initiatives
SDD-39
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
6
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 37
Meeting N
otes R
eference made to the W
orld Urban Forum
3 w
here a documentary alleged a large problem
w
ith sewage sludge.
Com
ment noted. M
V is required to m
eet provincial regulations, for anything applied to land. S
ince the 1990s, M
V has been applying som
e biosolids from sew
age to reclaim
mine sites. It is not used for agricultural crops.
38 M
eeting Notes
Requiring 8%
of household income to cover the
cost of municipal, M
V and TransLink program
s is too high.
This figure includes property taxes, TransLink fees and surcharges on gasoline. Fees are collected from
multiple
sources. 39
Meeting N
otes The best plan for street gardens is through coordination w
ith other departments and
comm
unity gardens in order to promote self-
irrigation systems.
Com
ment noted.
40 M
eeting Notes
Where are definitions regarding “open m
arine” located?
They are in the provincial “Municipal S
ewage
Regulations”.
41 M
eeting Notes
The term “open m
arine” should be defined as an area of ocean w
ith nothing visible to the horizon i.e. it is possible to see V
ancouver Island from
Vancouver, therefore the G
eorgia S
trait is not “open marine.”
Com
ment noted. The regulatory nature of the LW
MP
requires that its definitions be consistent w
ith provincial regulations—
i.e. for Georgia S
trait.
42 P
ublic C
orrespondence N
orth Am
ericans are the most w
asteful users of w
ater. C
omm
ent noted. MV
’s Drinking W
ater Managem
ent Plan
contains initiatives to promote m
ore efficient water use
behaviours. 43
Public
Correspondence
Give preference to re-developm
ent or brow
nfield development for the provision of
sewage services as opposed to new
developm
ent.
Land re-development (including brow
nfield) is where m
ost of the region’s developm
ent opportunities occur. The R
egional Grow
th Strategy is expected to support land re-
development through a firm
urban growth boundary.
44 P
ublic C
orrespondence M
V should exam
ine the full cost of greenfield developm
ents, including the carbon impact,
when deciding w
hether or not to provide sew
age services.
The Regional G
rowth S
trategy is expected to support land re-developm
ent through a firm U
rban Grow
th Boundary,
linked through Strategy 3.4.
SDD-40
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
7
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 45
Public
Correspondence
Is it reasonable to permit greenfield
development, w
hich will cause those areas
developed to become perm
anently de-forested w
ith a high carbon footprint?
The Regional G
rowth S
trategy is expected to limit
greenfield development through a firm
Urban G
rowth
Boundary, linked through S
trategy 3.4.
46 P
ublic C
orrespondence M
V should take advantage of every opportunity
to incorporate liquid waste m
anagement into
regional planning.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed through
linkages to the Regional G
rowth S
trategy (Strategy 3.4).
47 P
ublic C
orrespondence The interest of S
imon Fraser U
niversity (SFU
) in sustainability and the protection of public health and the environm
ent are in line with the
goals and proposed actions of MV
as outlined in the LW
MP
.
Addressed through S
trategies 1.3 and 3.3 and collaboration w
ith SFU
can be facilitated through Strategy
3.2.
48 P
ublic C
orrespondence The LW
MP
is a high level document that
establishes admirable objectives, goals, action
items and im
plementation steps that are
difficult to provide comm
ent on.
Com
ment noted.
49 P
ublic C
orrespondence LW
MP
implem
entation is dependent upon MV
m
embers im
plementing bylaw
s to make on-site
rainwater m
anagement a reality.
The rainwater site m
anagement actions in S
trategy 1.1 do not necessarily require m
unicipal bylaws, but they do
require municipal policies for land use and storm
water to
be more integrated
50 P
ublic C
orrespondence E
xploring all options for liquid waste
managem
ent prior to the implem
entation of a new
LWM
P; concern expressed that this has
not been done.
Strategy 3.2 enhances innovation and S
trategy 2.1 explores the integrated options to m
ore sustainable m
anage liquid wastes.
Strategy 1.1: Reduce liquid w
astes at their source (Strategy #1 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 51
Feedback Form
Improve public education around liquid w
aste m
anagement to the level of solid w
aste and recycling.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
52 Feedback Form
The cost of upgrades to private laterals should be equally split betw
een the homeow
ner, the m
unicipal government, the provincial
government and the federal governm
ent.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-41
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
8
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 53
Feedback Form
MV
should mandate perm
eable concrete roadw
ays and parking lots if it is cost-effective. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.1 in the LWM
P.
54 Feedback Form
Is it possible to w
ater gardens using waste
water?
Yes, providing that the reclaim
ed water does not pose a
health risk—regulation in this area is still being developed
by the province. 55
Feedback Form
Utilize m
ore green roofs and walls to m
inimize
water w
aste. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.1 in the LWM
P.
56 Feedback Form
A
sensor system should be put into place to
check what hum
ans discharge into the system
through storm w
ater;
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
57 Feedback Form
P
romote the use of rain barrels.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 58
Feedback Form
Help hom
e owners detect and solve problem
s related to private laterals.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 59
Feedback Form
What is the cost of sanitary sew
er smoke
testing? C
osts vary depending on the length and number of
sewers being inspected—
generally, smoke testing costs
are reasonable. 60
Feedback Form
Sanitary sew
er smoke testing should be piloted
in a small area to assess the severity of the
problem of private laterals
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
61 Feedback Form
P
rovide grants to home ow
ners for sewer
upgrades. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.1 in the LWM
P.
62 Feedback Form
W
hen sewers are privately ow
ned, the private ow
ner should repair them.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 63
Feedback Form
Make low
-interest loans available to owners of
private sewers to ensure repair is possible
when necessary.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
64 Feedback Form
H
as industry made any reduction in sew
er output in the last 5 – 10 years?
Perm
itted industries are monitored for com
pliance with
their discharge permits – im
proved compliance in
discharges has been achieved since 2002.
SDD-42
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
9
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 65
Feedback Form
What are M
V’s plans for the education of
primary and secondary students in regard to
liquid waste m
anagement?
MV
has a broader ongoing K-12 education program
which
includes liquid waste as a com
ponent.
66 Feedback Form
The future generation in M
V should be
educated about liquid waste m
anagement as
they will live w
ith the actions of the current generation.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
67 Feedback Form
E
ducating the public, home ow
ners, developers, planners and landscapers on liquid w
aste managem
ent is a priority.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
68 Feedback Form
Look globally for innovative ideas for reducing the usage of w
ater in the system, such as using
rain barrels for watering law
ns.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
69 Feedback Form
Industry should pay m
ore for their outflow into
the system.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 70
Feedback Form
Is MV
monitoring output into the system
made
by industry? Y
es, through inspection and enforcement program
s under S
trategy 1.1. 71
Feedback Form
Consider using perm
eable surfaces in every new
development.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 72
Feedback Form
What is the relationship betw
een private sew
age managers and M
V?
Private sew
age managers include private sew
erage utilities-system
s that are not connected to the MV
system
and businesses that transport liquid wastes (trucked liquid
waste) from
industries, businesses and septic fields to disposal at M
V’s W
astewater Treatm
ent Plants (W
WTP
s). 73
Feedback Form
Are there rules for the m
aintenance of sewer
systems by private sew
age managers and are
these maintenance contracts being kept?
Private sew
erage systems are regulated by the P
rovince, not M
V.
74 Feedback Form
P
rivate sewer system
s should be checked and ow
ners required to conduct updates if required; alternatively, all private pipes should be required to upgrade at the sam
e time as the
City.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-43
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
10
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 75
Feedback Form
MV
should support ongoing innovation to reduce rainw
ater run-off. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.1 in the LWM
P.
76 M
eeting Notes
Request for m
ore information on w
ater conservation.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 77
Meeting N
otes P
leased with conservation program
s being put forw
ard by MV
, such as low-flush toilets, rain
barrels and green roofs.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
78 M
eeting Notes
Will grants be considered to encourage
residents or businesses to take advantage of conservation techniques, such as low
-flush toilets, rain barrels and green roofs?
Municipalities are responsible for program
s regarding low-
flush toilets. BC
Hydro has som
e grant programs
available for washing m
achines.
79 M
eeting Notes
Through the water m
eter program several
houses were found to have plum
bing problems
or damaged w
ater connections; due to paying a flat rate, m
ost residents did not make repairs.
Com
ment noted.
80 M
eeting Notes
Is MV
monitoring industry outflow
into the sew
er system?
The 300 largest industries are permitted through a source
control program and are m
onitored on a regular basis. We
have mandatory codes of practices for a num
ber of com
mercial sectors.
81 M
eeting Notes
Can M
V increase charges to industry or force
industry to treat their outflow prior to
discharge?
MV
is exploring incentive programs.
82 M
eeting Notes
Implem
enting different sewage treatm
ent system
s on-board cruise lines is always m
ost effective w
hen the crew is brought in through
awareness, education and accountability.
Com
ment noted.
83 M
eeting Notes
Pleased w
ith the rain gardens and roadside sw
ales in Coquitlam
. C
omm
ent noted.
SDD-44
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
11
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 84
Meeting N
otes W
hat is the City of C
oquitlam doing in regard to
building with perm
eable surfaces? There are criteria for infiltration in m
ulti-family
developments; and there are som
e challenges for using perm
eable surfaces in road right-of-ways. S
and and gravel used during the w
inters plugs up any permeable
treatments.
85 M
eeting Notes
There should be no municipal jurisdiction from
a property line to a house.
Com
ment noted.
86 M
eeting Notes
Do private sew
ers only extend to the end of a property?
Yes.
87 M
eeting Notes
Would the province have to legislate
municipalities to inspect private sew
ers; have m
unicipalities lobbied for this previously?
A report has been prepared that looked at how
m
unicipalities were m
anaging private property laterals. There are a num
ber of ways that m
unicipalities are doing this. S
ome are doing inspections. O
thers are requiring inspections at the tim
e of property sale. All m
odels require a new
act or legal authority. There are various approaches that can be used.
88 M
eeting Notes
Has M
V or the m
unicipalities considered liability issues associated w
ith private sewers
and inspection?
There are some new
technologies being employed, such
as a trenchless approach for repairs and the use of micro
cameras for inspections of plum
bing systems to m
inimize
impacts and potential liability.
89 M
eeting Notes
With the increasing volum
es of the tributaries that feed into the Fraser, N
icomekl and
Serpentine, is it fair to say that the sm
all tributaries and rivers are taking m
ore volumes
once a housing development goes into an
area?
Historically that w
as the case. Now
we are m
anaging how
stormw
ater gets to these tributaries. We now
have perforated pipes in areas that have perm
eable soils where
we look to infiltrate storm
water into the ground as it w
ould have, before developm
ent occurred. Storm
water detention
ponds are still used. We look at it so that the m
ass run-off from
industrial and residential developments has a
controlled peak, at its natural rate. We are on the path to
having a more natural flow
regime w
ith these initiatives. 90
Meeting N
otes E
xercise care when considering w
ater savings program
s, such as rain barrel programs due to
the long payback period.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-45
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
12
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 91
Meeting N
otes W
hat is the City of N
orth Vancouver’s position
on “smart m
etering” and could it be installed? They w
ould add about $60 to $100 annually for a single fam
ily home.
92 M
eeting Notes
Would “sm
art metering” cost $100 per hom
e for the life of the project?
If you start with a new
system, adding w
ater meters is
relatively inexpensive. If you are retrofitting, it is more
costly. To start metering universally, it w
ould add $100 per year, per household.
93 M
eeting Notes
Installing water m
eters would not reduce the
rate at which M
V needs to add infrastructure as
meters need to be electronically tracked and
checked each year.
Com
ment noted.
94 M
eeting Notes
Have rooftop gardens been considered as a
way to absorb m
oisture run-off? M
etro Vancouver has collaborated extensively on
greenroof research and has co-developed guidelines for their use in rainw
ater managem
ent. 95
Meeting N
otes H
ave the use of green walls been considered
by MV
? G
reenwalls are less effective than greenroofs as they
cannot intercept as much rainfall and therefore have not
been examined.
96 M
eeting Notes
Will the increased num
ber of bioswales, and
resulting increase in standing water cause
problems w
ith things such as the mosquito
population?
In a properly designed bioswale, m
osquitoes should not be a problem
.
97 M
eeting Notes
Can M
V incorporate the use of engineered
concrete that allows for w
ater to pass underneath it into a bylaw
?
MV
put out a Best M
anagement G
uide and explored the use of porous concrete.
98 M
eeting Notes
Single fam
ily homes are connected to storm
drains and are easy to convert to keep w
ater on site; the D
istrict and City of N
orth Vancouver
have not adjusted their policies to allow
homeow
ners to retain water on site.
Com
ment noted.
99 M
eeting Notes
What is the difference betw
een a low-flush
toilet and other toilets? It is part of the provincial plum
bing code. All new
construction requires installation of low
-flush toilets that use only 6 litres per flush. W
hen you renovate or replace toilets, you w
ill only be able to purchase 6 litre toilets.
SDD-46
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
13
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 100
Meeting N
otes W
hen do upgrades to low-flush toilets need to
be completed by?
It is not a requirement to replace the existing 15 litre
toilets. They will be phased out over tim
e as toilets are replaced.
101 M
eeting Notes
Concerns that in older developm
ents the slope of line from
homes to the drains m
ay be insufficient to accom
modate low
-flush toilets.
Com
ment noted.
102 M
eeting Notes
Reference m
ade to dual flush toilets in the U
nited Kingdom
eliminating the need to flush
low-flush toilets m
ultiple times.
The Canadian W
ater and Waste A
ssociation has tested low
-flush toilets from m
any manufacturers.
103 M
eeting Notes
Support given to the functionality of low
-flush toilets.
Com
ment noted.
104 M
eeting Notes
Is there technology to allow for perforating
pavements in areas other than the country
lane?
Structural plastic grid and perm
eable pavers are being tried, in addition to other pilot program
s.
105 M
eeting Notes
Is heavier investment in perforating pavem
ents econom
ical considering it will take until 2050 to
do away w
ith Com
bined Sew
er Overflow
s (C
SO
s)?
MV
is exploring technologies and innovations in this area.
106 P
ublic C
orrespondence R
equire on-site rain water retainm
ent in existing developm
ents and encourage rain w
ater collection.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
107 P
ublic C
orrespondence E
ncourage and provide incentives for on-site grey w
ater usage in housing complexes.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 108
Public
Correspondence
Provide further incentives to the public and
industry for water-saving appliances and
plumbing fixtures.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
109 P
ublic C
orrespondence R
educe the amount of w
aste water.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-47
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
14
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 110
Public
Correspondence
Source control is of interest, in regard to
reducing property damage, poor w
ater quality and dam
age to aquatic habitat. Source
controls include vegetated swales, bio-retention
areas, infiltration trenches, infiltration ponds, foundation planters, pervious paving, green roofs and rainw
ater capture and reuse on landscaping.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
111 P
ublic C
orrespondence Include a balance betw
een approved regulations and econom
ic incentives to prom
ote creativity and flexibility in managing
stormw
ater at the source while fostering the
public’s acceptance of such measures and
avoiding enforcement costs.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
112 P
ublic C
orrespondence E
nsure that initial construction and subsequent m
aintenance costs of source control endeavours are both cost effective and com
patible with the structural integrity and
fitness of associated buildings.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
113 P
ublic C
orrespondence M
anage rainwater on a site by site basis.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 114
Public
Correspondence
Plan does not note w
hat engineering requirem
ents in regard to on-site rainwater
managem
ent would entail.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
115 P
ublic C
orrespondence N
o funding is available for developing new
engineering requirements in regard to on-site
rainwater m
anagement; or developm
ent of technologies.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-48
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
15
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 116
Public
Correspondence
MV
mem
bers currently encourage site owners
to design techniques for rainwater
managem
ent while still requiring the traditional
infrastructure; site owners are paying for the
development of rainw
ater managem
ent system
s and for traditional stormw
ater system
s, creating an expensive redundancy.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
117 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
ome M
V m
embers continue to require
traditional roads and sidewalks that are not
conducive to meeting M
V objectives to
increase permeable surfaces.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
118 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
et minim
um standards to prevent the overuse
of stormw
ater systems.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
. 119
Public
Correspondence
Com
pliance and Enforcem
ent of Grease
Interceptors (GIs) should be included in the
LWM
P, including the registration of every
location with a G
I, annual logging of the num
ber and size of each GI, required m
onthly m
aintenance and servicing of all GIs, increased
enforcement, a required log of all services
performed, a registration/renew
al charge for each G
I (creating a revenue source for MV
).
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
120 P
ublic C
orrespondence E
xamine alternatives for regulatory com
pliance softw
are that would require G
I service com
panies to report servicing on behalf of GI
waste generators and provide a servicing data
base to assist enforcement officers in their
compliance program
.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-49
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
16
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 121
Public
Correspondence
Resolve the persistent and costly Inflow
and Infiltration (I&
I) issue by embracing policy and
legal tools that enable municipalities to
implem
ent timely and appropriate m
easures on private property.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
122 P
ublic C
orrespondence P
rovide both the financial incentives and enforcem
ent resources that will ensure
effective source control in the industrial-com
mercial-institutional sector; the region can
protect the environment by preventing the
introduction of fire retardants and endocrine disruptors; and reduce sew
er system costs by
intercepting fats, oils and greases.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
123 P
ublic C
orrespondence The N
orth Shore does not have com
bined sew
ers; why is there no m
ention in the draft LW
MP
of a plan for municipalities to reduce
rainwater and storm
water infiltrating into the
sewer system
?
This has been addressed by Strategy 1.1 w
hich contains actions to reduce rainw
ater and groundwater infiltration
into sanitary sewers.
124 P
ublic C
orrespondence R
ainwater and storm
water m
anagement should
be left up to the municipalities; they are aw
are of area-specific concerns and are m
ore proactive since the S
eymour S
lide in 2005.
Com
ment noted. U
nder the LWM
P, m
unicipalities will
continue their mandate to provide storm
water and
rainwater m
anagement services.
Strategy 1.2: Reduce w
et weather overflow
s (Strategy #2 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 125
Feedback Form
Consider the potential destructive im
pact of C
ombined S
ewer O
verflows (C
SO
s) in the north arm
of the Fraser River
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.2 in the LW
MP
.
126 Feedback Form
C
onsider the environmental costs of adhering
to the current 1% per year replacem
ent strategy for C
SO
upgrades.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.2 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-50
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
17
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 127
Feedback Form
Where is the data to justify the current 1%
per year replacem
ent strategy for CS
O upgrades?
In the 1970s, the City of V
ancouver established a policy that it w
ould separate its combined sew
ers at average rate of 1%
per year corresponding best practice rate for sewer
renewal. E
nvironmental studies directed at the C
SO
s have been ongoing since the 1990s.
128 M
eeting Notes
Support given for sew
er updates as soon as possible, regardless of the cost.
Com
ment noted.
129 M
eeting Notes
Inquired about Bentley S
treet and Heather
Street discharging m
assive amounts of oil into
the Fraser River.
By 2050 w
e will be elim
inating those. Fraser River studies
confirmed no N
orth Arm
impacts from
CS
Os.
130 M
eeting Notes
18 connections are still being used by industry in the N
orth Arm
of the Fraser; request made
that the LWM
P deal w
ith this problem that is
affecting juvenile salmon.
By 2050 w
e will be elim
inating those. Fraser River studies
confirmed no N
orth Arm
impacts from
CS
Os.
131 M
eeting Notes
Move m
ore quickly on the issue of CS
Os and
illegal dumping in the north arm
of the Fraser im
mediately, not in 25 years.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.2 in the LW
MP
.
132 M
eeting Notes
Is MV
considering opportunities to coordinate the C
SO
replacement schedule w
ith other construction projects?
Yes, w
e look at opportunities and coordinate with the
streets division.
133 M
eeting Notes
Would the C
SO
replacement schedule occur
more quickly if m
ore funds were available?
The current sewer separation rate requires 3-4 dedicated
fulltime crew
s renewing the sew
ers. Increased efforts w
ould require more resources and also have m
ore roads and neighbours disrupted at any given tim
e. 134
Meeting N
otes R
equest for clarification that the proposed tim
eline for CS
O upgrades is no m
ore am
bitious than what is required.
The timeline for C
SO
elimination has been set taking into
account financial resources and logistics to separate the legacy com
bined sewers.
SDD-51
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
18
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 135
Meeting N
otes To w
hat degree are CS
Os a contributor to the
most sensitive w
ater bodies? D
ue to the complexity of non-point source pollutants, the
cumulative effects of C
SO
are instead assessed on the receiving environm
ent around CS
O locations. The
Environm
ental Monitoring C
omm
ittee (EM
C) and the
Fraser River E
stuary Managem
ent Plan (FR
EM
P) track
indicators for the receiving environments.
136 M
eeting Notes
What other C
SO
issues, with regard to
contaminants, should be considered?
Improving the understanding of the effects of storm
water
runoff for both separated sewers and com
bined sewer
systems is being considered.
137 M
eeting Notes
What is the potential for the sanitary sew
er to leak into the w
ater table? The potential for sew
age exfiltrating the pipes is low given
that gravity sewers are not pressurized, w
ith groundwater
more com
monly infiltrating into the sew
ers. 138
Public
Correspondence
Concerns over the m
ixing of rainwater and
sewage in the com
bined sewage system
s. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.2 in the LWM
P.
139 P
ublic C
orrespondence C
SO
s are a considerable source of pollution w
hen discharged during storm events.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.2 in the LW
MP
. 140
Public
Correspondence
Com
bined sewer system
s likely make it difficult
to apply advanced sewage treatm
ent technology due to higher fluctuations in daily flow
from rainw
ater.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.2 in the LW
MP
.
141 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
upport sewer separation being com
pleted in a tim
ely manner.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.2 in the LW
MP
. 142
Public
Correspondence
The separation of combined sew
ers will be
costly and should be shared with federal and
provincial funding, local government taxes and
development cost charges.
Com
ment noted.
Strategy 1.3: Reduce environm
ental impacts from
liquid waste m
anagement to a m
inimum
(Strategy #3 in March 2009 D
raft LW
MP)
143 Feedback Form
P
rovide information on the volum
e of primary
treated sewage em
issions over the last 3 – 4 decades.
The WW
TP in the V
ancouver and North S
hore sewerage
areas respectively discharge on average 580 megalitres
per day and 90 megalitres per day of treated effluent.
SDD-52
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
19
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 144
Feedback Form
Provide inform
ation on the breakdown of
contents, masses of toxic com
pounds and heavy m
etals emitted yearly from
the WW
TPs.
Characterization of the treated effluent discharged from
the treatm
ent plants can be obtained through the Metro
Vancouver H
arry Lash Library. 145
Feedback Form
Reduce liquid w
aste by: reducing the energy requirem
ents of treatment plants by 50%
relative to a conventional plant; reducing the land foot print to 30%
of a conventional plant, and; by lim
iting chemical consum
ption, and producing less sludge and odour.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. The LWM
P contains an action to
provide secondary level wastew
ater treatment.
146 Feedback Form
U
pdate the Iona and North S
hore wastew
ater plants by 2020 using the best possible technology.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. The LWM
P contains an action to
provide secondary level wastew
ater treatment.
147 Feedback Form
E
xercise precaution; current instruments used
to measure the im
pact of dumping prim
ary-treated effluent are not sufficient.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
148 Feedback Form
Iona m
ust be converted to secondary treatment
by at least 2020 due to the greater volume of
effluent discharged into a more sensitive
marine environm
ent, when com
pared with
Lions Gate.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. The LWM
P contains an action to
provide secondary level wastew
ater treatment.
149 Feedback Form
Iona m
ust be converted to secondary treatment
by at least 2020 as it currently receives the least treatm
ent; the plant is by-passed when it
rains.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. The LWM
P contains an action to
provide secondary level wastew
ater treatment.
150 Feedback Form
C
onsider land acquisition as well as the
distance between and location of the
discharging stations when upgrading the
WW
TPs.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
151 Feedback Form
C
ost is the greatest challenge for upgrading the W
WTP
s. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.3 in the LWM
P. C
ost sharing will be sought by M
V and
municipalities from
both senior levels of government.
SDD-53
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
20
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 152
Feedback Form
Are better treatm
ent options available that are not currently identified in the LW
MP
? The LW
MP
does not identify treatment specific options,
but a process of monitoring, assessm
ent and response to protect the environm
ent and public health Strategy 1.3.
153 Feedback Form
U
pgrades to secondary treatment should be
combined w
ith an upgrade to tertiary treatment.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. 154
Feedback Form
Consider the challenges presented by a
growing population w
hen considering upgrades to the W
WTP
s.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
155 Feedback Form
R
educe the amount of liquid w
aste so that the current capacity is sufficient for another 10 years; conduct upgrades to the W
WTP
s after 10 years have passed, w
hen technology has becom
e more advanced.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
156 Feedback Form
P
olitics is the biggest challenge involved in updating the W
WTP
s. C
omm
ent noted.
157 Feedback Form
S
upport accelerating timeline for updates due
to the current low interest rates and high
economic-stim
ulus spending in construction.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. The LWM
P contains an action to
provide secondary level wastew
ater treatment.
158 Feedback Form
S
upport for 2020 timeline on both W
WTP
s regardless of an increase in cost for residents.
Com
ment noted. The Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan
(LWM
P) contains an action to provide secondary level
wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and V
ancouver sew
erage areas. Based on the C
anada-wide S
trategy for the M
anagement of M
unicipal Wastew
ater Effluent (C
WS
-M
MW
E), Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year
timeline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
159 Feedback Form
The m
ain challenges for updating the WW
TPs
are funding and cost-sharing. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.3 in the LWM
P. C
ost sharing will be sought by M
V and
municipalities from
both senior levels of government.
160 Feedback Form
C
onsider newer designs for the new
North
Shore W
WTP
; opportunity to reduce the visual and aesthetic im
pact of the plant by blending w
ith the neighbourhood.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-54
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
21
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 161
Feedback Form
The new N
orth Shore W
WTP
should not have a negative im
pact on the comm
unity, such as odour or noise.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
162 Feedback Form
W
hy is tertiary treatment not being pursued as
an option? Tertiary treatm
ent does not necessarily provide better w
astewater treatm
ent; it is a term that usually refers to
nutrient removal processes. N
utrients have not been identified to be a concern.
163 Feedback Form
H
ow close to shore are w
aste effluents currently being discharged; how
far from shore
could/should these waste effluents be
discharged?
Outfalls are located to obtain dispersion of the treated
effluent through submerged diffuser outfalls. D
istances offshore vary from
100’s of metres to several kilom
etres.
164 Feedback Form
C
onsider future ability to upgrade the WW
TPs.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. 165
Feedback Form
Explain the process of upgrades to the W
WTP
s from
now until 2020.
We are doing conceptual design plans in conjunction w
ith integrated resource recovery business cases. The com
plete design process will be up to 18 m
onths, and construction 3-4 years. P
ublic consultation will parallel the
technical process. 166
Meeting N
otes C
oncern expressed that the three timelines for
WW
TP upgrades are a result of placing
responsibility on senior levels of government.
Cost sharing w
ill be sought by MV
and municipalities from
both senior levels of governm
ent.
167 M
eeting Notes
Suggestion m
ade that MV
put forward a
timeline for W
WTP
upgrades that the public desires; let accountability lay w
ith senior governm
ent to confirm support and funding.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
. The LWM
P contains an action to
provide secondary level wastew
ater treatment.
168 M
eeting Notes
Suggestion m
ade that the timeline for upgrades
to both Lions Gate and Iona be accelerated to
no later than 2020.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater treatm
ent for the North S
hore and V
ancouver sewerage areas. B
ased on the CW
S-
MM
WE
, Lions Gate should proceed w
ithin a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island within a 20-year tim
eline.
SDD-55
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
22
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 169
Meeting N
otes C
oncern expressed over a blunt set of environm
ental measures in regard to sew
age effluent and that triggers are based upon unsophisticated m
easures.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
170 M
eeting Notes
Concern expressed over how
tax payer money
is being spent; the Annacis Island W
WTP
is not w
orking well.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
171 M
eeting Notes
New
York and C
olumbia should be used as
role models for W
WTP
s; it should be possible to take a cup of w
ater at the outfall and drink it.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
172 M
eeting Notes
What has happened in term
s of increases in prim
ary treated sewage in the sam
e period and w
hat are the projections for the next 20-30 years? (R
eferenced graph illustrating the dram
atic drop of untreated sewage entering
coastal waters).
The volumes of prim
ary treated sewage have increased
primarily w
ith the North S
hore population (Vancouver’s
volumes are correlated to rainfall). O
ver the next 20-30 years these volum
es will drop to zero as the prim
ary plants are replaced w
ith secondary level treatment plants.
173 M
eeting Notes
With population grow
th and development have
we seen a great increase in sew
age that is prim
arily treated?
As population has grow
n, dry weather flow
s have increased in term
s of what is treated. H
owever, w
et w
eather flows have not changed as storm
water inflow
fills up the rem
aining treatment capacity.
174 M
eeting Notes
Based on research on C
olumbia and N
elson, M
V should consider tertiary treatm
ent due to em
erging contaminants.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
175 M
eeting Notes
What occurs after liquid w
aste is released into the environm
ent and solids disposed of? S
olids and biosolids are used in a digestion process to create biogas. M
ost are being land applied for mine
reclamation in the interior.
176 M
eeting Notes
Has M
V considered discharging the liquids that
result after plant treatment via pipeline into
open waters?
Currently w
e are discharging to a large body of water w
ith a sm
all flow. E
nvironmental assessm
ents conducted at the point of discharge, indicate the locations are appropriate.
177 M
eeting Notes
Does effluent flow
through sewer pipes
naturally or is it pumped discharge?
It moves by gravity. A
t the treatment plant, w
e lift sewage
high enough that it flows out.
SDD-56
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
23
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 178
Meeting N
otes C
ould a cable, similar to the large
telecomm
unications cables, be used for discharging effluent further out into the ocean?
It is high quality secondary effluent. It has not been deem
ed necessary to move the discharge location.
179 M
eeting Notes
Effluent w
ould carry some nitrogen and organic
material from
the treatment process, w
hich could be useful for organism
s in the ocean.
Nutrient levels in the G
eorgia Strait and Fraser R
iver are low
. On the W
est Coast, the nutrients released are
beneficial in some w
ays. 180
Meeting N
otes R
ichmond m
ade an effort to address the effluent going into the system
when the Lulu
Island WW
TP w
as first built; some com
panies w
ere given permission to use the system
.
Com
ment noted.
181 M
eeting Notes
Would it be useful to consider a W
WTP
in the southern region of M
V?
Siting decisions w
ill be finalized during the implem
entation phase of the LW
MP
. 182
Meeting N
otes A
WW
TP in the southern region of M
V could
utilize the resulting water for farm
land irrigation. C
omm
ent noted.
183 M
eeting Notes
Concern regarding the build-up of chem
icals in treatm
ent plants. Treatm
ent processes and substances entering the receiving environm
ent are structured so that the receiving environm
ent water quality objectives are m
et. Treatment
processes are matched to this.
184 M
eeting Notes
The treatment costs are different in each
sewerage area; is the [treated] w
ater quality the sam
e in all four regions on the output?
The plants on the Fraser treat to secondary levels and those that discharge in m
arine environments are using
primary treatm
ent levels. Those are being upgraded to secondary treatm
ent. 185
Meeting N
otes D
o any of the treatment plants currently use
bacteria? Y
es - all treatment processes use bacteria to digest.
186 M
eeting Notes
What is currently m
easured in the treatment
plants? M
V W
WTs have m
onitoring programs associated w
ith them
, including measurem
ent of biochemical oxygen
demand (B
OD
), total suspended solids (TSS
) and num
erous chemical param
eters. 187
Meeting N
otes A
laska has recently changed amm
onia levels to 2.9 m
illigrams.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
references Canadian
regulations and continues to use a “Cautions, W
arning and Triggers” approach to assess environm
ental impacts.
SDD-57
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
24
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 188
Meeting N
otes C
ruise ships are adding nitrifying bacteria to reduce am
monia levels.
Com
ment noted. There are various technologies available
to control amm
onia levels in Strategy 3.3.
189 M
eeting Notes
Are there any m
unicipalities that have achieved zero [liquid] w
aste that could be looked to as exam
ples for MV
?
No. There are som
e very arid cities where extensive
water reclam
ation systems have been built.
190 M
eeting Notes
Tertiary systems are effective and there are
many exam
ples of where M
V should be in
regard to their sewage system
s.
Com
ment noted. This com
ment is addressed by
Strategies 1.3 and 3.3.
191 M
eeting Notes
It is shocking that MV
is looking at 2030 as a tim
eline for upgrades to the WW
TPs, w
hen it w
as in Vancouver that B
ob Hunter started an
environmental m
ovement.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
192 M
eeting Notes
Privatization of W
WTP
s would lead to unions
feeling that their jobs are threatened. C
omm
ent noted. Ow
nership and corporate structures are not part of the LW
MP
; rather they are MV
Board (elected
officials) policy decisions. 193
Meeting N
otes W
here is MV
in terms of actual com
mitm
ent to m
oving forward on sustainability, innovation
and resource recovery for the WW
TPs?
Strategy 3.2 includes the use of innovative approaches
and technology and Strategy 2.1 includes the
development of business cases for each sew
erage area. 194
Meeting N
otes W
ill the Langley WW
TP be enlarged to sustain
trucked liquid waste?
We handle our trucked liquid w
aste at the two largest
plants. With the Langley plant there w
ould be odour issues, and for the foreseeable future it w
ill be just the two
largest plants. 195
Meeting N
otes A
2030 timeline is too slow
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
1.3 in the LWM
P. The LW
MP
contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater treatm
ent. 196
Meeting N
otes R
eference made to new
federal regulation on sew
age mandating that secondary treatm
ent be achieved in 10 years. W
ould MV
be in violation if secondary treatm
ent is not achieved in 10 years?
The LWM
P is aligned to this federal strategy.
197 M
eeting Notes
Does the Iona W
WTP
discharge directly into the ocean?
It discharges into “open marine”. M
V uses the provincial
definitions regarding “open marine”.
SDD-58
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
25
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 198
Meeting N
otes H
as MV
conducted studies regarding contam
ination occurring as a result of outfall from
the WW
TPs?
Extensive m
onitoring programs have been done around
outfalls since the 1980s. The Environm
ental Monitoring
Com
mittee (E
MC
) has and continues to review those
programs.
199 M
eeting Notes
Support the V
ictoria model of sludge entering
the water as preferable to sludge going to
farms.
Com
ment noted.
200 M
eeting Notes
Is MV
considering using salt water in the
sewage system
s like in Hong K
ong? There are no salt w
ater systems in M
V for residential or
comm
ercial use. 201
Meeting N
otes The C
ity of Vancouver has a salt w
ater sewer
system ready for im
plementation.
Vancouver has a saltw
ater fire fighting system for m
ajor em
ergencies. 202
Public
Correspondence
Increase the price of water to include the cost
associated with w
astewater treatm
ent and the required upgrades to the W
WTP
s.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
203 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
ewage treatm
ent provides an excellent opportunity for M
V to take a m
ore sustainable approach to regional planning.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
204 P
ublic C
orrespondence P
rovide more inform
ation at public meetings to
inspire the public to support innovative technologies for w
astewater treatm
ent.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
205 P
ublic C
orrespondence P
rovide more inform
ation regarding the presence of endocrine disrupters and other chem
icals in sewage and w
hat types of treatm
ent might rem
ove these compounds.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
206 P
ublic C
orrespondence P
rovide more inform
ation on how M
V’s treated
sewage com
pares with that of other regions
across Canada; this w
ould likely increase public support for W
WTP
upgrades.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-59
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
26
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 207
Public
Correspondence
Expressed doubt that upgrading the Iona and
Lions Gate treatm
ent plants to secondary treatm
ent is the correct decision given the num
ber of new technologies that are now
available.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
208 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
re there any advanced sewage treatm
ents that m
ight preclude the installation of secondary treatm
ent?
Secondary treatm
ent refers to the use of biological processes to rem
ove pollutants. Som
e technologies such as m
embrane filters treat w
astewater w
ithout relying on biological processes.
209 P
ublic C
orrespondence D
istributed sewage treatm
ent systems, rather
than a few large sew
age treatment plants
would provide greater options for new
technologies; assurances w
ould still need to be m
ade that monitoring and treatm
ent would be
adequate.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
210 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11: New
marina pum
p-outs must be
‘readily accessible to all vessels;” there are currently m
arinas with pum
p-out that are not accessible, this needs to be explicit in the LW
MP
.
Com
ment noted.
211 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11.3: Language should say ‘actively encourage representative m
arinas in MV
to install pum
p-outs.”
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
212 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11.3: If there are several marinas in an
area, it might not be necessary for each to
have a marina pum
p-out, as long as the marina
pump-outs available can service the vessel
traffic in that area.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-60
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
27
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 213
Public
Correspondence
Action 11.3: N
eed incentives and methods to
encourage installing marina pum
p-outs; marina
pump-outs are expensive and federal
regulation does not mandate their installation,
therefore these mechanism
s require more
discussion and the region must assist in
providing marina pum
p-out services to all boaters.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
214 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11: Marina pum
p-outs need to be accessible to the public; currently, som
e m
arinas do not allow public access to their
marina pum
p-outs but rather only to their m
embers or to those w
ho are moored there.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
215 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11: The parenthesis be removed w
hich refers to 50%
of the value of upgrades; this figure is vague and could be used as a m
eans to avoid putting in m
arina pump-outs during
upgrades.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
216 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11.1: By only discussing new
and renovated m
arinas, the LWM
P lim
its the likelihood of getting enough m
arina pump-outs
installed; consider annual goals for installing m
arina pump-outs so that w
ithin the next three years there are enough in the region to service boaters.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
217 P
ublic C
orrespondence A
ction 11: Clarify w
hy the Ministry w
ould need to be advised of barriers to installing m
arina pum
p-outs; this point insinuates a means to
find reasons not to install marina pum
p-outs. In reality, there should not be any barriers to stop the upgrades.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-61
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
28
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 218
Public
Correspondence
Action 11: There should be no potential barriers
in place to prevent the upgrades of marina
pump-outs.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 1.3 in the LW
MP
.
219 P
ublic C
orrespondence W
hy is the Lions Gate W
WTP
not being upgraded to secondary treatm
ent? This W
WTP
has been identified for upgrade by 2020. P
reliminary engineering has begun.
220 P
ublic C
orrespondence If rainw
ater and stormw
ater infiltrating into the sew
er system is elim
inated, the Lions Gate
WW
TP has capacity to handle N
orth Shore
sewage for som
e time; a new
WW
TP w
ill not solve the infiltration problem
.
Com
ment noted. Infiltration and inflow
is being addressed as part of the plan.
221 P
ublic C
orrespondence W
ith the new technology available, is a single
WW
TP on the N
orth Shore the best option?
Strategy 2.1 w
ill examine technologies and determ
ine w
hich options are best for the North S
hore; a single treatm
ent plant or smaller distributed plants.
222 P
ublic C
orrespondence Is it possible for each m
unicipality to have its ow
n WW
TP and control its ow
n costs? S
trategy 2.1 will determ
ine which options are m
ost beneficial for the N
orth Shore m
unicipalities; a single treatm
ent plant or smaller distributed plants.
223 P
ublic C
orrespondence W
ould multiple W
WTP
s in each municipality
give a better option for resource recovery? S
trategy 2.1 will determ
ine which options are best for the
North S
hore resource recovery; a single treatment plant or
smaller distributed plants.
Strategy 2.1: Pursue liquid waste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context (Strategy #6 and 8 in M
arch 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 224
Feedback Form
Support given to the production of phosphorus
as a by-product of resource recovery. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
225 Feedback Form
M
V m
ust ensure that solids are properly filtered from
liquids, that solids are dried accordingly and that solids are used as products for new
m
arket applications.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
226 Feedback Form
M
V m
ust ensure that no contaminants enter
into the food chain, such as chemicals,
pharmaceuticals and horm
ones through resource recovery.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-62
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
29
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 227
Feedback Form
Suggestion that bio-gases and fertilizer be
created as a by-product of the Wastew
ater Treatm
ent Plants (W
WTP
s).
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
228 Feedback Form
M
V should focus on recovering as m
uch energy as possible through the W
WTP
s. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
229 Feedback Form
M
V should m
ove towards zero w
aste treatment
and 100% resource recovery as soon as
possible.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
230 Feedback Form
S
uggestion made that M
V consider using
waste liquid and solids as feedstock for deep
sea organisms.
Com
ment noted.
231 Feedback Form
Is the generation of biogas for energy a sensible pursuit?
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 232
Feedback Form
Suggestion m
ade that manures be created as a
by-product of the WW
TPs, w
hich could be used to replenish soils in the interior of B
ritish C
olumbia.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
233 Feedback Form
M
V should exercise caution w
hen recovering m
aterials from w
aste due to toxicity concerns. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
234 Feedback Form
P
roducing water from
wastew
ater seems to be
cost inefficient. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
235 Feedback Form
W
ater and energy are inexpensive in MV
; resource recovery should be m
anaged with an
eye towards future build-out w
hile mitigating
the short-term costs of developm
ent.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
236 Feedback Form
C
onsider collecting sewage w
ater, evaporating it and using the rem
ains as fertilizer. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
237 Feedback Form
R
ecognize dangers of toxic waste and heavy
metal accum
ulation with regard to resource
recovery.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-63
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
30
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 238
Meeting N
otes P
leased with support for A
ction 20 that has been dem
onstrated: recover energy from liquid
waste and biosolids.
Com
ment noted.
239 M
eeting Notes
Effluent from
treatment plants should be
considered as a nutrient to feed existing resources, such as m
icroalgae, bacteria and fish.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
240 M
eeting Notes
The application of waste residuals in fisheries
is important w
hen considering options for resource recovery.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
241 M
eeting Notes
River w
ater is utilized in the farming com
munity
as much as possible; farm
ers are discouraged from
using potable water as there are
competing needs for w
ater.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
242 M
eeting Notes
Storm
sewer w
ater should be used in agriculture; the fresh w
ater is no longer as deep in the Fraser R
iver resulting in salt water
coming through farm
ers pumps.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
243 M
eeting Notes
Likely by-products of resource recovery are biogas or solids that could be used as fertilizers.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
244 M
eeting Notes
What is a potential negative by-product of
resource recovery? E
ffluent discharges and solids recovery have regulated standards. These requirem
ents are being comfortably
met. A
dditional research is being conducted by MV
and its partners.
245 M
eeting Notes
In som
e situations urban and industrial waste
mix; is there a surplus of w
aste not being used for biogas or fertilizer?
We have an extensive source control program
and bylaw.
A C
anada-wide strategy also provides directions. They
limit w
hat industry can discharge to the system, w
ith the purpose of protecting the environm
ent. 246
Meeting N
otes If there is a surplus of w
aste not being used for biogas or fertilizer, w
hat is the quantity? If it is non-toxic, can it be placed in the ocean?
Ocean disposal of biosolids is not a beneficial use of a
resource. It has been banned.
SDD-64
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
31
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 247
Meeting N
otes W
ould it be possible to incorporate wastew
ater into usage for agriculture?
Water can be collected locally from
the stormw
ater system
. There is not a lot of irrigation water that does not
come from
that system.
248 M
eeting Notes
What form
is phosphorus in when it is produced
as a result of resource recovery? In som
e processes it is used directly as a slow release,
non-burning fertilizer (5-28-0). 249
Meeting N
otes W
hat is the situation regarding contaminants in
resource recovery? This depends on the technology used and quality needs for the resource reuse.
250 M
eeting Notes
If contaminants w
ere present in products of resource recovery, it w
ould cause a problem.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 251
Meeting N
otes A
re any projects currently focused on energy recovery from
sewers?
A study is underw
ay for effluent extraction from the
Annacis Island W
WTP
s. Other specific projects are being
considered. 252
Meeting N
otes P
ipes close to Delta C
ity Hall, as w
ell as at a nearby sports com
plex would be ideal locations
for tapping into sewer heat.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
253 M
eeting Notes
There is a business case for converting liquid w
aste into hydrogen. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
254 M
eeting Notes
Are innovations, such as converting w
aste into hydrogen, being considered sufficiently by M
V?
Strategies 2.1 and 3.2 explore Integrated R
esource R
ecovery (IRR
), innovative approaches and technologies. 255
Meeting N
otes E
urope is currently using and applying heat and biogas recovery; secondary treatm
ent was
dictated over a decade ago.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
256 M
eeting Notes
Solids obtained from
liquid waste should be
dried, turned into energy to dry solids or turned into fertilizer and then sold to other production plants as fuel.
There are some quantities of sludge turned into biosolids
through the digestion process and are used for land reclam
ation. We are also pursuing their use as a fuel.
257 M
eeting Notes
Does M
V have a w
ay to remove the paint,
heavy metals and pharm
aceuticals from the
biosolids that are produced?
Source control program
s are the most effective m
eans to protect the quality characteristics of biosolids. Treating biosolids to rem
ove contaminants is im
practical. 258
Meeting N
otes B
iosolids can poison farmlands w
hen they are sprayed onto fields.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-65
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
32
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 259
Meeting N
otes S
upport LWM
P’s consideration of creative
options for resource recovery. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
260 M
eeting Notes
Consider ideas, such as anaerobic digestion to
fuel taxis and buses, in a more com
prehensive m
anner.
Strategy 2.1 com
mits to recovering energy, nutrients and
water from
liquid waste.
261 M
eeting Notes
Is evaporating waste w
ater being considered as a possibility for resource recovery?
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R business
cases for each sewerage area.
262 M
eeting Notes
Is MV
considering producing water from
waste
water effluent?
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R business
cases for each sewerage area.
263 M
eeting Notes
What are the opportunities for pow
er generation from
storm sew
ers? The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. 264
Public
Correspondence
Com
bine solid and liquid waste for use in
waste-to-energy (W
TE) plants.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 265
Public
Correspondence
Opposed to the developm
ent of WTE
plants. C
omm
ent noted. This is part of the Solid W
aste plan, and is not addressed under the LW
MP
. 266
Public
Correspondence
Opposed to the proposed garbage gasification
plant in Port M
oody. C
omm
ent noted. This is part of the Solid W
aste plan and is not addressed under the LW
MP
. 267
Public
Correspondence
Solid w
aste is a very heterogeneous mix of
materials som
e of which cannot be incinerated
or gasified without creating hazardous
chemicals including dioxins.
Com
ment noted. This is part of the S
olid Waste plan and
is not addressed under the LWM
P.
268 P
ublic C
orrespondence W
hile it may be appropriate to use liquid w
aste for W
TE purposes, it w
ould be inappropriate to use solid w
aste as well.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
269 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
olid waste should be subject to m
ore stringent recycling and re-use program
s rather than being destroyed to create energy.
Com
ment noted. This is part of the S
olid Waste plan and
is not addressed under the LWM
P.
270 P
ublic C
orrespondence C
omm
ent made that m
ore energy is wasted
when products are not reused in com
parison to using those products to generate energy.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-66
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
33
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 271
Public
Correspondence
Investigate any proposal to use liquid waste to
create energy; these investigations should be conducted in a transparent m
anner and engage the public in consultation.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
272 P
ublic C
orrespondence H
eat recovery from liquid w
aste should become
a standard application whenever possible.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 273
Public
Correspondence
The use of grey water for law
n watering and
flushing toilets should be investigated and incorporated into planning for new
developm
ents.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
274 P
ublic C
orrespondence E
xplore how sew
age is being used in Norw
ay to create biofuels for public buses.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 275
Public
Correspondence
Encourage greater re-use of rainw
ater. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
276 Feedback Form
S
upport MV
’s proposed actions for IRR
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
277 Feedback Form
R
educing usage is more im
portant than IRR
in regard to liquid w
aste managem
ent. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
278 Feedback Form
C
osts and funding are the key concerns in regard to IR
R.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 279
Feedback Form
Prioritize the use of roof gardens in plans for
IRR
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
280 Feedback Form
O
pinion expressed that timelines for IR
R w
ill take longer than projected.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
. 281
Feedback Form
Many of the strategies for IR
R w
ill involve research, identification and developm
ent of new
technologies and processes, likely resulting in a long tim
eline for implem
entation.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
282 Feedback Form
IR
R should be evaluated in the context of each
individual treatment facility; reclaim
ing water at
the Lions Gate facility w
ould not be as param
ount as at other facilities.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-67
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
34
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 283
Feedback Form
The emphasis in the draft LW
MP
on IRR
and the harvesting of w
aste for energy and income
is promising.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
284 M
eeting Notes
Generating energy is im
portant when
considering IRR
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
285 M
eeting Notes
What process does M
V use w
hen considering options for IR
R?
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R business
cases for each sewerage area.
286 M
eeting Notes
What is the estim
ated revenue currently generated by IR
R at the W
WTP
s? It is probably offsetting half of the energy cost. It is m
any m
illions of dollars annually in costs that would otherw
ise have to be levied and put on taxpayers.
287 M
eeting Notes
M
V w
ill soon be facing major environm
ental im
pacts; the timeline for upgrades m
ust be accelerated and technology for IR
R utilized.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
288 M
eeting Notes
Recognize the im
provement in the draft LW
MP
w
ith regard to IRR
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
289 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
upport an approach to liquid waste w
hich will
include a greater focus on IRR
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
290 P
ublic C
orrespondence P
rovide clarification at public meetings as to
what w
ould be entailed in taking an IRR
approach to w
astewater m
anagement and w
hat the options are in regard to specific technologies.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
291 P
ublic C
orrespondence P
rovide residents with m
ore information
regarding the pros and cons of IRR
. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
2.1 in the LWM
P.
292 P
ublic C
orrespondence R
esource recovery must have a positive
benefit; it is only beneficial if there is a local use for the recovered m
aterials that does not require storage or long-distance transportation.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
293 P
ublic C
orrespondence The recovery of m
aterial at an added cost, w
hich could otherwise be disposed of safely,
must not create other environm
ental impacts
through distribution for use.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-68
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
35
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 294
Public
Correspondence
Strategy 8: A
ssess the business case for IRR
before proceeding w
ith the engineering for replacem
ent treatment plants in the N
orth S
hore and Vancouver S
ewerage A
reas: if the region is to truly achieve the S
ustainable R
egion vision, then the IRR
philosophy must be
at the heart of the system and facility planning
process, not an add-on.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
295 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
trategy 8: Implem
ent a consistent region-wide
approach to neighbourhood (re)development
and building design that integrates rainwater
managem
ent, green infrastructure and IRR
; m
unicipalities will have to provide guidance as
to how w
atershed-specific targets established through Integrated R
ainwater M
anagement
Plans can be m
et at the development scale.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 2.1 in the LW
MP
.
Strategy 3.1: Manage assets and optim
ize existing sanitary sewerage operations (Strategy #4 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
296 Feedback Form
S
upport planning for the cost of future m
aintenance and upgrades as recognized in A
ction 16.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.1 in the LW
MP
.
297 M
eeting Notes
Pleased w
ith the public and political support dem
onstrated for Goal 2.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.1 in the LW
MP
. 298
Meeting N
otes W
hat is the optimal pipe density and height for
sustainable infrastructure and sewage?
This is not known.
299 M
eeting Notes
How
many toilets are there in a fifty storey
building? If several 50-storey buildings are built on one street, w
hat is the impact on
capacity? Is there an optimal density for the
City of V
ancouver?
This is a municipal policy decision on balancing zoning
and infrastructure capacity. The sewers have the capacity
to handle the buildings as they are proposed now.
SDD-69
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
36
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 300
Meeting N
otes Is the sensitivity of the receiving environm
ent considered w
hen deciding what action to take
next in regard to upgrading waste m
anagement
infrastructure?
Environm
ental monitoring (S
trategy 3.3) is used to inform
the setting of priorities (Strategy 1.3).
Strategy 3.2: Use innovative approaches and technologies (Strategy #5 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
301 Feedback Form
P
rovide more inform
ation about innovative options for liquid w
aste managem
ent. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
3.2 in the LWM
P.
302 Feedback Form
Increase the num
ber of innovative solutions to liquid w
aste managem
ent being put forward.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.2 in the LW
MP
. 303
Feedback Form
Candidate innovative technologies should
compete on m
erit. Many are excluded from
consideration by criteria such as: "M
ust have at least three local reference sites of the sam
e scale."
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.2 in the LW
MP
.
304 Feedback Form
M
any new innovative technologies that could
potentially be integrated into the LWM
P,
receive only cursory evaluation due to unfam
iliarity with the technology on the part of
the consultants and a bias towards traditional
designs. This issue could be remedied by
allocating points for "local" technology content; ensuring local technologies receive the sam
e due diligence as their conventional counterparts; and by reducing barriers to entry.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.2 in the LW
MP
.
305 M
eeting Notes
The technology for innovative treatment exists;
political reasons hinder their implem
entation. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
3.2 in the LWM
P.
306 M
eeting Notes
There are innovative strategies available that M
V refuses to use.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.2 in the LW
MP
. 307
Meeting N
otes P
leased with the innovations m
ade by the City
of Surrey.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-70
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
37
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 3.3: M
onitor the performance of liquid w
aste system im
pacts on the receiving environment (Strategy #7 in M
arch 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 308
Meeting N
otes W
hat is MV
’s monitoring com
mittee doing w
ith regard to the issue of reactive nitrogen?
Environm
ent Canada has guidelines on nitrogen, and
primarily in the am
monia form
. Metro V
ancouver does not exceed the nitrogen guidelines at any of our W
astewater
Treatment P
lants (WW
TPs).
309 M
eeting Notes
More testing required for em
erging wastew
ater contam
inants such as coffee and shampoo.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.3 in the LW
MP
. 310
Meeting N
otes A
re there triggers and testing in place for [storm
] water collection and run-off to indicate if
clean-up is required?
Storm
water is a non-point source pollutant. Integrated
stormw
ater managem
ent plan (ISM
P) processes are
expected to quantify and address this (Strategy 3.4).
311 M
eeting Notes
Does the public have access to the w
ater quality of ponds? C
oncern expressed over w
hat flows into the w
ater quality ponds; are there security m
easures to prevent people from
falling into them? W
hat becomes of the w
ater after it leaves the w
ater quality ponds?
The ponds are intended to be constructed within a
neighbourhood setting next to a forest or riparian area, w
ith a gentle slope and natural landscaping. A program
to m
onitor water quality in the ponds to assess the
effectiveness is underway. C
leaning the ponds requires sedim
ent settling from run-off, and then any contam
inants w
ould be cleaned out and treated as a special waste.
All w
ater quality ponds would discharge to creeks and
streams w
hich are fish habitat. The first ones just came on
line this yea. In a year or two w
e will know
if it is an effective strategy to protect our stream
s and creeks. 312
Meeting N
otes S
urrey and Langley should increase the am
ount of monitoring and treatm
ent in general, not just for w
astewater.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.3 in the LW
MP
.
313 M
eeting Notes
Why is only w
ater quality being monitored and
not concentrations of things like heavy metals
and pesticide residues?
Studies have been undertaken and IS
MP
s also identify w
hich parameters need to be m
onitored.
314 M
eeting Notes
Pesticide residues are reaching levels that are
harmful to fish.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.3 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-71
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
38
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 315
Meeting N
otes M
unicipalities should explore additional water
quality indicators, not just PH
and temperature.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.3 in the LW
MP
. Strategy 3.4: Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term
needs (Strategy #8 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 316
Feedback Form
Too many trees have been cut dow
n and too m
uch development has occurred in B
urnaby in order to m
anage rainwater and storm
water.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
317 Feedback From
B
urnaby has a poor record in regard to storm
water, for exam
ple, by building too close to S
till Creek. S
till Creek cannot handle the
rain-fall at high levels.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
318 Feedback Form
P
leased with the initiatives M
V has taken on
stormw
ater. C
omm
ent noted.
319 Feedback Form
B
uild using permeable surfaces.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
. 320
Feedback Form
Filters should be placed in stormw
ater pipes to help clean out contam
inants and/or sediment
so that streams can be m
aintained.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
321 Feedback Form
P
rioritize public health and public safety when
considering stormw
ater managem
ent. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
3.4 in the LWM
P.
322 M
eeting Notes
Storm
water contains m
any contaminants; w
hat level of treatm
ent does stormw
ater receive before it goes back into stream
s and rivers?
Historically, very little. S
tormw
ater runs off and enters stream
s. There are some requirem
ents on parking lots and separators to reduce destructive peak flow
s and im
prove water quality. S
trategy 1.1 emphasizes actions to
promote site level storm
water m
anagement to address
this concern and improve w
ater quality. 323
Meeting N
otes S
tormw
ater managem
ent practices have only been im
plemented in new
developments and
address localized alterations in the water
course.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
324 M
eeting Notes
Ninety per cent of the infrastructure does not
mitigate the storm
water flow
s to local streams;
the impact has not been reduced.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-72
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
39
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 325
Meeting N
otes W
ater run-off from roads should be treated.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
. 326
Meeting N
otes There is not enough funding available to im
plement treatm
ent infrastructure for storm
water.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
327 M
eeting Notes
Study the quality of surface run-off,
groundwater and storm
water before
considering the treatment of storm
water.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
328 M
eeting Notes
Som
e developed areas have bylaws in place
that require treatment of run-off, storm
water
and rainwater, by using an oil-separator.
Com
ment noted.
329 M
eeting Notes
A third storm
pipe for roof run-off, installed like a reverse w
ell, has been implem
ented as a pilot project in Langley.
Com
ment noted.
330 M
eeting Notes
Add an interim
step, prior to 2020 upgrades, to discuss introducing a filtration m
edium to storm
sew
ers that removes B
iochemical O
xygen D
emand (B
OD
), Chem
ical Oxygen D
emand
(CO
D) and heavy m
etals from the w
ater; this is a separate discussion from
primary and
secondary treatment discussions.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
331 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
tormw
ater managem
ent is a more sustainable
approach to regional planning. C
omm
ent noted. This has been addressed under Strategy
3.4 in the LWM
P.
332 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
upport increased efforts to return rainwater to
the ground, to create pervious areas in developed areas and to treat rainw
ater runoff to im
prove its water quality prior to discharge into
salmon-bearing w
ater courses.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
333 P
ublic C
orrespondence M
V plays a key role in developing rainw
ater m
anagement plans and providing leadership to
municipalities.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
SDD-73
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
40
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 334
Public
Correspondence
Strategy 8: R
e-focus Integrated Rainw
ater M
anagement P
lans on developing affordable and effective land use strategies that both green the urban landscape and im
prove w
atershed health; plans that do not integrate land use and drainage planning result in unaffordable drainage infrastructure budget item
s that become liabilities w
ithout offsetting stream
health benefits.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under S
trategy 3.4 in the LW
MP
.
Strategy 3.5: Use collaborative m
anagement to address evolving needs (A
daptive Managem
ent in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Financial Plan 335
Feedback Form
MV
’s strategy appears to be based on double rather than triple-bottom
line accounting. C
omm
ent noted. Metro V
ancouver takes a triple-bottom
line approach. 336
Feedback Form
What w
ill the outcomes be if funding from
senior governm
ent for upgrades to the W
astewater Treatm
ent Plants (W
WTP
s) does not com
e through?
Strategy 1.3 provides an overview
of MV
’s approach to liquid w
aste managem
ent. If cost sharing is not available from
senior governments, then M
V B
oard will decide how
to proceed.
337 Feedback Form
W
hat contingency plans does MV
have in place for funding of the upgrades to the W
WTP
? M
V is expecting cost sharing. If cost sharing is not
available from senior governm
ents, then MV
Board w
ill decide how
to proceed. 338
Feedback Form
Can the cost of the upgrades to the W
WTP
s be am
ortized over a large period to bring down
costs to the taxpayer?
The inter-generational equitability is less desirable as there are other m
ajor capital programs in w
ater, solid w
aste and liquid waste w
hich compete for the sam
e public funding.
339 Feedback Form
Lobby for am
endments to federal and
provincial tax sharing arrangements to ensure
that municipalities are better poised to handle
infrastructure costs such as the treatment plant
upgrades.
Com
ment noted.
340 Feedback Form
S
upport taxpayers paying more for faster and
better upgrades to WW
TPs.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-74
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
41
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 341
Feedback Form
If one billion dollars is being spent on security for the O
lympics an equivalent am
ount should be spent on upgrades to the W
WTP
s.
Com
ment noted.
342 Feedback Form
The provincial governm
ent should pay for upgrades to the Iona and Lions G
ate treatment
plants rather than spending 4 billion dollars to tw
in the Port M
ann Bridge.
Com
ment noted.
343 Feedback Form
C
onsider raising industry sewer fees to cover
the cost of upgrading the WW
TPs.
Com
ment noted.
344 Feedback Form
M
V m
ay find raising taxes becomes
problematic to accom
modate the cost of
upgrades to the WW
TPs.
Com
ment noted.
345 Feedback Form
N
eed provincial and federal governments to
assist in upgrading the WW
TPs.
Com
ment noted. S
trategy 1.3 contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater treatm
ent for the N
orth Shore and V
ancouver sewerage areas. B
ased on the C
anada-wide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of M
unicipal Wastew
ater Effluent (C
WS
-MM
WE
), Lions Gate
should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline, subject to the appropriate
financial arrangements being in place.
346 Feedback Form
C
onsider the possibility of escalating WW
TP
costs. C
omm
ent noted.
347 M
eeting Notes
Opposed to public/private partnerships (P
3s). C
omm
ent noted. 348
Meeting N
otes M
V does not receive a large am
ount of taxes; support paying taxes as they fund the construction of necessary infrastructure.
Com
ment noted.
349 M
eeting Notes
Will M
V consider a public/private partnership
considering that public projects often cost more
and run over schedule?
Under the current procedures, M
V w
ill consider public/private partnerships (P
3s) if beneficial.
350 M
eeting Notes
Cost sharing should be sought as a strategy to
overcome the dow
nturn in the economy.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-75
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
42
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 351
Meeting N
otes S
ewage costs per household w
ere shown at
8%; does that translate to $8,000 per year if an
individual earns $100,000 per year?
Approxim
ately 8% of our household incom
e funds all m
unicipal and MV
programs. M
V, m
unicipality and TransLink costs add up to 8%
of household income.
352 M
eeting Notes
What is M
V’s role in sharing the costs of
sewage treatm
ent and movem
ent between
municipalities, especially w
hen considering the great difference in sew
age treatment plants?
The region is divided into four sewerage regions; and
mem
ber municipalities share basic operating costs w
ithin their sew
erage area(s). For secondary treatment
upgrades, 70% of the costs are shared across all the
sewerage areas–am
ongst all the municipalities across the
region. 353
Meeting N
otes H
ow w
ill the cost of upgrading the WW
TPs
affect taxes? W
ith 2/3 senior government cost sharing, the current 8%
of household incom
e would pay for these program
s based on a m
edian scenario. 354
Meeting N
otes W
as the cost information provided in public
meeting presentations from
MV
’s point of view,
or was it referencing the costs of the treatm
ent plant?
The chart referenced costs of the treatment plant, and
costs coming from
MV
. It doesn’t include individual m
unicipal costs. The average household paid $300-350 annually for sew
er. 355
Meeting N
otes W
hat is the percentage of financial support given by each m
unicipality towards the cost of
the treatment plant upgrades?
The amount varies by the size of the m
unicipality and the size of the sew
erage area. All operating costs associated
with sew
age treatment plants stay in the sew
age area. O
perating costs of the project are significant. There are large infrastructure upgrade projects at treatm
ent plants (to the secondary portion of the plants). The form
ula breaks dow
n to 30% in the sew
erage area. Approxim
ately 70%
of the costs are shared. 356
Meeting N
otes W
ould the cost increases due to WW
TP
upgrades be different in each sewerage area?
Yes, as the costing form
ula allocates different amounts
within sew
erage areas and shares others region-wide.
357 M
eeting Notes
If public costs were to increase by $150, how
m
uch would be for operating costs of the
WW
TPs? W
hat would the rem
ainder cover?
About 40%
to 50% are operating costs – the rem
ainder is debt servicing. Large investm
ents will be debt financed.
SDD-76
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
43
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 358
Meeting N
otes R
equest for more clarification around cost-
sharing for the upgrades to the WW
TPs.
Strategy 1.3 contains an action to provide secondary level
wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and V
ancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions Gate
should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline, subject to the appropriate
financial arrangements being in place as indicated in the
Financial Plan.
359 M
eeting Notes
The fees in Vancouver are going up by 300%
; the upgrades in the Fraser S
ewerage A
rea have already been im
plemented and the costs
are higher than in Vancouver. R
esidents of the Fraser S
ewerage A
rea are paying the price of these upgrades and V
ancouver is not.
The MV
portion of the average utility bill is $150—about
half of the bill. The other half is what the m
unicipality needs to run its local sew
er system. The upgrades have
been made to A
nnacis Island—V
ancouver and North
Shore S
ewerage A
reas have contributed to cost sharing these upgrades.
360 M
eeting Notes
What stage is M
V at in their application to the
federal government to fund one third of the
WW
TP upgrades?
We have talked to them
about the funding programs,
including the current infrastructure program. They have
made it clear that this round is directed to transportation
improvem
ents. 361
Meeting N
otes W
hy is the North S
hore facing the highest increase in costs due to the upgrades to the W
WTP
s?
Both V
ancouver and the North S
hore Sew
erage Areas are
facing similar increases because the m
ajority of the upgrade costs are contained w
ithin the sewerage area as
set by the regional cost allocation formula. The sam
e form
ula was applied to the Fraser and Lulu Island
Sew
erage Areas in the 1990s w
hen these areas paid the m
ajority of the costs for upgrading the Lulu and Annacis
Island WW
TPs.
362 M
eeting Notes
Without governm
ent funding, the North S
hore has a projected 250%
increase per household due to the proposed upgrades to the W
WTP
s; w
ill an average household be paying $575 if no governm
ent funding is received?
It would increase to approxim
ately $525 per household.
SDD-77
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
44
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 363
Meeting N
otes W
ith or without governm
ent funding, the increase in cost to residents of the N
orth S
hore, as a result of the upgrades to the W
WTP
s seems excessive.
Com
ment noted.
364 M
eeting Notes
Would the new
North V
ancouver WW
TP be
paid for by North S
hore residents only, or are costs from
incremental expansions across the
region included?
Most of the costs w
ould be paid by the North S
hore S
ewerage A
rea, except a portion of the secondary treatm
ent plant upgrade which are shared region-w
ide—those over and above prim
ary treatment.
365 P
ublic C
orrespondence D
o not believe the public will support increased
taxes for improved sew
age treatment.
Com
ment noted.
366 P
ublic C
orrespondence The public w
ould support increased costs for im
proved sewage treatm
ent to ensure that orcas could continue to live and reproduce in the southern S
trait of Georgia.
Com
ment noted.
367 P
ublic C
orrespondence There w
ere no funds for the LWM
P identified in
the stimulus package as this project is not yet
considered to be “shovel ready.”
Com
ment noted. P
rojects will be developed and becom
e “shovel ready” as the plan is carried out
368 P
ublic C
orrespondence C
oncern over future funding of the LWM
P as
the current financial situation could leave the P
rovincial and Federal governments in a deficit
for many years.
Com
ment noted. S
enior governments have provided 2/3
cost-sharing on major capital projects.
369 P
ublic C
orrespondence C
oncerned that if the Provincial and Federal
governments do not contribute financially,
municipalities w
ould be responsible for a higher portion of funding, residents w
ould balk at the cost of the project and the prom
ised odour-free plant w
ould not be built odour-free, resulting in a negative effect on the com
munity.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-78
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
45
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 370
Public
Correspondence
The majority of N
orth Shore residents have no
idea of the potential costs of implem
enting the draft LW
MP
.
Com
ment noted. M
V continues to w
ork with N
orth Shore
councils to share information on the financial im
plications of secondary treatm
ent upgrade options, and other aspects of the plan.
Performance M
easures
N
o comm
ents received.
Consultation Process
371 Feedback Form
The current round of consultation on the LW
MP
seem
s to be the same as the consultation
conducted in 2008.
Com
ment noted. The 2008 LW
MP
consultations focused on the strategy to update the LW
MP
. The most recent
phase of consultation was on the draft LW
MP
document,
including specific actions and implem
entation steps. 372
Feedback Form
The comm
unity meeting w
ent well and w
as very w
ell moderated.
Com
ment noted.
373 Feedback Form
If sandw
iches or a light dinner are offered at com
munity m
eetings more people w
ill attend. C
omm
ent noted.
374 Feedback Form
H
old public meetings in the D
istrict of North
Vancouver, the com
munity w
here the new
Wastew
ater Treatment P
lant (WW
TP) is being
proposed.
Com
ment noted. P
ublic consultation will be a com
ponent of im
plementing the treatm
ent plant upgrade.
375 Feedback Form
P
arking facilities surrounding the venue for the com
munity m
eeting were too lim
ited, thus inhibiting public participation.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-79
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
46
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 376
Feedback Form
Post all results of the com
munity m
eeting on the w
ebsite. C
omm
ent noted. All input from
public meetings w
ill be considered before finalizing the LW
MP
and will be noted
in a MV
issue/response document. This docum
ent will be
included with a consultation report that w
ill be submitted to
the MV
Waste M
anagement C
omm
ittee and Board, along
with the final LW
MP
. The final LWM
P and consultation
report will be posted on M
V’s w
ebsite at: w
ww
.metrovancouver.org/services/w
astewater/planning.
377
Meeting N
otes W
ill the presentation on Innovations in the City
of Vancouver be available online?
Should you w
ish to obtain copies of this municipal
presentation from the public m
eetings, please contact lw
mp@
metrovancouver.org
378 M
eeting Notes
Request m
ade that MV
post all presentations on the w
ebsite. The M
V public m
eeting presentations are available on the w
ebsite: w
ww
.metrovancouver.org/services/w
astewater/planning
To obtain copies of municipal presentations from
the public m
eetings, please contact lw
mp@
metrovancouver.org
379 P
ublic C
orrespondence The presentations failed to provide a clear indication of how
MV
presently treats sewage
and what the full range of options are for
improvem
ent. Reference m
ade to the recent S
WM
P public consultation w
here the public w
as provided with relevant inform
ation regarding recycling rates and encouraged to choose from
among a num
ber of programs to
increase recycling.
Com
ment noted.
380 P
ublic C
orrespondence S
ince the North S
hore has no combined sew
er system
s and MV
is not responsible for rainw
ater and stormw
ater, it was redundant to
spend half of the meeting discussing this topic.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-80
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan Consultation
Public Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and MV
Responses
47
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 381
Public
Correspondence
Request for additional m
eetings in each of the N
orth Shore m
unicipalities, to which C
ouncil, staff and the public be invited.
Com
ment noted. A
dditional meetings w
ill take place in m
unicipalities during the implem
entation phase.
SDD-81
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-82
Liquid Waste M
anagement Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver Mem
ber Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver Responses
004955597
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 3
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse G
eneral Plan Com
ments
1 C
ity of Burnaby C
ouncil R
esolution, June 1, 2009 B
urnaby Council supports the Liquid
Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P) in
principle, contingent upon a few item
s.
Com
ment noted. S
pecific items are responded to
elsewhere in this table.
2 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, June 1, 2009
Coquitlam
Council w
ould not support the current draft of the LW
MP
due to reasons of affordability, private property service im
plications, and other im
pacts.
The LWM
P assum
es provincial and federal financial com
mitm
ents will be forthcom
ing and MV
will w
ork w
ith MV
Municipalities (m
unicipalities) to ensure that the cum
ulative cost implications of this plan are
mitigated through appropriate financial strategies
such as rate smoothing.
3 C
ity of New
Westm
inster E
ngineering Report, dated A
pril 20, 2009
New
Westm
inster staff support the draft LW
MP
, with the exception of a
few outstanding concerns.
Com
ment noted. S
pecific items are responded to
elsewhere in this table.
4 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 13, 2009. The draft LW
MP
provides a strong fram
ework for dealing w
ith liquid w
aste now and in the future. R
esource recovery, im
proved treatment and
renewal of infrastructure are in
accordance with sound liquid w
aste m
anagement principles.
Com
ment noted. S
pecific items are responded to
elsewhere in this table.
5 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 30, 2009
Pitt M
eadow’s current w
ork program
and long-term corporate priorities
appear to align with the recom
mended
strategies and actions contained in the draft LW
MP
.
Com
ment noted. S
pecific items are responded to
elsewhere in this table.
6 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam letter,
dated June 2, 2009 P
ort Coquitlam
Council is generally in
support of the draft LWM
P.
Com
ment noted. S
pecific items are responded to
elsewhere in this table.
7 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam letter,
dated June 2, 2009 A
dd more context to the LW
MP
, including inform
ation on the 20 year outlook.
The LWM
P provides context on linkages and
alignments w
ith national and provincial initiatives as w
ell as other plans (including long-term planning).
SDD-83
2 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 8
City of P
ort Moody C
ouncil R
esolution, May 26, 2009
Municipal staff should continue to
work to achieve liquid w
aste m
anagement efficiencies and optim
al levels of service.
The LWM
P is based on collaborative m
anagement
between M
V and its m
embers.
9 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 The draft LW
MP
has incorporated m
any elements to im
prove the current system
of wastew
ater managem
ent.
Com
ment noted.
10 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 E
xplore and pilot other delivery system
models that m
ay improve
comm
unity sustainability (ie. system
delivery to multiple com
munities,
combined utility delivery, liquid w
aste m
anagement through upfront design).
The LWM
P is aligned w
ith many provincial initiatives,
such as the BC
Energy P
lan and the Guide to G
reen C
hoices that include using alternative system
approaches to liquid waste m
anagement. The P
lan com
mits to Integrated R
esource Recovery (IR
R)
business cases for each sewerage area.
11 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Section A
of the LWM
P does not
recognize other legislation that plays a role in the LW
MP
such as Species at
Risk (Federal), Fish P
rotection Act
and the Water A
ct (Provincial).
Implem
enting the LWM
P requires close co-ordination
between m
any groups such as Environm
ent Canada
(who adm
inister the Species at R
isk Act), and the
Ministry of E
nvironment (w
ho administer the Fish
Protection and W
ater Acts). O
nly regulatory authorizing acts are listed in S
ection A.
12 C
ity of Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 21, 2009
Most of the draft LW
MP
actions are consistent w
ith Vancouver’s plans and
priorities, with the exception that
alternative upgrade schedules to the V
ancouver and North S
hore treatment
plants should be developed and the overall upgrade program
should be accelerated.
Com
ment noted.
13 D
istrict of Maple R
idge Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009. M
aple Ridge C
ouncil supports the draft LW
MP
goals and strategies. C
omm
ent noted.
14 D
istrict of Maple R
idge Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009 M
aple Ridge staff w
ill continue to work
with M
V to share inform
ation, practices and strive to be cost effective in program
s and service levels.
The LWM
P is based on collaborative m
anagement
between M
V and its m
embers.
SDD-84
3 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 15
District of W
est Vancouver
Council R
esolution, May 25, 2009
West V
ancouver Council supports the
draft LWM
P.
Com
ment noted.
16 Tsaw
wassen First N
ation Letter, dated M
ay 7, 2009 The Tsaw
wassen First N
ation (TFN)
would like to discuss becom
ing a m
ember of the G
reater Vancouver
Sew
er and Drainage D
istrict and included in the regional sew
er system.
Discussions are ongoing w
ith TFN and D
elta.
17 D
istrict of North V
ancouver C
ouncil Resolution, 25 M
ay, 2009The proposed changes to liquid w
aste m
anagement have significant financial
and operational implications; how
ever, resource recovery, im
proved treatm
ent and infrastructure renewal
are in accordance with sound w
aste m
anagement principles.
Com
ment noted.
Strategy 1.1 : Reduce liquid w
astes at their source (Strategy #1 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 1.1 in the LW
MP.
18 C
ity of Burnaby E
nvironment
Com
mittee R
eport, dated June 1, 2009
The allowances set by M
V for
discharge rates from m
unicipal sewers
to regional trunk sewers and w
aste w
ater treatment plants (W
WTP
s) w
arrant further evaluation to achieve a m
ore equitable and practical approach. E
valuation should consider infrastructure age, land use density and local conditions. If allow
ances are not revised, it w
ill create significant financial and infrastructure im
plications for the municipality.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains an action to review the average inflow
and infiltration (I&
I) allowance for regional trunk sew
ers and W
WTP
s.
19 C
ity of Burnaby E
nvironment
Com
mittee R
eport, dated June 1, 2009
I&I into sanitary sew
ers is a key issue in the LW
MP
. While the proposed I&
I standards m
ay be appropriate for new
system design, provisions m
ust be m
ade to reflect local conditions and different land use densities.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
anage I&I and an
action to review I&
I allowances.
SDD-85
4 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 20
City of B
urnaby Environm
ent C
omm
ittee Report, dated June 1,
2009
The expansion of the municipality’s I&
I inspection and m
onitoring program to
include private laterals will require an
additional $350,000 annually; this estim
ate does not include any corrective w
ork required of hom
eowners that m
ay be identified through the inspection program
.
Com
ment noted.
21 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, dated June 1, 2009
Clarify m
unicipalities’ source control and outreach program
obligations in the LW
MP
.
The LWM
P contains a strategy that outlines
municipality obligations associated w
ith source control.
22 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, dated June 1, 2009
Modify the LW
MP
requirements
relative to onsite piping repair, rehabilitation and replacem
ent, and reflect the ongoing replacem
ent of onsite system
s, concurrent with site
re-development.
I&I m
anagement plans required under the LW
MP
will
identify on-site repair needs based on local and dow
nstream issues and needs.
23 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, dated June 1, 2009
There are some situations w
here it m
ay not be practical to reduce I&I to
prescribed regional levels.
I&I m
anagement plans need to identify the
appropriate managem
ent actions.
24 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, dated June 1, 2009
Modify the requirem
ents for m
unicipalities to map locations of
onsite sewage disposal, w
hich is m
anaged by local health authorities.
On-site disposal system
actions are not identified in the updated plan.
25 C
ity of Langley letter, dated May
25, 2009 O
pposed to using the building permit
process as a means of inspecting and
repairing sanitary sewer service
connections to reduce I&I.
Com
ment noted. The building perm
it process is already in place in som
e municipalities and is a ready
instrument.
26 C
ity of New
Westm
inster Council
Resolution, dated A
pril 20, 2009 C
oncerned with the legal and practical
implications to m
unicipalities associated w
ith the proposed initiative to address deteriorating infrastructure on private property.
Com
ment noted. I&
I plans need to address best actions, including service lateral m
anagement to the
extent necessary to prevent downstream
overflows.
SDD-86
5 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 27
City of N
orth Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 25, 2009
The municipality has begun to
incorporate stormw
ater best practices into projects, including on-site rainw
ater infiltration in new
developments.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
contains actions that enable and encourage on-site rainw
ater m
anagement.
28 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
significant portion of the underground sew
age collection system
is on private land. Inspection, repair and replacem
ent of old sewer
laterals on private property will com
e at a cost to property ow
ners and to the m
unicipality.
Com
ment noted. I&
I plans need to address best actions, including service lateral m
anagement to the
extent necessary to prevent downstream
overflows.
29 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 The authority of the m
unicipality regarding private laterals is not clear in the LW
MP
.
Municipalities w
ill develop I&I m
anagement plans,
which w
ill include the consideration of private lateral m
aintenance. 30
City of P
itt Meadow
s Council
Report, dated A
pril 30, 2009 A
ction 3: Flow testing in m
unicipalities’ sanitary m
ains indicates that there is very little, if any, w
et water infiltration.
Municipality staff believes requiring
this type of inspection for homes 20
years and older is a good idea.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent I&I m
anagement plans to ensure w
et w
eather I&I volum
es are within M
V’s allow
ances.
31 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 30, 2009
Action 4: P
itt Meadow
s currently allow
s different storm w
ater infiltration approaches in its subdivisions and developm
ent control bylaw, w
here site-specific studies determ
ine that this practice is appropriate.
The LWM
P contains actions for on-site rainw
ater m
anagement.
32 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 A
key challenge in Richm
ond is m
anaging water-based discharge from
de-w
atering activities associated with
building and development projects.
The LWM
P should include strategies
to reduce de-watering volum
es.
Although the LW
MP
does not mention de-w
atering activities explicitly, it contains an action to review
and enhance sew
er use bylaws to reduce liquid w
aste at source (including contam
inants identified by the C
anadian Environm
ental Protection A
ct (CE
PA
)).
SDD-87
6 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 33
City of R
ichmond n C
omm
ittee R
eport, dated May 2, 2009
Groundw
ater in Richm
ond has naturally-occurring high levels of dissolved iron; this w
ater has the potential to adversely im
pact fresh w
ater systems and is not alw
ays suitable to discharge to storm
water
systems. S
ource reduction policies should consider criteria for iron.
The LWM
P contains an action to review
and enhance sew
er use bylaws to reduce liquid w
aste at source (including contam
inants identified by the CE
PA
and to establish region w
ide baseline criteria for on-site rainfall m
anagement including variations for localized
geology, rainfall and watershed conditions.
34 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Action 3.2: S
urrey has completed
numerous infrastructure repairs in an
attempt to achieve M
V’s I&
I allow
ance, but has been unable to reduce I&
I in many catchm
ent areas to a level at or below
MV
’s prescribed allow
ance.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement including w
orking with m
unicipalities to review
and adjust I&I allow
ances.
35 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Action 3.2: This action w
ill result in the inspection and replacem
ent of private sew
er laterals. This is an expensive proposition for private property ow
ners, and is administratively
intensive for Surrey.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement including the developm
ent and im
plementation of a process for inspection and
certification of private sewer laterals.
36 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Action 3.2: R
eview and revise, if
appropriate, the average I&I
allowance of 11,200 l/ha/day (A
ction 15.2) prior to considering A
ction 3.2.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement including w
orking with m
unicipalities to review
the I&I allow
ances.
37 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Action 3.2: C
omplete a cost/benefit
analysis prior to this action to determ
ine if requiring the repair or replacem
ent of private sewer laterals
is the most cost effective alternative to
addressing infiltration.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-88
7 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 38
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 21, 2009 A
ction 3.2: Municipalities be required
to introduce, as part of their sanitary sew
er by-laws, a requirem
ent that for every significant building perm
it application or property redevelopm
ent, the existing private sew
er lateral be inspected to ensure that it is in satisfactory condition for service and that it be replaced if found to be unsatisfactory; M
V should consider
this prior to Action 3.2.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement that addresses this.
39 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Action 3.2: R
e-evaluate other actions prior to considering A
ction 3.2 as most
properties experience some form
of developm
ent after 40 to 50 years, w
hich is in the general timefram
e that private sew
er laterals start contributing significant am
ounts of infiltration.
Com
ment noted.
40 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Monitor how
rainwater is infiltrated to
inform m
anagement approaches.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement that includes research on w
atershed-based storm
water m
anagement approaches.
41 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 21, 2009
Action 4: Include a reference to non-
point source pollution and a link back to w
atershed-based objectives defined in Integrated S
torm M
anagement
Plans (IS
MP
s). Minim
izing rainwater
runoff at the site level does not address the overall w
atershed non-point source pollution factor and m
ay not m
eet all watershed based
hydrological targets.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement that includes research on w
atershed-based storm
water m
anagement approaches.
SDD-89
8 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 42
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 21, 2009 A
ction 4: A focus on site m
easures in com
bination with com
munity facilities
and sustainable infrastructure design w
ill better serve the watershed.
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement that includes research on w
atershed-based storm
water m
anagement approaches.
43 C
orporation of Delta C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 27, 2009
Action 3: Legal issues have to be
resolved and potential costs to the m
unicipality and private property ow
ners have to be assessed. An
option for dealing with private property
sewer services is to require the
renewal of private sanitary sew
er lines at the tim
e of building permit
applications above a specified value (e.g. $100,000).
The LWM
P contains an action for I&I and rainw
ater m
anagement that addresses this.
44 D
istrict of West V
ancouver C
ouncil Resolution, dated M
ay 25, 2009
Work w
ith the province to obtain legislative authority for m
unicipalities to address infiltration from
aging, private property sanitary sew
er connections.
The LWM
P contains an action for M
V to address I&
I and rainw
ater managem
ent.
45 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 1.2: The current sewer use
bylaw has a list of banned or restricted
wastes, and lim
its on sewage
strength; this action would require
further treatment of w
astes prior to discharge to the m
unicipality system
by some industrial and com
mercial
customers.
The LWM
P contains actions to review
and enhance sew
er use bylaws to reduce liquid w
aste at source including contam
inants identified by the CE
PA
.
SDD-90
9 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 46
Township of Langley C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 25, 2009
Action 3.2: The Tow
nship of Langley is already required to prepare an I&
I plan as a requirem
ent to allow the
connection of East Langley into the
Greater V
ancouver Sew
erage and D
rainage District sew
erage system;
the repair of private service laterals requires further study, including clarification of m
unicipalities’ legal position on enforcem
ent on private property.
Com
ment noted.
47 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 4: The Township of Langley
has started implem
enting this action at developm
ent sites in Willoughby.
Com
ment noted. The Tow
nship of Langley is encouraged to share their results w
ith other m
unicipalities at technical comm
ittee meetings.
Strategy 1.2: Reduce w
et weather overflow
s (Strategy #2 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 1.2 in the LW
MP.
48 C
ity of Burnaby C
omm
ittee R
eport, dated May 14, 2009
Burnaby initiated the com
bined sewer
separation program for the N
orth B
urnaby area over a decade ago; the program
provides an opportunity to replace aging sew
er pipes.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains a strategy to reduce wet w
eather overflows
through separating existing combined sew
ers in B
urnaby, New
Westm
inster and Vancouver
(continuation of existing strategy). 49
City of B
urnaby Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 14, 2009 A
gree with the principles of the asset
managem
ent approach. The LW
MP
contains an action to reduce wet w
eather overflow
s and to work w
ith municipalities to develop
and implem
ent municipal-regional sanitary overflow
m
anagement plans.
50 C
ity of Burnaby C
omm
ittee R
eport, dated May 14, 2009
Burnaby w
ill likely have to increase its annual storm
sewer replacem
ent fund by approxim
ately $4 to $5 million by
2019.
Com
ment noted.
51 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 30, 2009
Action 7: There is little, if any, w
et w
eather infiltration in the Pitt
Meadow
s sanitary collection system.
The LWM
P contains an action to identify locations
and schedules for appropriate system capacity
improvem
ents, wet w
eather containment, and point
treatment of chronic overflow
s.
SDD-91
10 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 52
City of P
itt Meadow
s Council
Report, dated A
pril 30, 2009 A
ction 7: Overflow
is a chronic problem
at the Katzie sanitary pum
p station in M
aple Ridge; during heavy
rainfall events, sanitary overflow from
this station is discharged into the K
atzie Slough and flow
s through Pitt
Meadow
s to the Baynes R
oad drainage pum
p station.
The LWM
P contains actions to develop and
implem
ent municipal-regional sanitary overflow
m
anagement plans to reduce w
et weather overflow
s and to identify locations and schedules for appropriate system
capacity improvem
ents, wet
weather containm
ent, and point treatment of chronic
overflows.
53 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 30, 2009
Action 7: A
greater priority needs to be placed on w
et weather overflow
s by both M
V and M
V m
unicipalities to ensure that incidents of infiltration are reduced and that the capacity of the sanitary stations are appropriate.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to reduce w
et weather
overflows w
ith key municipal actions to elim
inate sanitary sew
er overflows and reduce the risk of spills.
54 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 30, 2009
Action 7: C
onstruction of a treatment
plant at the Katzie sanitary pum
p station and a second forcem
ain from
the Katzie pum
p station to the intersection of B
aynes Road and
Airport W
ay, should be included in the M
V 5 Y
ear Capital P
lan.
The LWM
P contains actions to develop and
implem
ent municipal-regional sanitary overflow
m
anagement plans to reduce w
et weather overflow
s and to identify locations and schedules for appropriate system
capacity improvem
ents, wet
weather containm
ent, and point treatment of chronic
overflows.
55 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 7: Include M
V’s infrastructure,
as some areas are undersized based
upon upstream developm
ent even w
ith appropriate inflow and infiltration
(I&I) levels.
The LWM
P contains an action for M
V to replace
combined regional trunk sew
ers with separated
sanitary and storm sew
ers (through prioritized and targeted sew
er renewal and separation).
56 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 4.3 iii: Stakeholders involved in
developing site-level rainwater
managem
ent systems m
ust include the developm
ent industry and builder associations such as the G
reater V
ancouver Hom
e Builders
Association.
This comm
ent will be useful input for the S
tormw
ater Interagency Liaison G
roup (SILG
) during im
plementation of the LW
MP
.
SDD-92
11 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 57
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 7: Priority locations of S
anitary S
ewer O
verflows (S
SO
s) may not be
associated with high grow
th areas; the S
SO
s are often occurring in older dow
nstream sections of the
infrastructure, which are w
eak and cannot handle the hydraulic pressure during significant events.
The LWM
P contains actions to develop and
implem
ent municipal-regional sanitary overflow
m
anagement plans to reduce w
et weather overflow
s and to identify locations and schedules for appropriate system
capacity improvem
ents, wet
weather containm
ent, and point treatment of chronic
overflows.
58 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 7: U
pgrade priorities should consider the design heads of the trunk system
s and vulnerabilities, separately and in addition to the I&
I w
ork; evidence of this is the numerous
breaks, surcharges, etc., in the north S
urrey trunk line, which has had little
new developm
ent through Surrey but
more developm
ent in upstream
catchments.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to reduce w
et weather
overflows through prioritized and targeted sew
er renew
al and separation.
59 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 7: The Township of Langley
historically has not had any issues w
ith sewer overflow
s. Areas know
n for overflow
s are adjacent to sanitary lift stations.
The LWM
P contains an action to identify locations
and schedules for appropriate system capacity
improvem
ents, wet w
eather containment, and point
treatment of chronic overflow
s.
60 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 7: The Township of Langley
has constructed a wet w
eather overflow
storage facility adjacent to the 28th A
venue Lift Station in
Aldergrove, w
hich mitigates the need
for emergency action.
The LWM
P contains an action to identify locations
and schedules for appropriate system capacity
improvem
ents, wet w
eather containment, and point
treatment or chronic overflow
s and contains a strategy to reduce w
et weather overflow
s through prioritized and targeted sew
er renewal and
separation.
SDD-93
12 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 1.3: R
educe environmental im
pacts from liquid w
aste managem
ent to a minim
um (Strategy #3 in M
arch 2009 Draft
LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 1.3 in the LW
MP.
61 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 S
upport secondary treatment facilities
for the Vancouver and N
orth Shore
sewerage areas provided that senior
levels of government share at least
66% of the project costs.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater treatm
ent for the North S
hore and V
ancouver sewerage areas. B
ased on the Canada-
wide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of Municipal
Wastew
ater Effluent (C
WS
-MM
WE
), Lions Gate
should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
62 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009 Include a secondary sew
age treatm
ent plant for the North S
hore by 2020 subject to senior governm
ent cost sharing.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline, subject to
the appropriate financial arrangements being in place
as indicated in the Financial Plan.
63 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 20, 2009 W
hen the Provincial M
inister of the E
nvironment approved the 2002
LWM
P, it included a deadline for
upgrades to Iona by 2020 and Lions G
ate by 2030.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
64 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 20, 2009 Lions G
ate has failed toxicity testing of the effluent due to am
monia and
surfactants; extensive monitoring has
been completed and there has been
no significant environmental im
pact m
easured in the receiving environm
ent.
The LWM
P contains an action to use the results of
environmental m
onitoring to assess discharge com
pliance with regulations, standards and official
water quality designations and identify and im
plement
any necessary remedial actions in consultation w
ith E
nvironment C
anada (EC
) and the Ministry of
Environm
ent (MoE
). 65
City of N
orth Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 20, 2009
Siting issues regarding the proposed
location of the new N
orth Shore
Wastew
ater Treatment P
lan (WW
TP)
exist. Resolution is required prior to
comm
itting to the upgrade.
Siting issues are addressed during the
implem
entation stage of the LWM
P.
SDD-94
13 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 66
City of P
itt Meadow
s Council
Report, A
pril 30, 2009 A
ction 11: There are two m
arinas w
ithin Pitt M
eadows that do not
currently have sanitary services; should these facilities w
ish to expand, perm
its for these services would be
required.
The LWM
P contains an action to address
environmental im
pacts from liquid w
aste managem
ent at m
arinas.
67 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
Action 13: P
itt Meadow
s is developing an inventory of the G
reenhouse Gas
(GH
G) em
issions and recom
mendations to reduce
emissions m
ay include those at sanitary sew
er stations.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent programs to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions from
municipal liquid w
aste managem
ent system
s with the m
ain municipal action to focus on
quantifying and managing air em
issions associated w
ith the wastew
ater collection systems.
68 C
ity of Richm
ond Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009 The upgrade of the Iona W
WTP
should be included as a priority.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
69 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 10.1: Linked to A
ction 28.4 and m
ust be clearly defined through the E
nvironmental M
onitoring Com
mittee
(EM
C) and the S
tormw
ater Interagency Liaison G
roup (SILG
). C
osts of an expanded monitoring
program cannot be reasonably
estimated and should not be included
as a comm
itment w
ithin the LWM
P
Com
ment noted.
70 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 10.1: W
ater quality monitoring
can be expensive depending upon the types of contam
inants and pollutants captured; a m
ore cost effective approach w
ould be to use proxies to evaluate w
ater quality in a scientifically defendable m
anner.
The LWM
P contains an action to use the results of
environmental m
onitoring to assess discharge com
pliance with regulations, standards and official
water quality designations and identify and im
plement
any necessary remedial actions in consultation w
ith E
C and the M
oE.
SDD-95
14 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 71
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 8.3: Em
ergency plans must
include a timely overflow
notification protocol for all affected stakeholders (M
V m
unicipalities and land owners
and in some cases irrigation districts,
Ministry of A
griculture and Lands, and other relevant associations.)
The LWM
P contains an action to use the results of
environmental m
onitoring to assess discharge com
pliance with regulations, standards and official
water quality designations and identify and im
plement
any necessary remedial actions in consultation w
ith E
C and the M
oE.
72 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 10: It is unclear w
hat is expected from
municipality program
s (i.e., type of m
onitoring, frequency, result subm
issions, non-point source pollution etc.). The E
MC
and the S
ILG need to play a role in this action
item.
The LWM
P contains a strategy that outlines m
unicipal responsibilities for reducing environm
ental impacts
from liquid w
aste managem
ent to a minim
um.
73 C
ity of Vancouver C
ouncil R
esolution, June 2, 2009 R
e-prioritize upgrades to secondary treatm
ent at the Iona and North S
hore W
WTP
s and accelerate the overall com
pletion of upgrades.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
74 C
ity of Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 21, 2009
Com
pleting upgrades at both WW
TPs
by 2020 would be financially and
logistically challenging.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline. C
ost sharing w
ill be sought by Metro V
ancouver and m
unicipalities from both senior levels of governm
ent. 75
City of V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 21, 2009 The best approach is to conduct the upgrades sequentially; this w
ould likely result in better application of technology, greater advancem
ents of innovative resource m
anagement
initiatives and lower cost.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
SDD-96
15 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 76
District of N
orth Vancouver
Council R
esolution, May 25, 2009
Include a secondary treatment plant
for the North S
hore by 2020. The LW
MP
contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater treatm
ent for the North S
hore and V
ancouver sewerage areas. B
ased on CW
S-M
MW
E,
Lions Gate should proceed w
ithin a 10-year timeline
and Iona Island within a 20-year tim
eline. 77
District of W
est Vancouver
Council R
esolution, May 25, 2009
Advance the tim
eline for the Lions G
ate WW
TP secondary upgrade to
2020, on the condition that MV
receives senior governm
ent cost sharing grants.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline. C
ost sharing w
ill be sought by Metro V
ancouver and m
unicipalities from both senior levels of governm
ent. 78
Corporation of D
elta Council
Report, dated A
pril 27, 2009 The proposed W
WTP
upgrades will
significantly improve the discharge
water quality. To reduce the im
pact to taxpayers, the upgrade at Iona Island should be com
pleted by 2020 and the N
orth Shore by 2030.
Com
ment noted. The Liquid W
aste Managem
ent P
lan (LWM
P) contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
79 C
orporation of Delta C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 27, 2009
With senior governm
ent cost sharing it is anticipated that the N
orth Shore
upgrade could be accelerated to 2020.
Com
ment noted. The Liquid W
aste Managem
ent P
lan (LWM
P) contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline. C
ost sharing w
ill be sought by Metro V
ancouver and m
unicipalities from both senior levels of governm
ent. 80
City of V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 21, 2009 M
V and senior governm
ent regulators should use the C
anadian Council of
Ministers of the E
nvironment C
anada-w
ide Strategy for the M
anagement of
Municipal W
astewater E
ffluent (CC
ME
C
WS
– MM
WE
) to determine the
scheduling priority of WW
TPs.
The LWM
P is integrated w
ith the CC
ME
CW
S –
MM
WE
. Timelines for upgrading the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas to secondary treatment
balance comm
unity and senior government
expectations.
SDD-97
16 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 2.1: Pursue liquid w
aste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context (Strategy #6 & #8 in M
arch 2009 D
raft LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 2.1 in the LW
MP.
81 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam C
ouncil R
eport, dated June 2, 2009 M
ore details are needed regarding the environm
entally friendly techniques to reuse m
aterials generated through resource recovery.
Through an outline of the recovery of energy, nutrients and w
ater from liquid w
aste, the Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan (LW
MP
) outlines environm
entally friendly approaches to reuse m
aterials generated through resource recovery. 82
City of P
ort Coquitlam
Council
Report, dated June 2, 2009
The concept of better use of grey w
ater should be expanded. The LW
MP
states that in consultation with health and
environmental authorities, M
V w
ill explore the use of grey w
ater as a substitute for potable water.
83 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam C
ouncil R
eport, dated June 2, 2009 M
ore discussion is needed with the
provincial government in regard to
reducing barriers in regulations, especially w
ith regard to grey water
systems.
The LWM
P states that in consultation w
ith health and environm
ental authorities, MV
will explore the use of
grey water as a substitute for potable w
ater.
84 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
Action 20: H
eat recovery may becom
e a P
itt Meadow
s objective in its corporate and com
munity
sustainability plan.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
states that MV
and m
unicipalities will evaluate opportunities for heat
recovery.
85 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
Action 22: U
pdates are needed to the subdivision servicing and building bylaw
s to encourage, if not require, the collection and reuse of rainw
ater. This supports the green infrastructure solutions as part of the m
unicipality’s ow
n sustainability mandate.
This is not explicitly stated in the current LWM
P.
How
ever, under Strategy 1.1, the LW
MP
does encourage m
unicipalities to update bylaws to require
on-site rainwater m
anagement sufficient to m
eet criteria established in m
unicipal integrated stormw
ater plans and to update m
unicipal utility design standards and neighbourhood design guidelines to enable and encourage on-site rainw
ater managem
ent. 86
City of R
ichmond C
omm
ittee R
eport, dated May 2, 2009
Action 18.1: R
evise to include m
unicipal rights to material and
energy recovery. Exclusive M
V rights
to material and energy recovery from
the w
astewater system
would displace
potential revenue generation opportunities for R
ichmond.
This action is no longer in the LWM
P.
SDD-98
17 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 87
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 22: Ensure this is not a
detriment to tributary w
atershed creek base flow
s and fisheries habitat.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
does not endorse actions that w
ould result in detrimental im
pacts to w
atersheds and fisheries habitat. 88
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 22.1: Use of rainw
ater as an alternative to using potable w
ater m
ust be evaluated in the context of w
atershed limitations to ensure runoff
diversions do not adversely affect historical receiving w
atercourses.
MV
will w
ork with m
unicipalities to evaluate opportunities for the collection and use of rainw
ater as an alternative to potable w
ater for non-drinking purposes. The LW
MP
respects associated watershed
limitations.
89 C
ity of Vancouver C
ouncil R
esolution, June 2, 2009 P
rioritize options for recovering energy and nutrients from
liquid waste
as described in Strategy 6.
Options for recovering energy and nutrients from
liquid w
aste have been prioritized in the LWM
P.
90 C
orporation of Delta C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 27, 2009
Action 18 to 24: S
upport these actions as they are green initiatives and have the ability to create revenue. It is recognized that they also carry cost im
plications.
Com
ment noted.
91 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009 B
egin Integrated Resource R
ecovery (IR
R) P
lanning for the North S
hore, in co-operation w
ith the three North
Shore m
unicipalities as soon as possible.
A com
mitm
ent to IRR
is made in the LW
MP
. MV
and m
unicipalities will capitalize on Integrated R
esource M
anagement approaches that m
aximize ecological,
social and economic benefits.
92 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 20, 2009 C
onsider IRR
more holistically and in
conjunction with the current solid
waste m
anagement planning.
Stated in the LW
MP
. There is interdependence betw
een the development of goals, strategies and
actions in this plan and those in other regional plans, such as the S
olid Waste M
anagement P
lan (SW
MP
). 93
City of N
orth Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 20, 2009
Begin IR
R business case study as
soon as possible; the results may
have implications to the design and
capacity of the new N
orth Shore
Wastew
ater Treatment P
lant (WW
TP).
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
94 D
istrict of North V
ancouver C
ouncil Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009B
egin IRR
planning on the North
Shore as soon as possible, in
cooperation with the three N
orth S
hore Municipalities.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
SDD-99
18 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 95
District of W
est Vancouver
Council R
esolution, May 25, 2009
Undertake an IR
R study on the N
orth S
hore as soon as possible, in cooperation w
ith the three North
Shore M
unicipalities.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
96 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Resolution, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 20.2: The Township of Langley
is currently investigating this action through a C
omm
unity Energy
Assessm
ent pre-feasibility study.
Com
ment noted.
Strategy 3.1: Manage assets and optim
ize existing liquid waste operations (Strategy #4 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.1 in the LWM
P. 97
City of P
itt Meadow
s Council
Report, A
pril 30, 2009 A
ction 16: Pitt M
eadows, as part of its
regular infrastructure maintenance,
uses video surveillance to assess the condition of one quarter of its sew
er m
ain inventory every year and plans its annual repair and replacem
ent program
around these findings.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains actions to assess the performance and
condition of municipal sew
erage systems.
98 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
Action 16: In 2008, P
itt Meadow
’s older asbestos m
ains were sam
pled and subjected to testing for integrity and rem
aining life; the report and its findings are expected in m
id-2009 and w
ill be considered this fall when P
itt M
eadows review
s its 5 and 20 year capital plans.
The LWM
P contains actions to assess the
performance and condition of m
unicipal sewerage
systems.
Strategy 3.2: Use innovative approaches and technologies (Strategy #5 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.2 in the LWM
P. 99
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 17.4: The proposed internal audit tim
eline can be problematic for
municipal planning; review
of opportunities for innovation to im
prove efficiency and effectiveness is not tim
eline driven, it is undertaken through the w
atershed planning process on an ongoing basis.
This has been addressed in the Liquid Waste
Managem
ent Plan (LW
MP
). The review of best
practices to identify opportunities for innovation will be
done on an ongoing basis and has been identified through various actions.
SDD-100
19 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 3.3: M
onitor the performance of liquid w
aste system im
pacts on the receiving environment (Strategy #7 in M
arch 2009 D
raft LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 3.3 in the LW
MP.
100 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 28.4: The type of m
onitoring, frequency, result subm
ission, m
onitoring targets and representative w
atersheds must be defined; the
Environm
ental Monitoring C
omm
ittee (E
MC
) and the Storm
water
Interagency Liaison Group (S
ILG) are
the most logical groups to discuss the
merits and value of specific m
onitoring m
ethodology, locations and reporting based on current local and international experience.
This action is no longer in the LWM
P; how
ever, SILG
and E
MC
will be consulted on m
onitoring initiatives. The LW
MP
contains actions that comm
it MV
to using defined m
onitoring methodology.
101 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 25.1: The E
MC
should be involved in this action.
Com
ment noted.
102 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 29.2: Link needs to be m
ade w
ith already established local systems
to avoid overlap; Surrey currently
operates 6 rainfall stations (real time)
and has over 16 flow stations and
approximately 20 river level stations
(real time).
As per the LW
MP
, MV
will w
ork with m
unicipality m
unicipalities to reduce redundancies.
103 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 29.2: M
any other local governm
ents have automated
systems in their jurisdiction; sharing
the data or having joint agreements on
these sites should be considered by M
V.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-101
20 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 104
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 28.4: This item could have
huge cost implications to local
governments. Integrated S
torm
Managem
ent Plans (IS
MP
s) currently m
onitor benefits for watershed health;
general sampling program
s for non-point source pollution or storm
water
systems have not been defined.
This action is no longer in the LWM
P.
105 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 29.3: Three of the 25 sewage
lift stations operated by the m
unicipality have flow m
eters.
Com
ment noted.
106 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 29.3: In conjunction with station
upgrades and retrofits, municipality
staff is planning on installing meters at
an average of two stations per year.
Com
ment noted.
107 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Resolution, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 29.3: The municipality has
three portable flow m
eters that can m
easure flow at any point in the
sewage system
.
Com
ment noted.
Strategy 3.4: Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term needs (Strategy #8 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.4 in the LWM
P. 108
City of Langley C
ouncil R
esolution, May 25, 2009
The development of storm
water
managem
ent must be done on a
voluntary basis.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P) has an
action that comm
its MV
municipalities to develop and
implem
ent Integrated Storm
Managem
ent Plans
(ISM
Ps) at the w
atershed scale to manage rainw
ater runoff by 2014.
109 C
ity of New
Westm
inster E
ngineering Report, dated A
pril 20, 2009
Municipal resources w
ill be required to com
plete ISM
Ps.
The LWM
P has an action that com
mits M
V
municipalities to develop and im
plement IS
MP
s at the w
atershed scale to manage rainw
ater runoff by 2014. 110
City of N
ew W
estminster
Engineering R
eport, dated April
20, 2009
Municipal resources w
ill be required to develop and im
plement procedures to
link ISM
Ps w
ith land use and the O
fficial Com
munity P
lanning (OC
P)
processes.
The LWM
P has an action that com
mits M
V
municipalities to develop and im
plement IS
MP
s at the w
atershed scale by 2014.
SDD-102
21 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 111
City of N
ew W
estminster
Engineering R
eport, dated April
20, 2009
Municipal resources w
ill be required to update developm
ent standards and guidelines to incorporate new
sustainable, rainw
ater managem
ent requirem
ents.
The LWM
P encourages m
unicipalities to update bylaw
s to require on-site rainwater m
anagement
sufficient to meet criteria established in m
unicipal integrated storm
water plans and to update m
unicipal utility design standards and neighbourhood design guidelines to enable and encourage on-site rainw
ater m
anagement.
112 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
Action 31: W
hile there are no w
atersheds, by definition, within P
itt M
eadow’s jurisdiction, m
any of the sam
e principles of ISM
P have been
applied to the Area N
o. 3 Drainage
Catchm
ent.
Com
ment noted.
113 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
Action 31: In the M
V public
presentation on the strategy to update the LW
MP
, drainage catchment and
watershed boundaries w
ere shown
incorrectly and include connections to w
atersheds in Maple R
idge that do not exist due to dyking.
Com
ment noted.
114 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 A
ction 35.3: Further development or
urbanization should be considered through the Livable R
egion Strategic
Plan and guided by the m
unicipality’s O
CP
and land use planning and approval processes.
The LWM
P aligns w
ith the Regional G
rowth S
trategy and needs of m
unicipal OC
Ps.
115 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 A
ction 35.3: Rem
ove clause ii. C
lause removed. The LW
MP
aligns with the R
egional G
rowth S
trategy and needs of municipal O
CP
s.
SDD-103
22 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 116
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 35.3: This action should also ensure new
service areas do not overtax lim
ited or deficient MV
trunk system
s that exist downstream
until the dow
nstream infrastructure is
capable of servicing the catchment
area without the undue risk of
significant trunk failures or frequent overflow
events.
The LWM
P aligns w
ith the Regional G
rowth S
trategy and needs of m
unicipal OC
Ps.
117 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 30.1 ii, viii, ix: These item
s can be very broad in nature, and depending on scope, can have a significant effect on research program
s; the scope must be clearly
defined through the EM
C and the
SILG
.
Com
ment noted. H
owever, this action is no longer in
the LWM
P.
118 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 31.1 ii: M
anagement of
rainwater runoff at the site level
should be included as well as non-
point source pollution considerations as other local governm
ents must
undertake; ensure the ISM
P tem
plate addresses these issues for com
bined and piped system
s as well.
Com
ment noted. H
owever, this action is no longer in
the LWM
P.
119 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 32.2 ii: R
oads are not the only source of non point source (N
PS
) pollution problem
s and should not be highlighted separately, land use planning does play a role; how
ever, issues like sedim
ent and erosion, use of m
etal fences and storage of m
aterials, use of pesticides, hot tub discharges, etc., all play a large role in N
PS
effects beyond just those from
road runoff.
Com
ment noted. H
owever, this action is no longer in
the LWM
P.
SDD-104
23 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 120
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 32.2 ii: Often aggressive
municipal street and catch basin
cleaning programs com
bined with
storm receptors can lead to
reasonable treatment of the runoff
from the road facility; this action item
should read m
ore generically to capture the broader range of influences.
Com
ment noted. H
owever, this action is no longer in
the LWM
P.
121 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Action 35: Liquid w
aste infrastructure expansion m
ust be coordinated with
the Regional G
rowth S
trategy only if this grow
th strategy is consistent with
municipality grow
th strategies; if regional and m
unicipality growth
strategies are at odds, an appropriate servicing approach m
ust be mutually
agreed upon.
Com
ment noted.
122 C
orporation of Delta C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 27, 2009
Action 31 and 32: E
xtend timeline for
an additional 3 to 5 years as current tim
eline may not provide sufficient
time to com
plete these studies for an entire m
unicipality as budgets for studies are lim
ited.
The LWM
P states that m
unicipalities must com
plete their IS
MP
s at the watershed scale by 2014.
123 D
istrict of West V
ancouver C
ouncil Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009.
Recom
mend that the D
istrict of West
Vancouver continue to com
plete IS
MP
s for remaining w
atersheds w
ithin the municipality.
The LWM
P states that m
unicipalities must com
plete their integrated storm
water m
anagement plans by
2014.
124 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 34:.The municipality is
completing a D
ecentralized Sew
age M
anagement P
lan as a requirement of
the grant received for the Brooksw
ood S
ewer.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-105
24 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 125
Township of Langley C
ouncil R
eport, May 25, 2009
Action 35.2: W
hile there is currently a lim
itation on areas that can connect to the m
unicipal sewer system
, this action m
ay make it m
ore difficult for properties to do so.
Com
ment noted. H
owever, this action is no longer in
the LWM
P.
126 Tow
nship of Langley Council
Report, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
ction 35.2: The municipality w
ould be one of the M
V m
unicipalities most
affected by this action; as a com
munity of com
munities, there are
a number of sew
age corridors or potential sew
age corridors between
comm
unities where properties on
those alignments cannot be serviced
without special approval from
the G
VS
&D
D. These areas include:
Fraser Highw
ay between M
urrayville and A
ldergrove, 200th Street betw
een Fernridge and the H
igh Point
development, G
lover Road and the
potential development of the S
almon
River U
plands.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
aligns with the R
egional G
rowth S
trategy and needs of municipal O
CP
s.
Strategy 3.5: Use collaborative m
anagement to address evolving needs (A
daptive Managem
ent Section in March 2009 D
raft LW
MP)
No com
ments received.
Financial Plan 127
City of B
urnaby Council
Resolution, June 1, 2009
The three levels of government
(federal, provincial and regional) should equally fund the upgrading of the W
astewater Treatm
ent Plants
(WW
TPs) for the V
ancouver and N
orth Shore sew
erage areas.
This plan includes a comm
itment to upgrading both
the treatments plants in the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Given the significant cost
and importance of this w
ork, it is designed to fulfill environm
ental policy goals shared by all three levels of governm
ent; this plan assumes provincial and
federal financial comm
itments w
ill be forthcoming.
SDD-106
25 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 128
City of B
urnaby Council
Resolution, June 1, 2009
Address concerns for financial
implications of adoption of the
remaining Liquid W
aste Managem
ent P
lan (LWM
P) elem
ents in the context of regional affordability prior to the adoption of the final LW
MP
by the MV
B
oard.
A regional affordability context has been prepared by
the Regional Finance A
dvisory Com
mittee (R
FAC
).
129 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, June 1, 2009
Recognize that cum
ulative costs of various regional initiatives is excessive and that significant senior governm
ent funding must be sought
and other avenues explored, in order to reduce or defray the direct costs to local tax payers.
The LWM
P notes that the am
ount and timing of cost
sharing contributions will determ
ine the timelines
given the region’s limited capacity to com
plete certain com
mitm
ents. The LWM
P assum
es Provincial and
Federal financial comm
itments w
ill be forthcoming.
130 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009 Forw
ard a letter to the Provincial and
Federal governments urging them
to each provide 1/3 funding for the new
treatm
ent plants.
Given the significant cost and im
portance of this work,
the LWM
P is designed to fulfill environm
ental policy goals shared by all three levels of governm
ent; this plan assum
es Provincial and Federal financial
comm
itments w
ill be forthcoming.
131 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 20, 2009 R
eplacement of the Lions G
ate W
WTP
will likely have significant
impacts on the R
egional Sew
er Levy; depending on the level of senior governm
ent funding provided, the regional sew
er levy could increase anyw
here from 80%
to 250%.
Com
ment noted.
132 C
ity of North V
ancouver Council
Report, dated M
ay 20, 2009 U
ntil further planning work is
completed for new
initiatives, such as private property sew
er laterals, a potential increase in cost is difficult to quantify.
Com
ment noted.
133 C
ity of Pitt M
eadows C
ouncil R
eport, April 30, 2009
The investments in sew
age treatment
provided for in the draft LWM
P w
ill increase the cost of sew
age collection in the region in the com
ing years.
MV
will w
ork with its m
embers to ensure that the
cumulative cost im
plications of this plan are mitigated
through appropriate financial strategies such as rate sm
oothing.
SDD-107
26 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 134
City of P
ort Coquitlam
Council
Report, dated June 2, 2009
Concerns raised regarding the ability
of municipalities to apply local taxes to
all upcoming regional initiatives such
as transportation, water and solid
waste.
A regional affordability context has been prepared by
the Regional Finance A
dvisory Com
mittee (R
FAC
).
135 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam C
ouncil R
eport, dated June 2, 2009 The proposed tim
etable to implem
ent the new
and enhanced actions of the LW
MP
should be extended.
Com
ment noted.
136 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam C
ouncil R
eport, dated June 2, 2009 Include a strategy for securing appropriate funding assistance from
senior levels of governm
ent prior to undertaking m
ajor LWM
P projects.
The LWM
P is designed to fulfill environm
ental policy goals shared by all three levels of governm
ent; this plan assum
es provincial and federal financial com
mitm
ents will be forthcom
ing. 137
City of P
ort Coquitlam
Council
Report, dated June 2, 2009
Expand the Financial P
lan to include details of the costs to im
plement the
LWM
P; bring forw
ard some of the
numbers from
the tables in the back of the LW
MP
.
Com
ment noted.
138 C
ity of Port C
oquitlam C
ouncil R
eport, dated June 2, 2009 Include a strategy for M
V to determ
ine the infrastructure funding gap over the next five years.
Com
ment noted.
139 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 The LW
MP
would com
mit the C
ity to sew
er utility rate surcharges of up to 25%
.
Com
ment noted.
140 C
ity of Richm
ond Com
mittee
Report, dated M
ay 2, 2009 The final surcharge over current rates is dependent upon w
hether or not MV
receives grants for large infrastructure projects and the schedule upon w
hich the m
ajor initiatives are completed.
The LWM
P is designed to fulfill environm
ental policy goals shared by all three levels of governm
ent; this plan assum
es provincial and federal financial com
mitm
ents will be forthcom
ing
141 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Add to the costs of upsizing
secondary treatment facilities to
accomm
odate future growth to
Vancouver and N
orth Shore
Sew
erage Area D
evelopment C
ost C
harges.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-108
27 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 142
City of S
urrey Corporate R
eport, dated M
ay 25, 2009 A
lthough financial implications related
to the MV
action items are significant,
the total financial impact for all
municipal action item
s to the m
unicipality’s sewer and drainage
utility rates are considered m
anageable, given that the E
ngineering Departm
ent is already undertaking or has budgeted for the m
ajority of actions.
Com
ment noted.
143 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Ensure that adequate funding is
provided to the Environm
ental M
onitoring Com
mittee (E
MC
) and the S
tormw
ater Interagency Liaison G
roup (SILG
) for these groups to m
eet their mandates.
Com
ment noted.
144 C
orporation of Delta C
ouncil R
eport, dated April 27, 2009
With cost sharing, m
unicipal residential sew
er charges would
increase by 30%, w
hile for full cost sharing the increase w
ould be 10%.
The remaining actions of the LW
MP
also have the potential to represent costs to the m
unicipality, but the specific financial im
pacts are unclear at this tim
e.
Com
ment noted.
145 D
istrict of Maple R
idge Council
Resolution, M
ay 25, 2009. W
ork with provincial and federal
governments for funding of the
sewage plants. The tim
ing of the plants should be determ
ined by those outcom
es.
Given the significant cost and im
portance of this work,
the LWM
P is designed to fulfill environm
ental policy goals shared by all three levels of governm
ent; this plan assum
es provincial and federal financial com
mitm
ents will be forthcom
ing. The amount and
timing of cost sharing contributions w
ill determine the
timelines given the region’s lim
ited capacity to com
plete certain comm
itments.
SDD-109
28 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 146
District of M
aple Ridge C
ouncil R
esolution, May 25, 2009.
The District of M
aple Ridge w
ould like to annually review
the implem
entation and funding of the LW
MP
action item
s, in regard to affordability.
Com
ment noted.
147 D
istrict of North V
ancouver C
ouncil Report, dated M
ay 13, 2009
Forward a letter to the provincial and
federal governments urging them
to each provide 1/3 funding for the new
treatm
ent plants.
Given the significant cost and im
portance of this work,
the LWM
P is designed to fulfill environm
ental policy goals shared by all three levels of governm
ent. S
pecifically, cost sharing will be sought by M
V and
municipalities from
both senior levels of government.
148 C
ity of Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 21, 2009
Senior governm
ents should develop an econom
ic plan to fund the large costs of upgrades w
hile meeting
environmental, technological and
Integrated Resource R
ecovery (IRR
) priorities.
Cost sharing for secondary treatm
ent will be sought
and innovative opportunities for integrated resource recovery w
ill be examined—
this is supported by S
trategies 1.3 and 2.1.
149 C
ity of Vancouver C
ouncil R
eport, dated May 21, 2009
The draft LWM
P w
ould have significant cost im
plications for hom
eowners in V
ancouver.
Com
ment noted.
150 C
ity of Coquitlam
Council
Resolution, dated June 2, 2009
Conduct an updated regional
affordability study, with m
unicipal input and com
mentary, prior to adoption of
the LWM
P.
The MV
continues to liaise with its m
embers as part
of an ongoing process to share an understanding of the affordability of the regional utility plans.
151 D
istrict of North V
ancouver C
ouncil Report, dated M
ay 13, 2009
Som
e potential new initiatives, such
as the managem
ent of private property sew
er laterals and m
anagement of M
V system
capacity issues related to infiltration in m
unicipal systems could result in
increased costs; until further planning w
ork is completed, these costs are
difficult to quantify.
Com
ment noted. It is recognized that in general
municipal w
et weather inflow
and infiltration m
anagement program
s require increased efforts and resources in order to m
anage the total system m
ost cost affordably and to reduce sew
er overflows.
Performance M
easures
N
o comm
ents received.
SDD-110
29 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation M
etro Vancouver M
ember Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse C
onsultation Process 152
City of P
ort Moody C
ouncil R
esolution, dated May 14, 2009
Recom
mendation m
ade that the MV
draft LW
MP
, dated March 2009 be
referred to the Environm
ental P
rotection Com
mittee for review
.
Com
ment noted.
153 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
The LWM
P tim
eline is overly am
bitious; there will be no
opportunities for the municipality to
review the final draft LW
MP
that incorporates com
ments from
the consultation process prior to consideration of approval by the M
V
Board.
Following the approval of the LW
MP
by the Metro
Vancouver B
oard, it will be subject to a final review
by M
etro Vancouver m
ember C
ouncils before it is sent to the B
.C. M
inister of Environm
ent for approval.
154 C
ity of Surrey C
orporate Report,
dated May 25, 2009
Provide a copy of the final draft LW
MP
to all M
V M
embers for final com
ment
prior to consideration of the LWM
P by
the MV
Board; w
ould ensure that m
unicipality concerns have been addressed and that other com
ments
that have been received and subsequently incorporated into the final draft are acceptable to the m
unicipalities.
Following the approval of the LW
MP
by the Metro
Vancouver B
oard, it will be subject to a final review
by M
etro Vancouver m
ember C
ouncils before it is sent to the B
.C. M
inister of Environm
ent for approval.
SDD-111
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-112
Liquid Waste M
anagement Plan C
onsultation First N
ations Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver Responses
004955599
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 4
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse G
eneral Plan Com
ments
1.
Public M
eeting N
otes First N
ations are stewards of the land; liquid w
aste m
anagement is a system
that is owned by
municipalities or other organizations over w
hich First N
ations have no control.
MV
’s and municipal liquid w
aste managem
ent system
s are owned by the public and protect health
and the environment. The region’s First N
ations benefit from
these systems and are engaged in
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
consultations. 2.
P
ublic Meeting
Notes
Aboriginal rights and title m
ust be considered when
thinking about the environment.
First Nations have been engaged in LW
MP
consultation. In addition, First N
ations’ constitutional rights w
ill be considered in LWM
P im
plementation
(Section A
). 3.
P
ublic Meeting
Notes
First Nations, w
ho were here first, are being
affected; the affect on the longevity of the First N
ations people will cause m
ore strain on the health system
.
First Nations have been engaged in LW
MP
consultation. In addition, First N
ations’ constitutional rights w
ill be considered in LWM
P im
plementation
(Section A
). 4.
P
ublic Meeting
Notes
The Sem
iahmoo First N
ation is trying to gather reports and data to find out w
hat contaminants are
flowing dow
n the Serpentine and N
icomekl.
Access to M
V’s studies is available through its library
or by contacting the Information C
enter at icentre@
metrovancouver.org
5.
Public M
eeting N
otes M
any industries and municipalities are going ahead
with projects w
ithout looking at aboriginal rights and title.
Com
ment noted. First N
ations have been engaged in LW
MP
consultation. First Nations’ constitutional
rights will be considered in LW
MP
implem
entation (S
ection A).
6.
Public M
eeting N
otes W
ater quality is important for the S
emiahm
oo First N
ations as they are salt water people.
Com
ment noted. S
trategy 3.3 will continue to assess
Boundary B
ay for impacts from
liquid wastes.
7.
Public M
eeting N
otes The Little C
ampbell R
iver has experienced three m
ajor fish kills due to poor water quality; the
Sem
iahmoo First N
ations are unable to harvest oysters on their lands.
Under S
trategy 3.4, municipalities w
ill develop and im
plement co-ordinated integrated storm
water
managem
ent plans (ISM
Ps) for Little C
ampbell
River.
Strategy 3.3 w
ill continue to assess Boundary B
ay for im
pacts from liquid w
astes.
SDD-113
2 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation First N
ations Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 8.
P
ublic Meeting
Notes
Bring back the health of the environm
ent as First N
ations cannot currently hunt or fish for traditional foods.
Strategy 1.3 “M
inimizes im
pacts to the environm
ent—w
ater, land and air” helps support this need.
Strategy 1.1: Reduce liquid w
astes at their source (Strategy #1 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Strategy 1.2: Reduce w
et weather overflow
s (Strategy #2 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Strategy 1.3: Reduce environm
ental impacts from
liquid waste m
anagement to a m
inimum
(Strategy #3 in March 2009 D
raft LW
MP)
No com
ments received.
Strategy 2.1: Pursue liquid w
aste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context (Strategy #6 & #8 in M
arch 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Strategy 3.1: Manage assets and optim
ize existing sanitary sewerage operations (Strategy #4 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
No com
ments received.
Strategy 3.2: U
se innovative approaches and technologies (Strategy #5 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Strategy 3.3: Monitor the perform
ance of liquid waste system
impacts on the receiving environm
ent (Strategy #7 in March 2009
Draft LW
MP)
No com
ments received.
Strategy 3.4: Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term
needs (Strategy #8 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 9.
M
eeting with the
Musqueam
Indian B
and, July 21, 2009
Musqueam
Indian Band (M
IB) requested a tim
eline on the upgrade and potential re-location of the Iona Island W
aste Water Treatm
ent Plant (IIW
WTP
).
MV
staff sent an information package to the M
IB on
October 22, 2009 and M
V staff w
ill follow up w
ith the M
IB B
and Manager to ensure that he has received
the IIWW
TP briefing package and related m
aterial. 10.
Meeting w
ith the M
usqueam
Indian Band,
July 21, 2009
MV
should work to engage the province in
discussions with M
usqueam on consultations over
the IIWW
TP and capacity funding issues.
MV
staff is in discussions with the province
concerning the role of the MIB
in LWM
P
consultations.
SDD-114
3 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation First N
ations Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 11.
Meeting w
ith the M
usqueam Indian
Band, July 21,
2009
MIB
representatives indicated that they will review
the 2005 proposal for a joint liaison com
mittee (or
other format such as briefings sessions/w
orkshops, etc.) as a possible approach for M
V and M
IB to
address the IIWW
TP and other issues requiring
“political” discussions and decisions.
MV
staff will seek M
IB’s com
ments on this issue
and/or proposed format for an engagem
ent process betw
een MV
and MIB
.
Strategy 3.5: Use collaborative m
anagement to address evolving needs (A
daptive Managem
ent in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Financial Plan
N
o comm
ents received.
Performance M
easures
N
o comm
ents received.
Consultation Process
12. H
wlitsum
First N
ation letter The H
wlitsum
First Nation (H
FN) has an interest in
liquid waste m
anagement and w
ould like to be involved in the decision m
aking process.
Com
ment noted.
13. H
wlitsum
First N
ation letter The H
FN w
ould like to comm
ent on the LWM
P to
ensure that their interests are protected; however,
they have a firm policy that all consultation should
take place on a revenue neutral basis. To participate effectively in LW
MP
consultation and finance any expertise needed to assist in m
aking informed
decisions, capacity funding must be provided.
MV
does not provide capacity funding for participation in the LW
MP
update process.
14. H
wlitsum
First N
ation letter R
equest for information regarding w
hat capacity funding, if any, is available to the H
FN to participate
in the LWM
P negotiations.
MV
does not provide capacity funding for participation in the LW
MP
update process.
15. H
wlitsum
First N
ation letter The ongoing w
ork of identifying and articulating the interests of the H
FN and participating in the decision
making process requires a level playing field; in
return, the HFN
will m
ake itself available to participate in activities such as studies, assessm
ents, conferences, workshops and
presentations within the H
FN com
munity.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-115
4 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation First N
ations Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 16.
Meeting N
otes A
nother level of consultation will need to take place
with the S
emiahm
oo First Nation.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-116
Liquid Waste M
anagement Plan C
onsultation Provincial and Federal G
overnment A
gency and Ministry Input (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro Vancouver R
esponses
004955600
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 5
#
Source Issue/C
omm
ent/Question
Metro Vancouver (M
V) Response
General Plan C
omm
ents 1
BC
Ministry of
Environm
ent letter dated D
ecember
4, 2008
Due to the specific language identified in the
Environm
ental Managem
ent Act, the province
cannot consider the naming convention proposed by
Metro V
ancouver (Liquid Resource M
anagement
Plan.) H
owever, the M
inistry understands Metro
Vancouver’s position and acknow
ledges the potential value of using a w
aste as a resource.
MV
staff proposes a new title: Integrated Liquid
Waste and R
esource Managem
ent Plan: A
Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan for the G
VS
&D
D and
Mem
ber Municipalities.
2 B
C H
ydro letter dated M
ay 29, 2009
Several opportunities to w
ork collaboratively with M
V
exist and we look forw
ard to discussions. M
V looks forw
ard to working w
ith all stakeholders during the im
plementation of the (Liquid W
aste M
anagement P
lan) LWM
P.
3 B
C H
ydro letter Integrate a regional energy and em
issions vision into the various M
V plans, including the LW
MP
. The LW
MP
contains a vision statement in the
Sustainable R
egion Initiative Section that addresses
energy and emissions.
4 B
C H
ydro letter A
dd regional energy quantification and mapping -
including demand, supply, w
aste heat recapture, and resource recovery options in the LW
MP
.
The LWM
P contains an action to prepare business
cases for Integrated Resource R
ecovery (IRR
) opportunities w
ithin each sewerage area. M
any of these issues w
ill be assessed during this exercise. 5
BC
Hydro letter
Has M
V considered a potential governance role as a
regional energy utility? Such a utility m
ay address broader issues than current M
V resource and w
aste m
anagement functions.
MV
’s energy role is evolving.
6 B
C H
ydro letter M
V has the potential for regional leadership in
district energy, to ensure consistent standards and future interconnectivity am
ong systems.
MV
understands the benefit of district energy on the long range energy planning initiatives. M
V w
ill also have an Integrated U
tility Managem
ent Advisory
Com
mittee (IU
MA
C) to ensure integration across its
utilities.
SDD-117
2 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 7
BC
Hydro letter
Opportunities exist for local energy generation, an
important elem
ent of a sustainable region. Recent
results of a technical feasibility assessment show
ed high potential for technologies such as w
aste -to -energy.
The LWM
P contains an action item
to assess IRR
through business casing in each sew
erage area. These issues w
ill be addressed through the IRR
process.
8 B
C H
ydro letter P
otential regional leadership on local government
energy as well as greenhouse gas (G
HG
) targets. M
V is developing long range energy planning and
GH
G initiatives w
ith appropriate municipal
coordination on opportunities. 9
BC
Hydro letter
Opportunities exist to engage in a national vision of
Integrated Com
munity E
nergy System
s. C
omm
ent noted.
Strategy 1.1: Reduce liquid w
astes at their source (Strategy #1 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 1.1 in the LW
MP.
10 Fisheries and O
ceans Canada
letter dated May
15, 2009
LWM
P com
ponents such as improved integration of
land use planning and rainwater m
anagement to
protect or improve w
atershed and stream health are
complem
entary to the fish habitat managem
ent goals of the D
epartment of Fisheries and O
ceans.
The LWM
P contains an action item
to address w
atershed scale stormw
ater planning, and action item
s to assess impacts on the receiving
environment.
11 H
ealth Canada
letter dated May
27, 2009
Consider program
s developed for other jurisdictions in the developm
ent of MV
liquid waste outreach
programs. R
eference made to an A
ustralian governm
ent initiative to help people use water w
isely in their everyday lives.
The LWM
P contains an action item
to develop outreach program
s, which w
ill likely include a review
of other jurisdictions, and an action item to exam
ine rainw
ater re-use. The Drinking W
ater Managem
ent P
lan has considered this issue as well.
12 H
ealth Canada
letter S
uggest that similar to the “C
omm
uter Challenge,”
municipalities could prom
ote a water conservation
challenge.
The Drinking W
ater Managem
ent Plan has actions
on water conservation.
13 H
ealth Canada
letter W
ould MV
consider including water m
etering as an option in G
oal 1, Strategy 1 of the LW
MP
? Water
metering has successfully reduced w
ater consum
ption in other municipalities.
The Drinking W
ater Managem
ent Plan has
considered this issue with decisions on m
etering to be m
ade by municipalities.
SDD-118
3 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 1.2: R
educe wet w
eather overflows (Strategy #2 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 1.2 in the LWM
P. 14
Environm
ent C
anada letter dated A
pril 24, 2009
Continued action is needed to elim
inate overflows
from com
bined sewers and reduce the im
pact of storm
water.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P) has
several action items to address w
et weather
overflows, and storm
water m
anagement.
15 H
ealth Canada
letter dated May
27, 2009
Transport Canada m
ay have been overlooked in Im
plementation S
tep 11.1, the Governance S
ection and G
oal 1: Strategy 2.
The LWM
P contains action item
s to address the pum
p out facilities, which w
ill address this issue.
16 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail dated June 1, 2009
Actions 6 and 7: W
herever current overflows im
pact land in the Agricultural Land R
eserve (ALR
), these should be m
ade a high priority. Elim
inate rather than m
inimize sanitary sew
er spills, as they have potential negative food safety im
pacts on the adjacent crops.
The LWM
P has several action item
s pertaining to prevention of w
et weather overflow
s.
17 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail
Actions 6 and 7: The target of m
inimizing “the
occurrence of combined sew
er overflows to a
frequency no greater than once every 5 years for a 24 hour duration event” w
ill likely mean that sew
er overflow
s continue to occur on an annual basis. In the interim
, timely overflow
reporting is crucial so potential food borne pathogens discovered later can be traced back to sew
er overflow records.
The LWM
P contains a strategy and several action
items to m
onitor the performance of the liquid w
aste system
and impacts on the environm
ent, including actions to address chronic sanitary sew
er overflows.
18 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail
Strategy 2, A
ction 6.3: Priority areas defined here -
does this mean that M
V M
embers, like S
urrey, are not included?
The updated LWM
P contains an action item
requiring m
unicipalities to work w
ith MV
to implem
ent overflow
managem
ent plans. Strategy 1.3: M
inimize im
pacts from liquid w
aste managem
ent on the environment – w
ater, land and air (Strategy #3 in March
2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 1.3 in the LWM
P. 19
Environm
ent C
anada letter dated A
pril 24, 2009
The Canadian C
ouncil for Ministers of the
Environm
ent (CC
ME
) strategy signed in February 2009 indicates that E
nvironment C
anada (EC
) intends to develop a federal w
astewater effluent
regulation under the Fisheries Act.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-119
4 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 20
Environm
ent C
anada letter E
C cannot com
ment on the proposed tim
elines to upgrade treatm
ent plants since the federal w
astewater regulation is still under developm
ent. H
owever, in the interest of protecting the
environment, M
V is strongly encouraged to upgrade
the Wastew
ater Treatment P
lants (WW
TPs) w
ithout delay.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater treatm
ent for the North S
hore and V
ancouver sewerage areas. B
ased on the Canada-
wide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of Municipal
Wastew
ater Effluent (C
WS
-MM
WE
), Lions Gate
should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
21 E
nvironment
Canada letter
All effluents from
wastew
ater treatment system
s and overflow
s from com
bined sewers in C
anada must
comply w
ith all applicable federal legislation including the Fisheries A
ct and the Canadian
Environm
ental Protection A
ct (CE
PA
).
The LWM
P contains action item
s to work w
ith regulatory agencies to m
onitor impacts of the liquid
waste system
in conformance w
ith the CC
ME
C
anada Wide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of M
unicipal Wastew
ater Effluents requirem
ents, and develop environm
ental quality objectives. Strategy 2.1: Pursue liquid w
aste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context (Strategy #6 & #8 in M
arch 2009 D
raft LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 2.1 in the LW
MP.
22 B
C H
ydro letter dated M
ay 29, 2009
Support the Integrated R
esource Recovery (IR
R)
vision of the plan. The Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan (LW
MP
) contains a goal to use liquid w
aste as a resource.
23 B
C H
ydro letter H
as MV
conducted a highest and best use analysis of biosolid and yard w
aste? B
iosolids investigations for land application and energy recovery have been undertaken.
24 B
C H
ydro letter D
oes biosolid and yard waste have m
ore value in com
posting and anaerobic digestion or in waste-to-
energy?
Biosolids investigations for land application and
energy recovery have been undertaken.
25 B
C H
ydro letter It w
ould be useful to understand the quantity (tonnes per year) and quality (w
ater content) of biosolids and anaerobic digestion residues that are presently available (not currently digested) for energy recovery.
Biosolids investigations for land application and
energy recovery have been undertaken.
26 B
C H
ydro letter The Integrated R
esource Recovery (IR
R) concept
assumes all biosolids w
ill be processed to biogas, but this m
ay not be their “highest and best use.”
Biosolids investigations for land application and
energy recovery have been undertaken.
SDD-120
5 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 27
BC
Hydro letter
Integrate the LWM
P w
ith the Solid W
aste M
anagement P
lan (SW
MP
), as the method of
treating wet biosolids (LW
MP
). LWM
P by-products
can be integrated with treatm
ent for garden waste,
Dem
olition, Land Clearing and C
onstruction and w
ood in the SW
MP
.
The LWM
P contains an action item
for a business case for IR
R for each sew
erage area to assess such item
s. This includes linkages between liquid w
aste and other system
s such as solid waste, drinking
water and land use.
28 B
C H
ydro letter Transfer stations m
ay be a good location to process w
ood waste to gasification feedstock as they are
decentralized in industrial areas and may be in close
proximity to future district energy sites, allow
ing for cost effective transportation of district energy feedstock.
Wood w
aste collection and processing is being addressed in the S
WM
P.
29 B
C H
ydro letter A
ction 20.2 and 20.4: Should be expedited over the
next few years as m
any comm
unities are now
considering opportunities of sewer w
aste heat recovery.
The LWM
P contains an action item
to evaluate heat energy recovery. The LW
MP
contains an action item
for a business case for IRR
for each sewerage area
which w
ill include timelines.
30 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail dated June 1, 2009
Action 21: The use of these types of fertilizers for
agricultural food crops will depend on the quality of
the fertilizer product produced (whether the nutrients
are in the form of biosolids, purified liquids or
extracted nutrients such as struvite).
The LWM
P contains an action item
to assess technologies and processes to recover nutrients, and develop business cases. It also w
ill continue to assess production of a m
inimum
Class B
biosolids.
31 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail
Action 21: A
ny recovered fertilizer product from
liquid waste m
ust meet food safety standards and
organic certification requirements; even if the current
crop is not intended for human consum
ption, such as a hay field, m
any farms practice crop rotation and
a future crop may be a food crop.
The LWM
P contains an action item
to assess technologies and processes to recover nutrients, and develop business cases. It also w
ill continue to assess production of a m
inimum
Class B
biosolids.
32 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail
Action 22: This cannot be intended for agriculture;
agricultural operators would have to build huge
reservoirs to capture rain water, and this w
ould take significant am
ounts of land out of production.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-121
6 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 33
Ministry of
Agriculture and
Lands email
Action 23: The use of reclaim
ed wastew
ater for agricultural irrigation of food crops w
ould be dependent on the quality; if it is potable and w
ithin drinking w
ater standards, the irrigation of food crops, even for direct consum
ption, should not be a problem
.
The LWM
P contains an action for m
unicipalities to evaluate opportunities for the collection and use of rainw
ater.
Strategy 3.3: Monitor the perform
ance of liquid waste system
impacts on the receiving environm
ent (Strategy #7 in March 2009
Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.3 in the LWM
P. 34
Environm
ent C
anada letter dated A
pril 24, 2009
Action 28.1: The M
inistry of Environm
ent regulates sew
age sludge applications and should be added to the list of parties to be notified of substances potentially im
pacting the receiving environment.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains a strategy to monitor liquid w
aste discharges, and the im
pacts on the environment. It
also contains action items to w
ork with the province
to develop environmental quality objectives.
Biosolids applications are in accordance w
ith provincial requirem
ents. 35
Health C
anada letter dated M
ay 27, 2009
Action 25.1: This inform
ation should be used to prioritize w
orks for sewer separation or
implem
entation of measures to better m
anage high peak volum
es.
Information generated by environm
ental effects m
onitoring is used to determine strategies for system
m
anagement and infrastructure refinem
ents. This is review
ed by the Environm
ental Monitoring
Com
mittee (E
MC
) and Storm
water Interagency
Liaison Group (S
ILG) as subcom
mittees under the
Integrated Utility M
anagement A
dvisory Com
mittee
(IUM
AC
). 36
Ministry of
Agriculture and
Lands email
dated June 1, 2009
Action 27: This action m
ay require the use of bacterial source tracking to determ
ine the source of bacterial contam
inants.
The assessment of need for additional indicator tools
such as bacterial source tracking is part of the EM
C
role.
37 M
inistry of A
griculture and Lands em
ail
Action 27: Investigate the relative costs of this type
of sampling and build them
into the “cost and resources” section of the LW
MP
.
The budgets for environmental m
onitoring are contained w
ithin MV
’s annual budgeting process.
SDD-122
7 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 3.4: Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long—
term needs (Strategy #8 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.4 in the LWM
P. 38
Ministry of H
ealth letter dated M
ay 27, 2009
Ensure that m
unicipal Integrated Storm
water
Managem
ent Plans (IS
MP
) are developed and im
plemented in a tim
ely manner; these plans w
ill need to ensure attainm
ent of any existing water
quality guidelines and objectives in receiving waters.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains an action item requiring the developm
ent of IS
MP
s by 2014.
Strategy 3.5: Use collaborative m
anagement to address evolving needs (A
daptive Managem
ent in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ent received.
Financial Plan
N
o comm
ent received.
Performance M
easures 39
Health C
anada letter dated M
ay 27, 2009
Periodic reassessm
ents of the list of parameters
should be made to consider em
erging contaminants.
Perform
ance measures w
ill be further developed and review
ed by the Integrated Utility M
anagement
Advisory C
omm
ittee (IUM
AC
). C
onsultation Process 40
Environm
ent C
anada letter dated A
pril 24, 2009
MV
is encouraged to participate in the consultations that w
ill take place on the proposed federal w
astewater effluent strategy, once they have been
prepared.
MV
intends to participate.
41 B
C M
inistry of A
dvanced E
ducation and Labour M
arket D
evelopment
letter dated March
26, 2009.
The Ministry of A
dvanced Education and Labour
Market D
evelopment does not consider itself to be a
direct stakeholder in the Liquid Waste M
anagement
Plan, but suggests that M
V offer consultation options
to public post-secondary institutions in MV
.
Com
ment noted. M
V has conducted an extensive
consultation program during the developm
ent of the LW
MP
, including providing input opportunities for post-secondary institutions.
SDD-123
8 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 42
Departm
ent of Indian and N
orthern Affairs
Canada letter
dated April 8,
2009
Would like to participate in the LW
MP
consultation process in the follow
ing manner: receive regular
correspondence regarding the status of the LWM
P
review, attend an intergovernm
ental workshop about
the LWM
P, receive inform
ation about upcoming
public consultation activities and review the draft
LWM
P through the M
inistry of Environm
ent.
MV
complied w
ith Departm
ent request.
43 B
C M
inistry of C
omm
unity D
evelopment
letter dated March
16, 2009
Would like to participate in the LW
MP
consultation process in the follow
ing manner: receive regular
correspondence regarding the status of the LWM
P
review, m
eet with M
V staff to review
and discuss the draft LW
MP
, attend an intergovernmental w
orkshop about the LW
MP
, receive information about
upcoming public consultation activities, subm
it form
al comm
ents on the draft LWM
P and review
the draft LW
MP
through the Ministry of E
nvironment.
MV
complied w
ith Ministry request.
44 B
C H
ydro letter dated M
arch 31, 2009
Would like to participate in the LW
MP
consultation process in the follow
ing manner: receive regular
correspondence regarding the status of the LWM
P
review, attend an intergovernm
ental workshop about
the LWM
P, receive inform
ation about upcoming
public consultation activities and submit form
al com
ments on the draft LW
MP
.
MV
complied w
ith BC
Hydro request.
45 E
nvironment
Canada letter
dated May 1,
2009
Indicated which E
nvironment C
anada staff mem
ber w
ould attend the Technical Forum on M
ay 6, 2009 and provide input via the B
urrard Inlet Environm
ental A
ction Program
/Fraser River E
stuary Managem
ent P
rogram.
Com
ment noted.
46 B
C M
inistry of H
ealth Living &
Sport letter dated
March 26, 2009
Forwarded M
V correspondence regarding LW
MP
R
eview to M
r. Andrew
Hazlew
ood, Assistant D
eputy M
inister of Population and P
ublic Health, M
inistry of H
ealthy Living and Sport for his inform
ation.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-124
9 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation P
rovincial and Federal Governm
ent Agency and M
inistry Input (May 31, 2008 – O
ctober 30, 2009) Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 47
BC
Ministry of
Sm
all B
usinesses, Technical &
E
conomic
Developm
ent letter dated M
ay 21, 2009
Indicated that Ministry feedback w
ill be submitted
following the com
pletion of the electoral process and the receipt of policy direction from
Cabinet in early
June, 2009
Com
ment noted.
SDD-125
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-126
Liquid Waste M
anagement Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro Vancouver R
esponses
004976099
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 6
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse G
eneral Plan Com
ments
1 B
IEA
P/FR
EM
P
letter dated May
20, 2009
Com
ments m
ade in April 2009 by the B
urrard Inlet E
nvironmental A
ction Program
and the Fraser R
iver Estuary M
anagement P
rogram (B
IEA
P-
FRE
MP
) Managem
ent Com
mittee have been
incorporated or addressed in the draft Liquid Waste
Managem
ent Plan (LW
MP
).
Com
ment noted.
2 B
IEA
P/FR
EM
P
letter S
upport the LWM
P direction requiring adaptive
standards and integration with land use plans.
Com
ment noted.
3 B
IEA
P/FR
EM
P
letter U
nclear how the LW
MP
includes climate change
initiatives or responds to climate change in general.
Greenhouse gas (G
HG
) tracking and mitigation under
Strategy 1.3. Im
pacts and adaptation for treatment
plants under Strategy 3.1 and overall system
s under S
trategy 3.4. 4
BIE
AP
/FRE
MP
letter
The Canadian C
ouncil of Ministers of the
Environm
ent (CC
ME
) should be referenced in the final LW
MP
.
References added.
5 E
nvironmental
Monitoring
Com
mittee (E
MC
) C
orrespondence
Implem
entation section: The “timeline” colum
n should be clarified; target years are identified but do not specify “by that year” or “w
ithin that year”. This w
ill be important for short term
goals.
Timelines im
ply within the specified calendar year.
6 E
MC
C
orrespondence S
ection A: D
oes not recognize other legislation that plays a role in the LW
MP
such as Species at
Risk (Federal), the Fish P
rotection Act (P
rovincial) and the W
ater Act (P
rovincial).
LWM
P im
plementation continues to take into account
all regulations and legislation.
7 E
MC
C
orrespondence G
oal 1: Change sentence 2 to read: “P
rinciple objectives of rainw
ater managem
ent are preventing localized flooding from
rainwater runoff and
protecting urban streams from
polluted runoff and dam
aging storm flow
s, maintaining stream
health and fisheries value.”
Reference to fish and w
ildlife habitats has been added to the G
oal 1 rainwater and storm
water text.
SDD-127
2 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 8
EM
C
Correspondence
Need to m
onitor how rainw
ater is infiltrated and reused. S
ome findings through S
urrey Integrated S
tormw
ater Managem
ent Plans (IS
MP
s) have show
n that existing creeks and fisheries waterw
ays m
ay dry up if water balances are altered.
Such m
onitoring needs and programs are best brought
forward by S
tormw
ater Interagency Liaison Group
(SILG
) and Environm
ental Monitoring C
omm
ittee (E
MC
) as part of the plan implem
entation.
9 E
MC
C
orrespondence C
onsider a solution for the issue of groundwater
traveling down utility trenches and then em
erging and causing flooding problem
s in low lying areas,
creating problems w
ith infrastructure and private properties, such as pooling at the bottom
of hills and basem
ents or eroding backfills.
This issue pertains to construction practices—it is best
addressed through Regional E
ngineers Advisory
Com
mittee (R
EA
C) or as part of m
unicipal ISM
Ps.
Strategy 1.1: Reduce liquid w
astes at their source (Strategy #1 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 10
BIE
AP
/FRE
MP
letter
Education, outreach and source control are cost
effective options for protecting wastew
ater from
pollutants; support the identification of specific outreach program
s and target audiences.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under
Strategy 1.1 in the Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan
(LWM
P).
11 B
IEA
P/FR
EM
P
letter R
equire the implem
entation of stormw
ater and rainw
ater managem
ent measures and plans to
address the cumulative negative effects of altered
water quality and quantity on area w
atercourses and receiving w
aters.
Com
ment noted. This has been addressed under
Strategy 1.1 in the LW
MP
.
12 B
IEA
P/FR
EM
P
letter The LW
MP
does not explicitly comm
ent on pharm
aceuticals and how to address them
; this issue could benefit from
wider source control
initiatives such as education and public outreach.
Com
ment noted. P
harmacy take-back program
s are part of provincial extended producer responsibility (E
PR
) programs being m
anaged under the solid waste
planning. 13
EM
C
Correspondence
Implem
entation Step 3.2 iii b: W
ho will identify the
need to inspect private sewers; is this
implem
entation step meant to be reactive to
problems or w
ill sewer ow
ners be required to inspect and report?
Strategy 1.1 w
ill lead to linking private sewer inspection
to property disclosure statements at the tim
e of real estate transfer.
14 E
MC
C
orrespondence Im
plementation S
tep 3. iii b: This implem
entation step is vague.
Action has been re-w
ritten for clarity.
SDD-128
3 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 15
EM
C
Correspondence
Action 4: Identified that m
inimizing rainw
ater runoff at the site level does not address the overall w
atershed non-point of source pollution factor; additional references for pollution and pollution prevention and m
anagement are necessary.
Com
ment noted. N
on-point source pollution m
anagement is best addressed through the S
urrey Integrated S
tormw
ater Managem
ent Plans (IS
MP
) processes under S
trategy 3.4.
16 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 4: Focusing only on individual site measures
will not necessarily serve the needs of a w
atershed; site m
easures, in combination w
ith comm
unity facilities and sustainable infrastructure design, w
ill better serve the w
atershed, especially in re-developm
ent areas.
Com
ment noted. The IS
MP
process under Strategy
3.4 is expected to identify and address the watershed
specific needs.
17 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 7: Priority locations of S
anitary Sew
er O
verflows (S
SO
s) may not be associated w
ith high grow
th areas; SS
Os often occur dow
nstream of
older infrastructure sections which are w
eak and cannot handle the hydraulic grade line during the event.
Com
ment noted. S
trategy 1.2 will lead to the
development of S
SO
Managem
ent Plans that w
ill take this into account.
18 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 7: Look at the design heads of the trunk system
s and associated vulnerabilities and prioritize upgrades from
that point forward. This
should be separate and in addition to Inflow and
Infiltration (I&I).
Strategy 1.3 addresses these com
ments.
19 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 7: Evidence exists of S
SO
s occurring dow
nstream of high-density areas in S
urrey; num
erous breaks and surcharges in the north S
urrey trunk line, which has little new
development
through Surrey, but m
ore development from
upstream
sources.
Strategies 1.1 and 1.2. address this com
ment.
Strategy 1.2: Reduce w
et weather overflow
s (Strategy #2 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P) 20
EM
C
Correspondence
Implem
entation Step 6.4 i &
ii: Clarify baselines for
annual reductions. If existing text is interpreted literally, full separation w
ill never be achieved. A
lso, current wording does not give a sense of the
overall timeline.
Addressed by new
text for Strategy 1.2.
SDD-129
4 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 21
EM
C
Correspondence
Action 7: S
hould include MV
infrastructure (in some
areas MV
’s system is undersized based on
upstream developm
ent, even with appropriate I&
I considerations).
Sizing of M
V infrastructure is addressed through
Strategies 1.3, and 3.1.
22 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 10: Clarify w
hat is expected from M
V
Mem
ber programs, such as type of m
onitoring, frequency and result subm
issions
Strategy 3.3 outlines the m
onitoring, while S
trategy 1.3 uses the m
onitoring results to inform operating
changes and needs for upgrades. 23
EM
C
Correspondence
Action 10: If this action refers to non-point of source
pollution, then more clarification is required.
Clarification is under S
trategy 3.3 though the Canadian
Council of M
inisters of the Environm
ent (CC
ME
) C
anada Wide S
trategy for Managem
ent of Municipal
Wastew
ater Effluents needs.
24 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 10: Environm
ental Monitoring C
omm
ittee (E
MC
) and the Storm
water Interagency Liaison
Group (S
ILG) need to play roles.
SILG
and EM
C roles are identified in S
trategy 3.5.
Strategy 1.3: Reduce environm
ental impacts from
liquid waste m
anagement to a m
inimum
(Strategy #3 in March 2009 D
raft LW
MP)
25 B
IEA
P/FR
EM
P
letter S
upport the emphasis placed on collaboration,
particularly relative to agricultural runoff, septic-serviced areas, and m
arine pump-out areas.
Com
ment noted.
26 E
MC
/Port M
V
Implem
entation Step 8.3 i: M
ost, if not all, of the S
anitary Sew
er Overflow
(SS
O) locations w
ill lead to flow
s into Port M
V jurisdictional w
aters, either directly or indirectly. P
ort MV
requests to be consulted w
hen overflow locations are identified.
Consultation requirem
ents must be identified in the
LWM
P as is required under existing federal
legislation (Port A
uthorities Operations
Regulations).
Com
ment noted. S
SO
notification is the responsibility of the M
inistry of Environm
ent, the agency responsible for regulating liquid w
aste discharges.
Strategy 2.1: Pursue liquid waste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context (Strategy #6 &
#8 in March 2009
Draft LW
MP)
27 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 22: “Prom
ote the collection and use of rainw
ater for irrigation and other non-potable water
uses,” is acceptable so long as it is not detrimental
to creek base flows and fisheries habitat.
Com
ment noted.
SDD-130
5 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 28
EM
C/ P
ort MV
A
ction 11: Many, if not m
ost, of the pleasure craft m
arinas in the region are Port M
V tenants. P
ort MV
supports this action and can likely assist w
ith its im
plementation.
Com
ment noted.
Strategy 3.1: Manage assets and optim
ize existing sanitary sewerage operations (Strategy #4 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
No com
ments received.
Strategy 3.2: U
se innovative approaches and technologies (Strategy #5 in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
N
o comm
ents received.
Strategy 3.3: Monitor the perform
ance of liquid waste system
impacts on the receiving environm
ent (Strategy #7 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
29 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 25.1: The Environm
ental Monitoring
Com
mittee (E
MC
) should be involved in this action. C
omm
ent noted.
30 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 28.4: This action could have major cost
implications for local governm
ents; Surrey
Integrated Storm
water M
anagement P
lans (ISM
Ps)
currently monitor benthics for w
atershed health.
This action is no longer explicit in the plan.
31 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 28.4: General sam
pling programs for non-
point of source or stormw
ater systems have not
been defined.
This action is no longer explicit in the plan.
32 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 28.4: Consult E
MC
and Storm
water
Interagency Liaison Group (S
ILG) to explore the
merits of this action and develop relevant goals.
This action is no longer explicit in the plan.
33 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 29.2: Link the LWM
P needs w
ith established local system
s to avoid duplicate functions. This action is no longer explicit in the plan. IS
MP
s are required under S
trategy 3.4 34
EM
C
Correspondence
Action 29.2: C
onsider sharing data or having joint agreem
ents on automated system
s in the region. For exam
ple, Surrey currently operates six rainfall
stations, over 16 flow stations and approxim
ately 20 river level stations.
Com
ment noted.
Strategy 3.4: Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term needs (Strategy #8 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
35 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 31.1 ii: Include the managem
ent of rainwater
runoff at the site level and non-point of source (N
PS
) pollution considerations.
Com
ment noted. S
trategy 1.1 addresses site-level rainw
ater managem
ent.
SDD-131
6 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 36
EM
C
Correspondence
Action 32.1: Include all M
V com
munities, even
those with com
bined sewerage areas.
ISM
P are required for all w
atersheds all areas, S
trategy 3.5. 37
EM
C
Correspondence
Action 32.2 ii: R
oads are not the only sources of N
on Point S
ource pollution problems and therefore
should not be highlighted separately.
Com
ment noted. A
ction is no longer explicit.
38 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 32.2 ii: Land use planning plays a role in N
PS
pollution; issues like sediment and erosion,
use of metal fences and storage, use of pesticides
and hot tub discharges all play a large role in the N
PS
effects beyond road runoff.
Com
ment noted. A
ction is no longer explicit.
39 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 32.2 ii: Identified that aggressive municipal
street and catchbasin cleaning programs,
combined w
ith stormceptors, can lead to good
treatment of the road facility; A
ction 32.2 ii should be m
ore generic so as to capture the broader range of influences.
Com
ment noted. A
ction is no longer explicit.
40 E
MC
C
orrespondence A
ction 35.3: Ensure that new
service areas do not overtax lim
ited or deficient MV
trunk systems that
exist downstream
until downstream
infrastructure is capable of servicing the catchm
ent area without the
undue risk of significant trunk failures or frequent overflow
events.
Com
ment noted. W
ording has been revised to require conform
ance with R
egional Grow
th Strategy. S
ystem
capacity is addressed by scenarios under Strategy 3.4
and basic servicing under Strategy 1.3.
Strategy 3.5: Use collaborative m
anagement to address evolving needs (A
daptive Managem
ent in March 2009 D
raft LWM
P)
No com
ments received.
Financial Plan 41
BIE
AM
P-FR
EM
P
letter S
upport the identification of a funding schedule for specific program
s and activities such as those supporting collaboration and innovation.
Budget schedules are not included as the B
oard and councils cannot authorize future budgets extending the full duration of the plan.
Performance M
easures 42
BIE
AP
/FRE
MP
letter
Perform
ance measures and reporting should be
linked to sustainability. P
erformance m
easures are linked to MV
sustainability reporting in S
ection B.
SDD-132
7 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Input from
Com
mittees (M
ay 31, 2008 – October 30, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 43
EM
C
Correspondence
Goal 1: A
dd “minim
ize beach PO
STIN
GS
/ closures” to the final bullet.
Beach closures can occur due to m
any causes. C
ollaborative work w
ill continue to support this objective, but is not explicitly stated.
Consultation Process
No com
ments received.
SDD-133
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-134
Liquid Waste M
anagement Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, Com
ments, Q
uestions and Metro Vancouver R
esponses
004955601
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 7
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse G
eneral Plan Com
ments
1 Forum
Notes
Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P) priorities
include the protection of human health and the
environment and creating a legacy for younger
generations.
Com
ment noted. This is addressed under the G
oals of the LW
MP
.
2 Forum
Notes
No significant environm
ental concerns have been identified w
ithin the existing LWM
P.
Com
ment noted. U
nder Strategy 3.3, the LW
MP
continues to m
onitor the performance of the liquid
waste system
and impacts on the receiving
environment.
3 Forum
Notes
Need a “front end” to be added to the LW
MP
that m
akes the case for action. C
omm
ent noted. The Vision S
tatement S
ection of the LW
MP
includes information on the S
ustainable R
egion Initiative which provides a rationale for
action. Strategy 1.1: R
educe liquid wastes at their source (Strategy #1 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 1.1 in the LWM
P. 4
Forum N
otes It is im
portant to create public support for the LWM
P
by identifying on the ground outcomes and engaging
a broad section of the comm
unity in education.
Com
ment noted. S
ource control outreach has been addressed under S
trategy 1.1 in the LWM
P.
5 Forum
Notes
MV
should take a watershed approach to source
control. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop storm
water m
anagement plans at a w
atershed scale.
6 Forum
Notes
Monitoring, enforcem
ent and increased regulation are critical to source control.
The LWM
P contains an action to increase inspection
and enforcement.
7 Forum
Notes
Organize forum
s where M
V perm
ittees can share ideas around liquid w
aste managem
ent; share best practices w
ith permittees.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop codes of
practice, guidelines and standards.
8 Forum
Notes
Provide incentives to industry and business to
implem
ent on-site treatment and reduce the im
pact on treatm
ent plants.
The LWM
P contains actions to reduce im
pacts on treatm
ent plants through source control, and an action to develop and evaluate business cases for integrated resource recovery opportunities.
SDD-135
2 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 9
Forum N
otes Is volum
e metering being considered?
Flow m
etering takes place at a regional level as part of the cost allocation process.
10 Forum
Notes
The flow of w
astewater should be reduced prior to
upgrades to the Waste W
ater Treatment P
lants (W
WTP
s).
The LWM
P contains num
erous actions to reduce flow
s in the collection system.
11 Forum
Notes
Industry and business need to be held more
accountable for the volume and quality of
wastew
ater discharge.
The LWM
P contains actions to w
ork with
stakeholders to develop Codes of P
ractice and S
tandards. 12
Forum N
otes W
hat type of incentives could convince homeow
ners to address inflow
and infiltration (I&I) issues?
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent a process for certification of private laterals as part of real estate transactions.
13 Forum
Notes
Com
municate the im
pacts of particular substances, such as pharm
aceuticals, on the environment.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent outreach programs.
14 Forum
Notes
Ask business for an increase in innovation rather
than collecting development cost charges.
The LWM
P contains a goal to use liquid w
aste as a resource.
15 Forum
Notes
Encourage developm
ent that has a low-im
pact on the environm
ent. The LW
MP
contains a goal to reduce impacts by
using liquid waste as a resource.
16 Forum
Notes
What is an appropriate level to set regulatory
requirements for discharge into the sew
er system?
The LWM
P contains an action to review
and enhance sew
er use bylaws.
17 Forum
Notes
Consider a user-pay principle.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop new
regulatory instrum
ents. 18
Forum N
otes C
onsider on-site managem
ent of stormw
ater and rainw
ater within a w
atershed context. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop and im
plement Integrated S
tormw
ater Managem
ent P
lans (ISM
P).
19 Forum
Notes
Identified the need for concise design objectives in regard to on-site rainw
ater managem
ent standards at the com
munity and m
unicipal level.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent ISM
Ps.
20 Forum
Notes
Would on-site rainw
ater managem
ent be maintained
through enforcement?
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent ISM
Ps.
21 Forum
Notes
Use storm
water and rainw
ater as a resource. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop and im
plement IS
MP
s and an action to evaluate rainw
ater re-use.
SDD-136
3 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse Strategy 1.2: R
educe wet w
eather overflows (Strategy #2 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 1.2 in the LWM
P. 22
Forum N
otes The highest priority C
ombined S
ewer O
verflow
(CS
O) areas to address are beaches and the m
ain pipe trunks in M
V.
The LWM
P contains actions to prioritize C
SO
elim
ination.
23 Forum
Notes
A business case could be m
ade for accelerated CS
O
managem
ent to accomm
odate more grow
th and/or reduce the necessary size of treatm
ent plants.
The LWM
P contains actions to prioritize C
SO
elim
ination.
24 Forum
Notes
CS
Os are a key issue in the Fraser A
rea, New
W
estminster and B
urnaby; issue is being addressed, particularly in regard to infiltration inflow
.
The LWM
P contains an action to prevent C
SO
s caused by rainfall and snow
melt.
25 Forum
Notes
CS
O plans m
ust be created by municipalities,
including goals and timelines for im
plementation.
The LWM
P contains actions to develop priorities to
eliminate C
SO
s. 26
Forum N
otes It w
ill take time to im
plement sew
er separation. The LW
MP
contains actions to prioritize CS
O
elimination.
27 Forum
Notes
Sew
er separation at a rate of 1% a year fits w
ell with
the lifecycle of the pipes. The LW
MP
contains actions to prioritize CS
O
elimination.
28 Forum
Notes
CS
Os w
ill be replaced by 2050. The LW
MP
contains actions to prioritize CS
O
elimination.
29 Forum
Notes
Sew
er separation should include private laterals. The LW
MP
comm
its municipalities to C
SO
elim
ination and identifies timelines.
30 Forum
Notes
Take a watershed approach to sew
er separation. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to reduce wet
weather overflow
s. 31
Forum N
otes M
unicipalities must be held accountable for sew
er separation.
The LWM
P com
mits m
unicipalities to CS
O
elimination and identifies tim
elines. 32
Forum N
otes W
hat is the connection between C
SO
managem
ent issues and building the new
North S
hore Wastew
ater Treatm
ent Plant (W
WTP
)?
The North S
hore has separated sanitary sewer and
storm sew
er systems, so there is no connection.
33 Forum
Notes
CS
O volum
e is not a clear indicator of CS
O im
pact; better definitions and m
easures are needed. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to monitor im
pacts of liquid w
aste on the receiving environment.
34 Forum
Notes
Concerns about the tim
eline for CS
O upgrades.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
contains actions to prioritize C
SO elim
ination.
SDD-137
4 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 35
Forum N
otes C
oncerns about private property laterals; if MV
accelerated the tim
eline for sewer separation, the
public would be forced to do the sam
e.
The LWM
P contains an action to address the
Canadian C
ouncil of the Ministers of E
nvironment
(CC
ME
) Canada-w
ide Strategy for the M
anagement
of Municipal W
astewater E
ffluent to eliminate w
et w
eather overflows, including those from
private property.
36 Forum
Notes
Sew
er separation does occur when a property is re-
developed, even if the city pipe has not yet been separated.
The LWM
P contains an action w
ork with the real
estate industry to certify sewer laterals to be in good
condition. Strategy 1.3: R
educe environmental im
pacts from liquid w
aste managem
ent to a minim
um (Strategy #3 in M
arch 2009 Draft
LWM
P) ** A
ll actions listed in the MV R
esponse column are located under the Strategy 1.3 in the LW
MP.
37 Forum
Notes
The University of B
ritish Colum
bia (UB
C)
comm
itment regarding on-site w
aste water treatm
ent m
ust inform decisions regarding N
orth Shore
Wastew
ater Treatment P
lants (WW
TPs).
UB
C is not a m
unicipality subject to the provisions of the LW
MP
. Integrated Resource R
ecovery (IRR
) business cases w
ill assess the UB
C initiative relative
to the Vancouver S
ewerage A
rea Treatment P
lant. 38
Forum N
otes S
upport expressed for upgrades at WW
TPs w
ith prim
ary treatment in a tim
ely manner.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary
level wastew
ater treatment for the N
orth Shore and
Vancouver sew
erage areas. Based on C
WS
-M
MW
E, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year
timeline and Iona Island w
ithin a 20-year timeline.
39 Forum
Notes
WW
TPs should not only protect public health, but
improve public health as w
ell. The LW
MP
contains an action to upgrade the W
WTP
s to secondary treatment.
40 Forum
Notes
Justification for upgrades to the WW
TPs m
ust be m
ade to maintain public trust.
The LWM
P contains an action to upgrade the
WW
TPs to secondary treatm
ent. 41
Forum N
otes The econom
ic cost of implem
enting IRR
at the W
WTP
s must be considered.
The LWM
P addresses financial issues in the
Financial Plan section. It also contains an action to
develop business cases for IRR
in each sewerage
area. 42
Forum N
otes The capacity of the W
WTP
s should not be expanded beyond the needs of the com
munity.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop asset
managem
ent plans. 43
Forum N
otes C
oncurrent upgrades to the Iona and North S
hore treatm
ent plants might drive up construction costs.
The LWM
P addresses financial issues and identifies
the need for cost-sharing on the treatment plant
upgrades.
SDD-138
5 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 44
Forum N
otes C
ontamination of killer w
hales is a WW
TP concern.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
onitor the im
pacts of liquid waste on the receiving
environment.
45 Forum
Notes
Upgrades to the W
WTP
s should be linked to energy planning.
The LWM
P contains strategies and actions to
address energy recovery from the liquid w
aste system
. 46
Forum N
otes C
onsider human health and environm
ental benefits w
hen exploring WW
TP options.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
onitor the perform
ance and impacts of the liquid w
aste system.
47 Forum
Notes
MV
must w
eigh the costs and benefits of a centralized system
against a distributed system.
The LWM
P contains actions to develop plans for
WW
TPs in the context of IR
R.
48 Forum
Notes
The lessons learned from other planning processes
should be applied to the planning process for the upgrades to the W
WTP
s.
The LWM
P contains actions to develop plans for
WW
TPs as w
ell as undertake IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. 49
Forum N
otes M
V should consider integrating planning betw
een solid w
aste, liquid waste, energy and w
ater. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to pursue waste
resource recovery (including solid waste). A
ll of M
V’s m
anagement plans are integrated.
50 Forum
Notes
Should the level of treatm
ent be the same for all
types of waste w
ater? The LW
MP
contains an action to address the CC
ME
C
anada Wide strategy for m
unicipal wastew
ater effluents.
51 Forum
Notes
Action 10.1 is too vague. It should m
ake reference to the E
nvironmental M
onitoring Com
mittee (E
MC
) and the S
tormw
ater Interagency Liaison Group
(SILG
).
Action 10.1 has been replaced and rew
orded.
Strategy 2.1: Pursue liquid waste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context (Strategy #6 &
#8 in March 2009
Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 2.1 in the LWM
P. 52
Forum N
otes The draft Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan (LW
MP
) is the first to recognize the concept of Integrated R
esource Recovery (IR
R).
The LWM
P contains a goal to use liquid w
aste as a resource.
53 Forum
Notes
Support for U
BC
becoming self-sufficient in liquid
waste m
anagement and IR
R.
UB
C is part of the V
ancouver Sew
erage Area and
their initiative will be part of the IR
R business casing.
54 Forum
Notes
Current regulations create challenges for IR
R.
Com
ment noted. The LW
MP
contains actions to w
ork with all levels of governm
ent.
SDD-139
6 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 55
Forum N
otes IR
R im
plementation w
ould be a major paradigm
shift for M
V.
Com
ment noted.
56 Forum
Notes
An annual “dare to dream
forum” should be held for
all comm
ittees in regard to IRR
. S
trategy 3.2 includes the use of innovative approaches and technology and has an action to support dem
onstration projects. 57
Forum N
otes R
ainwater harvesting should be a com
ponent of IRR
. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. It also contains an action to evaluate rainw
ater re-use. 58
Forum N
otes IR
R is not a “silver bullet” to solve the problem
s of liquid w
aste managem
ent. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. 59
Forum N
otes IR
R should not be a delay tactic.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area in parallel
with treatm
ent plant planning. 60
Forum N
otes IR
R cannot com
promise public health.
The LWM
P contains an action to undertake an
annual audit of environmental m
anagement
systems.
61 Forum
Notes
IRR
is linked to conserving electricity. The LW
MP
contains actions to recover energy. 62
Forum N
otes IR
R could be difficult to im
plement at the Iona
treatment plant due to its rem
ote location and other logistical issues.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
63 Forum
Notes
A business analysis should be conducted for IR
R, to
inform future plant upgrades, address the risks and
uncertainty surrounding IRR
, and identify im
plementation opportunities.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
64 Forum
Notes
Do seed investm
ent funds exist for decentralized infrastructure located in com
munities? P
ilot projects are needed.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
65 Forum
Notes
What role does public procurem
ent play in IRR
? The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. 66
Forum N
otes D
ecision makers need to recognize the im
portance of IR
R. P
olitical will is needed for change.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
67 Forum
Notes
Show
IRR
leadership by investing in smaller,
decentralized waste w
ater infrastructure. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area.
SDD-140
7 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 68
Forum N
otes R
equire producers of waste to take m
ore responsibility for disposal.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
69 Forum
Notes
Use the best environm
ental and economical w
aste w
ater treatment technologies, including IR
R.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
70 Forum
Notes
The implem
entation of IRR
would contradict existing
liquid waste m
anagement plans.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
71 Forum
Notes
IRR
deals with w
ater managem
ent and relates back to the w
ater conveyance system.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
72 Forum
Notes
Is IRR
a way of displacing dem
and for reducing im
provements?
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
73 Forum
Notes
What does IR
R m
ean for existing infrastructure? The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. 74
Forum N
otes N
eed to identify district and local uses of resource recovery.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
75 Forum
Notes
IRR
is an opportunity to integrate neighbourhoods. C
omm
ent noted. 76
Forum N
otes IR
R is a clim
ate change plan. C
omm
ent noted. 77
Forum N
otes G
aining comm
unity acceptance of IRR
at the im
plementation phase could be a challenge
Com
ment noted.
78 Forum
Notes
A clear “vision” for IR
R for use in public relations and
comm
unications is needed. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area, and an action for public outreach.
79 Forum
Notes
Solid “w
aste” and liquid “waste” have been caused
by overconsumption; “w
aste” would be reduced
through the implem
entation of IRR
.
Com
ment noted.
80 Forum
Notes
IRR
would have to be im
plemented gradually.
The LWM
P contains actions to w
ork with
municipalities to adapt plans and infrastructure.
81 Forum
Notes
A closed-loop system
could be created to protect the environm
ent through the implem
entation of IRR
. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to monitor the
receiving environment and im
plementation action to
ensure its protection. 82
Forum N
otes A
shortage of resources must be considered w
hen im
plementing IR
R.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
SDD-141
8 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 83
Forum N
otes The acceptance of technology, such as com
bustion w
aste collection odours, is an important IR
R factor.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
Strategy 3.1: Manage assets and optim
ize existing sanitary sewerage operations (Strategy #4 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.1 in the LWM
P. 84
Forum N
otes A
sset managem
ent priorities are the replacement of
old infrastructure, upgrading combined sew
ers and addressing other environm
ental issues.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains a strategy to manage assets and optim
ize liquid w
aste operations. 85
Forum N
otes C
ombine system
maintenance priorities in order to
gain funding. C
omm
ent noted.
86 Forum
Notes
LWM
P priorities need to be ranked by im
portance and better articulated in the LW
MP
. The LW
MP
contains strategies to manage assets
and optimize liquid w
aste operations, and develop scenarios and trends to assist the liquid w
aste system
. 87
Forum N
otes Include hum
an elements in a cost benefit analysis.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
anage assets and optim
ize liquid waste operations.
88 Forum
Notes
The system m
ust be flexible and adaptable. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to manage assets
and optimize liquid w
aste operations. 89
Forum N
otes C
urrent asset managem
ent decisions must take
Integrated Resource R
ecovery (IRR
) and densification into consideration.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
90 Forum
Notes
Consider efficiencies for asset m
anagement
associated with innovation, com
bined use and coordination of asset stream
s.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IR
R
business cases for each sewerage area.
91 Forum
Notes
Consider and /or incorporate pilot projects into
managing assets.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop a
sustainability academy to support research and
demonstration projects.
92 Forum
Notes
Current infrastructure is not aligned to com
pliment
IRR
. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop IRR
business cases for each sew
erage area. 93
Forum N
otes B
alance reinvestment and m
aintenance of existing infrastructure.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
anage assets and optim
ize liquid waste operations.
94 Forum
Notes
Asset m
anagement should include private
infrastructure in buildings and private laterals. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to manage assets
and optimize liquid w
aste operations, and actions that deal w
ith private connections.
SDD-142
9 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 95
Forum N
otes H
istorically, liquid waste infrastructure m
aintenance has been underfunded.
Com
ment noted.
96 Forum
Notes
All M
V liquid w
aste assets must be tracked.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
anage assets and optim
ize liquid waste operations.
97 Forum
Notes
Improve energy efficiency of current system
. The LW
MP
contains a strategy to recover energy, nutrients and w
ater from liquid w
aste. 98
Forum N
otes Im
prove public understanding of infrastructure plans. The LW
MP
contains actions for public outreach. 99
Forum N
otes Increased population densification w
ill increase the efficiency of the current infrastructure.
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
anage assets and optim
ize liquid waste operations.
Strategy 3.2: Use innovative approaches and technologies (Strategy #5 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
N
o comm
ents received.
Strategy 3.3: Monitor the perform
ance of liquid waste system
impacts on the receiving environm
ent (Strategy #7 in March 2009
Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.3 in the LWM
P. 100
Forum N
otes C
ontinue current level of monitoring activities.
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P)
contains a strategy to monitor the perform
ance of the liquid w
aste system and im
pacts on the receiving environm
ent. 101
Forum N
otes E
ncourage research and development at the federal
level in regard to contaminants.
The LWM
P contains actions to collaborate w
ith regulatory agencies.
102 Forum
Notes
Action 28.4 is too vague, should reference the
Environm
ental Monitoring C
omm
ittee (EM
C) and the
Storm
water Interagency Liaison G
roup (SILG
).
Com
ment noted. The tw
o noted comm
ittees are referenced as part of S
trategy 3.5.
Strategy 3.4: Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term needs (Strategy #8 in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
** All actions listed in the M
V Response colum
n are located under the Strategy 3.4 in the LWM
P. 103
Forum N
otes S
tormw
ater managem
ent is a unifying issue as rain falls everyw
here. The Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan (LW
MP
) contains an action to develop and im
plement
Integrated Storm
water M
anagement P
lans (ISM
Ps).
104 Forum
Notes
Watershed planning needs to be conducted on a
watershed w
ide-scale level and be tied into im
plementation, w
hich happens through planning departm
ents.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent ISM
Ps.
SDD-143
10 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse 105
Forum N
otes M
unicipalities must discuss plans for storm
water
managem
ent with each other in order to drive
watershed planning.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop and
implem
ent ISM
Ps.
106 Forum
Notes
Who is leading the process of developing IS
MP
s? The LW
MP
contains an action to develop and im
plement IS
MP
s. Plan developm
ent is led by m
unicipalities. 107
Forum N
otes H
ow is storm
water m
onitoring made effective; how
are tim
ely answers achieved?
The LWM
P contains a strategy to m
onitor the receiving environm
ent with review
by the E
nvironmental M
onitoring Com
mittee (E
MC
). 108
Forum N
otes W
hose responsibility is it to develop and implem
ent IS
MP
s? This is a m
unicipal responsibility.
109 Forum
Notes
Consider the local context w
hen prioritizing ISM
P
implem
entation. The LW
MP
contains an action to develop and im
plement IS
MP
s on a watershed basis.
110 Forum
Notes
The implem
entation of ISM
Ps needs to be linked to
land-use planning on a watershed basis.
The LWM
P contains an action to develop IS
MP
s, w
ith consideration regarding land use. Strategy 3.5: U
se collaborative managem
ent to address evolving needs (Adaptive M
anagement in M
arch 2009 Draft LW
MP)
No com
ments received.
Financial Plan 111
Forum N
otes C
ost is the greatest concern on the North S
hore in regard to liquid w
aste managem
ent. This is addressed under the Financial P
lan section in the LW
MP
and Metro V
ancouver will seek senior
government cost sharing.
112 Forum
Notes
Costs could triple on the N
orth Shore, due to the
proposed upgrades. This is addressed under the Financial P
lan section in the LW
MP
and Metro V
ancouver will seek senior
government cost sharing.
113 Forum
Notes
Support cost-sharing for upgrades and m
aintenance by M
V partners and senior level governm
ents. C
omm
ent noted.
114 Forum
Notes
Look at the LWM
P from
a financial viewpoint,
combined w
ith an eye towards hum
an health. This is addressed under Financial P
lan Section in
the LWM
P.
115 Forum
Notes
Sustainability is an im
portant factor in financial planning; the federal governm
ent does not need to be approached to fund upgrades to the liquid w
aste m
anagement system
.
This is addressed under Financial Plan S
ection in the LW
MP
. Not approaching the federal governm
ent is contrary to B
oard direction.
Performance M
easures
N
o comm
ents received.
SDD-144
11 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation Technical Forum
Input (May 7, 2009)
Issues, C
omm
ents, Questions and M
etro Vancouver R
esponses
# Source
Issue/Com
ment/Q
uestion M
etro Vancouver (MV) R
esponse C
onsultation Process
N
o comm
ents received.
SDD-145
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-146
Liquid Waste M
anagement Plan C
onsultation LW
MP R
eference Panel R
ecomm
endations and Metro Vancouver R
esponses
004972726
ATTA
CH
MEN
T 8
#
Recom
mendation
Response
1 C
all the Plan
A Liquid R
esource Managem
ent Plan for M
etro V
ancouver.
The Waste M
anagement C
omm
ittee and Reference P
anel’s recomm
endations are accom
modated in the plan in a m
anner to be acceptable to the Minister.
For the updated plan, staff proposes a new title that accom
modates all the
perspectives: Integrated Liquid Waste and R
esource Managem
ent Plan: A
Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan for the G
VS
&D
D and M
ember M
unicipalities. 2
Adopt the goal of m
oving from protect to
improve the N
atural Environm
ent over time.
The Panel’s recom
mendation is accom
modated at a higher level by the
statement of principles in the S
ustainability Framew
ork. The legal context for the plan is the ‘E
nvironmental P
rotection Act’ and one of
the three principles of the Board’s S
ustainability Framew
ork is to: “Protect and
Enhance the N
atural Environm
ent”. 3
Undertake m
ore extensive monitoring of the
long-term cum
ulative impacts of m
ultiple contam
inants in effluents (both from point and
non-point sources).
The Liquid Waste M
anagement P
lan (LWM
P) proposes an Integrated U
tility M
anagement A
dvisory Com
mittee (IU
MA
C) w
hich will be responsible for
overseeing the current Environm
ental Monitoring C
omm
ittee (EM
C). The E
MC
w
ill continue to provide advice on monitoring program
s, which are expected to
continue to evolve during this plan as Canada-w
ide Strategy for the
Managem
ent of Municipal W
astewater E
ffluent (CW
S-M
MW
E) needs are
identified and addressed.
4 R
esolve the persistent and costly sanitary Inflow
& Infiltration issue by acting on policy
and legal tools that enable municipalities to
implem
ent timely and appropriate m
easures on private property.
The LWM
P has been am
ended after discussions with R
egional Engineer’s
Advisory C
omm
ittee (RE
AC
) to include requirements for m
unicipal inflow and
infiltration managem
ent plans.
5 R
e-focus Integrated RA
INw
ater/Storm
water
Managem
ent Plans on w
atershed targets and outcom
es so that there are clear linkages with
the land use planning and development
approval process.
The LWM
P is consistent w
ith the general intent of the Panel’s
recomm
endation. The specific intent will be the subject of individual m
unicipal storm
water m
anagement plans.
SDD-147
2 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation LW
MP
Reference P
anel R
ecomm
endations and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# R
ecomm
endation R
esponse 6
Mandate a renam
ed and ‘new S
ILG’
(Storm
water Interagency Liaison G
roup) to spearhead a regional team
approach to develop policy, legal and technical tools that w
ill enable ‘integrated solutions’ for rainwater
managem
ent, green infrastructure and integrated resource recovery.
The IUM
AC
and its subcomm
ittees (SILG
and EM
C) w
ill encompass the
responsibilities recomm
ended by the Reference P
anel.
7 Im
plement a consistent region-w
ide approach to neighbourhood (re)developm
ent and building design that integrates rainw
ater managem
ent, green infrastructure and integrated resource recovery.
Although the underlying principle is acceptable, the specific recom
mendation is
beyond the mandate of the LW
MP
. The IU
MA
C w
ill facilitate a more consistent region-w
ide approach through its m
andate linking and integrating the LWM
P w
ith other plans. In addition, a m
ore inclusive, approach is being developed by Metro V
ancouver to better integrate and align all M
etro Vancouver plans and Sustainability
Framew
ork. 8
Adopt the follow
ing four objectives as the guiding fram
ework so that the P
lan ensures a flexible and adaptable approach to regional sew
age treatment that strives for continuous
improvem
ent over time:
1) m
anage liquid discharges as a resource 2)
minim
ize discharges 3)
minim
ize financial risk, and 4)
maxim
ize the quality of the discharges.
The intent of the Panel’s recom
mended objectives are supported by LW
MP
strategies. H
owever, the current goals are broader and have been w
ell vetted w
ith the public and municipalities.
9 C
omm
it to constructing advanced treatment
plants in the North S
hore and Vancouver
Sew
erage Areas no later than 2020.
The LWM
P contains an action to provide secondary level w
astewater
treatment for the N
orth Shore and V
ancouver sewerage areas. B
ased on C
WS
-MM
WE
, Lions Gate should proceed w
ithin a 10-year timeline and Iona
Island within a 20-year tim
eline.
SDD-148
3 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation LW
MP
Reference P
anel R
ecomm
endations and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# R
ecomm
endation R
esponse 10
Conduct business case assessm
ents for Integrated R
esource Recovery (IR
R) before
proceeding with the engineering for
replacement treatm
ent plants in the North
Shore and V
ancouver Sew
erage Areas, and
still meet the 2020 com
mitm
ent.
The Panel’s recom
mendation is accom
modated in the LW
MP
.
11 S
trive to achieve Integrated Resource
Recovery progress increm
entally by comm
itting to business casing (using life cycle accounting approach) through com
munity-scale
opportunities such as the UB
C Living
Laboratory: Integrated Water and E
nergy P
roject.
The Panel’s recom
mended approach is current M
etro Vancouver practice and
the plan includes IRR
business casing in each sewerage area.
12 E
nsure effective source control in the industrial-com
mercial-institutional sector, and ultim
ately in the residential sector too, by providing additional financial incentives, enforcem
ent resources and autom
ated monitoring
technologies.
The Panel’s recom
mendation is reflected in the plan through a com
mitm
ent to im
proved source control programs.
13 M
ove from a facility-specific approach to a total
system w
ay-of-thinking about financing, constructing, operating and m
aintaining regional conveyance and treatm
ent infrastructure.
Metro V
ancouver’s current practices address this recomm
endation.
14 Increase the am
ortization period for treatment
plant financing from 15 years to 30 years to
achieve inter-generation equitability.
Given the pattern of expenditures over the total M
etro Vancouver utility
systems, inter-generation equitability is better served by a fifteen year
amortization period, w
hich is the Board’s current policy.
15 D
irect that rate-setting will adopt and im
plement
the principles of ‘polluter pay’ and equity to provide m
unicipalities (and homeow
ners and businesses) w
ith an incentive to reduce their w
et-weather flow
contributions to the regional conveyance and treatm
ent system.
After further discussion w
ith RE
AC
, the plan has been strengthened to reflect this recom
mendation.
SDD-149
4 Liquid W
aste Managem
ent Plan C
onsultation LW
MP
Reference P
anel R
ecomm
endations and Metro V
ancouver Responses
# R
ecomm
endation R
esponse 16
Develop m
ajor capital projects in a manner that
demonstrates value for m
oney, including protecting ratepayers / taxpayers from
the risks associated w
ith these major projects.
Metro V
ancouver’s current practice addresses this recomm
endation.
17 E
stablish a “stewarding com
mittee” to stew
ard the P
lan, and ensure ongoing action im
plementation occurs and stays true to the
vision.
The plan contains a new IU
MA
C w
hich will provide a regular com
mentary on
the plan. Additionally, the plan provides for periodic form
al public accountability sessions associated w
ith the biennial review of the plan.
The Board and its standing com
mittees retain responsibility for ensuring the
implem
entation of the plan occurs in a timely fashion, consistent w
ith the vision.
18 D
evelop and implem
ent a proactive and innovative education and com
munication plan
that builds broad-based public support for liquid resource and rainw
ater managem
ent.
The Panel’s recom
mendation is reflected through M
etro Vancouver’s current
practices and is included in the plan. Com
munication strategies specific to
liquid waste m
anagement w
ill continue to be developed to achieve clear and specific objectives under the direction of the G
VS
&D
D B
oard and its standing com
mittees.
19 C
ontinue to implem
ent and strengthen inter-departm
ental and inter-governmental
continuing education opportunities for Metro
Vancouver m
embers that align local actions
with provincial and regional goals, and result in
consistent expectations for region-wide
implem
entation of Plan elem
ents.
Mechanism
s are in place to achieve the objectives set out in the Reference
Panel recom
mendation.
SDD-150
Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
To: Waste Management Committee From: Fred Nenninger, Regional Utility Planning Division Manager
Policy and Planning Department Date: November 6, 2009 Subject: Liquid Waste Management Plan Recommendation: That the Board adopt the Liquid Waste Management Plan, November 2009 (Attachment 1), and direct staff to forward the Plan to the GVS&DD member municipality councils for their endorsement prior to submitting the Plan to the B.C. Ministry of Environment for their approval. 1. PURPOSE At its February 2009 meeting, the Board endorsed the draft Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) and directed staff to undertake a formal consultation process based on the draft LWMP. Since that time, staff has undertaken the consultation process and the input received has been used to develop the final LWMP. The purpose of this report is to seek Board adoption of the LWMP and ask the Board to direct staff to submit the LWMP to the GVS&DD municipalities for their endorsement, prior to submitting the LWMP to the Ministry of Environment for their approval. 2. CONTEXT The current Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP) was approved by the Province in 2002 with a requirement for review and updating every five years. The review started in 2007 with its adaptation to Metro Vancouver’s Sustainable Region Initiative format. A formal consultation process based on the discussion document titled “Strategy for Updating the Liquid Waste Management Plan” was undertaken in 2008 to obtain input from the public, municipal staff, and the LWMP Reference Panel. First Nations were also contacted for their input. Input received from this process was considered in developing the Draft Plan. The draft LWMP contained carry-forward actions from the previous plan and new actions to address sustainability needs and resource recovery opportunities. At its February 2009 meeting, the Board endorsed the draft LWMP and directed staff to undertake formal consultation on the draft LWMP in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Environment. The consultation plan was developed in close consultation with Provincial staff and included consultation with the regulators, municipalities, public, First Nations, and others. In addition, staff worked closely with the LWMP Reference Panel during 2008 and 2009. Separate reports were made by the Reference Panel to the Waste
Section E 1.2
SDD-151
Liquid Waste Management Plan Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 2 of 3
Management Committee in May, June, and July 2009. A separate summary report on the LWMP consultation process is also being submitted to the Board. Key Changes in the LWMP The consultation process resulted in many suggested changes to the draft LWMP. Key changes included in the final LWMP are noted below:
• Integrated with the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) new Municipal Wastewater Effluent Strategy
• Strengthened integration of resources and material recovery • New goal and focus on Integrated Resource Recovery • New action to create an Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee. (A
separate report on their Terms of Reference is also being submitted to the Board.) • Strengthened action to manage the entire sewerage system including private
property laterals • Action to base cost recovery on wet weather flows.
Implications Implementing the LWMP requires additional staff and budget resources for Metro Vancouver and its GVS&DD members. Completion timelines and estimated new costs for each LWMP action are listed in Attachment 2. The most significant cost is the upgrading of the Iona Island and Lions Gate wastewater treatment plants to secondary treatment at an estimated cost of $1,400,000,000. In a few instances, some costs are shown as “to be determined” as the development of business cases is required first. Next Steps Following adoption by the Board, the LWMP will be forwarded to GVS&DD member municipality councils for their endorsement prior to submitting the LWMP and Consultation Report to the B.C. Ministry of Environment for their approval. 3. ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Board adopt the Liquid Waste Management Plan, November 2009 (Attachment 1), and direct staff to forward the Plan to the GVS&DD member municipality councils for their endorsement prior to submitting the Plan to the
B.C. Ministry of Environment for their approval.
2. That the Board direct staff to undertake further work before resubmitting the Plan for consideration by the Board.
4. CONCLUSION The Province requires that the LWMP be reviewed and updated every five years. Based on input received from extensive consultation to date, the final LWMP is ready to be considered by the Board. Staff recommends that the Board adopt the final Plan so that it may be forwarded to the GVS&DD municipalities for their endorsement, prior to being submitted to the Province for their approval.
SDD-152
Liquid Waste Management Plan Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 3 of 3
Attachments: 1. Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management – A Liquid Waste Management
Plan for the GVS&DD and Member Municipalities, Metro Vancouver, November 2009 (eRIM doc. #004991397)
2. Implementation of the Liquid Waste Management Plan, November 2009
(eRIM doc. #004991770) 004960367
SDD-153
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-154
www.metrovancouver.org
N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 9
A Liquid Waste Management Plan for the Greater Vancouver
Sewerage & Drainage District and Member Municipalities
Integrated Liquid Waste and
Resource Management
SDD-155
File: CP-18-01-LS5eRIM: 004991397
SDD-156
Table of Contents
Vision Statement 4
A. Sustainable Liquid Waste Management Plan 6
Governance 6
Roles and Responsibilities 6
Scope of the Plan 7
Linkages and Alignment 10
B. Goals, Strategies, Actions and Measures 13
Goal 1: Protect public health and the environment 13
Goal 2: Use liquid waste as a resource 21
Goal 3: Effective, affordable and collaborative management 23
Financial Plan 30
Performance Measures 31
Table 1 List of Members for Metro Vancouver and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District 7
Figure 1 Metro Vancouver Member Municipalities and Electoral Area A 8
Figure 2 Metro Vancouver Sewerage Areas and Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant Locations 9
Figure 3 Metro Vancouver Sustainability Framework 12
SDD-157
4 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
Vision Statement Sustainable Region InitiativeMetro Vancouver has a vision to achieve what humanity aspires to on a global basis—the highest quality of life embracing cultural vitality, economic prosperity, social justice and compassion, all nurtured in and by a beautiful and healthy natural environment.
We will achieve this vision by embracing the principles of sustainability, not least of which is an unshakeable commitment to the well-being of current and future generations and the health of our planet, in everything we do.
As we share our efforts in achieving this vision, we are confident that the inspiration and mutual learning we gain will become vital ingredients in our hopes for a sustainable common future.
In 2002, Metro Vancouver adopted The Sustainable Region Initiative (SRI) as its framework for decision making as well as the mechanism by which sustainability imperatives are moved from ideas into action. The SRI has been driven by three overarching principles which state that decision making must:
•have regard for both local and global consequences, and long term impacts;
•recognize and reflect the interconnectedness and interdependence of systems; and
•be collaborative.
These provide the foundation for the three sets of sustainability principles that guide Metro Vancouver:
•protectandenhancethenaturalenvironment(conserveanddevelopnaturalcapital);
•provideforongoingprosperity(conserveanddevelopeconomiccapital);and
•buildcommunitycapacityandsocialcohesion(conserveanddevelopsocialcapital).
SDD-158
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 5
Liquid WasteLiquid waste is the wastewater that is collected from homes, businesses, industries and institutions through vast networks of sewer pipes. Liquid waste is also the rainwater runoff and snowmelt that may be, or may become contaminated by washing and collecting pollutants from streets, lawns and gardens—most of this runoff enters creeks, rivers and the ocean untreated.
Traditionally, liquid waste has been viewed as an unusable output needing collection, treatment and disposal. However, stormwater can also be an asset in the natural environment in the form of creeks and other watercourses. Furthermore, as resources world-wide become scarcer and more expensive, liquid waste is increasingly recognized as a resource from which nutrients, energy, and water may be recovered and reused. Resource recovery can help to offset a portion of the costs associated with liquid waste management. In a fully sustainable system, there is no waste—everything is recycled and reused.
The long-term vision for liquid waste management in Metro Vancouver is that all elements of liquid waste will be efficiently recovered as energy, nutrients, water or other usable material or else returned to the environment as part of the hydrological cycle in a way that protects public health and the environment.
This vision and the Sustainable Region Initiative are supported by three goals:
Goal 1: Protect public health and the environmentPublic health and the environment are protected by managing sanitary sewage and stormwater at their sources, and providing wastewater collection and treatment services protective of the environment.
Goal 2: Use liquid waste as a resourceEnergy will be recovered from the heat in the sewage and from biogas generated in the treatment process. Materials which have nutrient value will be recovered from wastewater treatment plants. Water will be recovered from the wastewater treatment process and stormwater.
Goal 3: Effective, affordable and collaborative managementMonitoring, maintaining and investing in liquid waste infrastructure are essential to ensuring effective system performance and preventing costlier repairs. Innovative alternative approaches to traditional treatment systems will be explored. Opportunities for positive synergies with other utilities and regional management systems will be pursued—such as integrated stormwater management plans. Sources of risk will be identified and mitigated.
SDD-159
6 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
A. Sustainable Liquid Waste Management Plan
GovernanceThe BC Ministry of Environment allows all local governments to develop and periodically update a liquid waste management plan. Liquid waste management plans are authorized and regulated through the BC Environmental Management Act.
This plan authorizes discharges to the environment—water, air and land—associated with the management of liquid waste in Metro Vancouver according to the criteria set out in the plan and facility specific Operational Certificates.
Once each updated plan is approved, it becomes part of local liquid waste regulation through the BC Environmental Management Act. In the absence of an approved liquid waste management plan, the provincial Municipal Sewage Regulation governs.
Roles and Responsibilities The extent and complexity of the liquid waste systems, with roles and responsibilities being spread between broad levels of governance, require close co-ordination between the following groups.
Federal Government:
•EnvironmentCanada:regulatespollutants.
•FisheriesandOceansCanada:mandatedtoprotect fish populations and habitat in receiving waters and urban streams.
Provincial Government: •MinistryofEnvironment:regulatesliquidwaste
and approves Liquid Waste Management Plans.
•MinistryofCommunityandRuralDevelopment:
enables infrastructure financing and provides co-funding to local governments for civic projects.
•MinistryofHealth:regulateson-sitewastewatertreatment systems (such as septic tanks).
•MinistryofAgricultureandLands:encouragesresponsible agricultural land management.
Local Government: •MetroVancouverandtheGreaterVancouverSewerageandDrainageDistrict(GVS&DD):own, maintain and operate regional trunk sewers and major wastewater treatment plants, regulate industrial waste discharges, implement required regional actions in its plans, report on plan progress, and collaborate with others as appropriate.
•MunicipalmembersoftheGVS&DD:ownandmaintain collector sewers, implement municipal actions set out in the regional liquid waste management plan, manage stormwater systems, report on their progress on actions required in the plan, set local land use plans and community development standards.
First Nations: have constitutional rights which must be taken into account in the planning process.
Homeowners, businesses, institutions, and crown corporations: own and maintain private property sewer connections and private stormwater management systems.
SDD-160
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 7
Scope of the Plan While the plan covers the geographic area of Metro Vancouver (Figure 1), the majority of its actions are specific to Metro Vancouver’s wastewater collection and treatment systems, and the users connected to these systems, includingmunicipalities,businesses,andhomeowners.Inaddition,theplansetsspecificactionsforGVS&DDmembersregardingtheirmanagementofstormwaterrunoff.MajorGVS&DDfacilitiesandthesystemextentsareshowninFigure2.AllactionsintheplanareapplicabletotheGVS&DDanditsmembersaslistedinTable1.
Liquid waste management from sources such as on-site treatment and septic systems, agricultural runoff, and marine pump-out facilities for pleasure craft is cross-jurisdictional. Their management is addressed in the plan by Metro Vancouver and members though collaboration with senior government agencies and stakeholders.
City of Burnaby City of Port Moody
City of Coquitlam City of Port Coquitlam
CorporationofDelta City of Richmond
City of Langley City of Surrey
Township of Langley City of Vancouver
DistrictofMapleRidge DistrictofWestVancouver
City of New Westminster City of White Rock
City of North Vancouver University Endowment Lands
DistrictofNorthVancouver
DistrictofPittMeadows
Village of Anmore
Village of Belcarra
Bowen Island Municipality
Village of Lions Bay
Electoral Area A
Tsawwassen First Nation
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Members (GVS&DD)
METRO VANCOuVER MEMBERS
Table 1 List of Members for Metro Vancouver and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District
SDD-161
8 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
Fig
ure
1 M
etro
Van
couv
er M
emb
er M
unic
ipal
ities
and
Ele
ctor
al A
rea
A
SDD-162
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 9
Fig
ure
2 M
etro
Van
couv
er S
ewer
age
Are
as a
nd E
xist
ing
Was
tew
ater
Tre
atm
ent P
lant
Loc
atio
ns
SDD-163
10 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
Linkages and Alignment
Aligning with National InitiativesMetro Vancouver and its members actively participated with the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) to develop the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE). The Canada-wide Strategy was endorsed by the CCME in February 2009, and will be implemented in British Columbia by the Ministry of Environment.
The Canada-wide Strategy sets baseline wastewater management criteria, timelines and prioritization methodologies, and formalizes processes to assess environmental risk. This plan has been developed in accordance with the Canada-wide Strategy.
Aligning with Provincial InitiativesThe goals, strategies and actions have been aligned with senior government policies and positions
to ensure that Metro Vancouver’s and senior governments’ environmental and fiscal objectives and actions are mutually supportive and successful.
Key senior government plans and initiatives supported by this plan include:
• Integrated Resource Recovery: Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR) was formally defined by the Province in 2008 in a report commissioned by theMinistryofCommunityDevelopmenttitledResources from Waste: A Guide to Integrated Resource Recovery. It is a concept and approach that integrates the management of water, wastewater, energy and solid waste services to recover resources and value and to help increase resiliency. IRR planning and resource recovery actions in this plan support the BC Climate Action Plan, the BC Energy Plan, and Living Water Smart.
• BC Climate Action Plan: The success in achieving the province-wide target of 33% less greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 (Live Smart BC) depends on the success of supporting initiatives of other provincial and local government plans. The actions set out in this plan will contribute to meeting these targets through its IRR approach and actions to recover energy, water and nutrients from wastewater and stormwater.
• The BC Energy Plan—A Vision for Clean Energy Leadership: In support of the provincial government’s vision for “clean energy leadership” and electricity self-sufficiency by 2016, this plan seeks to expand the production of biogas from wastewater, and to recover heat energy from wastewater for use in district heating systems. The IRR approach to integrating liquid and solid waste management will also support the BC Bioenergy Strategy: Growing Our Natural Energy Advantage. In partnership with municipalities and the private sector, initiatives in these areas will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, diversify the region’s sources of energy, provide renewable energy and increase our energy independence.
Flood management and constructed habitat, Eugene Creek, Surrey.
SDD-164
11N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
• Living Water Smart—British Columbia’s Water Plan: Water Smart objectives supported by this plan include the requirements to complete and implement municipal Integrated Stormwater Management Plans, support rainwater harvesting and water reclamation actions, the development of an understanding of what makes streams healthy, watershed management planning in priority areas, and helping address the impacts of climate change and climatic variability on local water resources. This will be supported by the ongoing work of a new overarching integrated utility management advisory committee which will enhance and continue the work of the current two inter-governmental committees: the Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC) and Stormwater Inter-agency Liaison Group (SILG).
• A Guide to Green Choices—Ideas and Practical Advice for Land Use Decisions in BC Communities: Expressed in this guide is the need for “sustainable infrastructure” and “integrating communities with nature”. The commitment to IRR in this plan recognises and reinforces the links between community and effective infrastructure services. Municipal Integrated Stormwater Management Plans link the health of urban streams to the land use decisions and will seek to protect the health of urban streams by better managing rainwater where it falls.
• Burrard Inlet Environmental Management Plan and Fraser River Estuary Management Plan: These are joint plans involving federal and provincial agencies, Metro Vancouver, municipalities and crown corporations. This plan supports the long-term goals of improving the health of Burrard Inlet and the Fraser River estuary by upgrading wastewater treatment plants, eliminating combined sewer overflows, improving stormwater management, and ongoing environmental monitoring.
Linking with Metro Vancouver’s other plans
There is interdependence between the goals, strategies and actions in this plan and those in other regional plans.
• Drinking Water Management Plan (DWMP): The increased use of reclaimed wastewater for non-drinking water uses and harvesting of rainwater for landscape irrigation will help access alternatives to treated drinking water for use where high quality drinking water is not needed. These plans support provincial government targets for BC to become 33% more efficient in its water uses.
• Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP): Minimizing greenhouse gas emissions generated from liquid waste management and using wastewater heat to substitute for fossil fuel based heating supports Metro Vancouver’s climate change objectives.
uce emergency overflows due to power outages; and identify locations and
11
Releasing salmon fry, Silver Creek, Burnaby.
SDD-165
12 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
• Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP): Metro Vancouver will seek to produce biogas from co-managing liquid waste and organic solid wastes; technologies to make biodiesel from wastes, opportunities to derive marketable fertilizer products, recovered nutrients and compost will be explored.
• Regional Growth Strategy (RGS): The regional sewerage system will not be extended beyond the urban containment boundary except for overarching environmental or public health reasons.
The Sustainability Framework also provides a mechanism to collaborate with other organizations in areas of overlapping responsibilities such as transportation, economic development, culture, social responsibility, and environmental stewardship.
Figure 3 Metro Vancouver Sustainability Framework
MEASuRES & TARGETS(Sustainability Report)
REGIONAL VISION
METRO VANCOuVER ROLE & MISSION
VALuES
SuSTAINABILITY PRINCIPLES
SuITE OF PLANSSuSTAINABILITY IN ACTION
•Water
•Sewerage
•SolidWaste Disposal
•Parks
•Housing
•LabourRelations
COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE
Service Delivery
Plans, Policy & Regulations
Political Leadership
•DrinkingWater
•SolidWaste
•LiquidWaste
•AirQuality
•Growth Management
•Housing
•Parks&Greenway
•EcologicalHealth
•Outreach
•Advocacy
•Education
SDD-166
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 13
B. Goals, Strategies, Actions and Measures
Goal 1: Protect public health and the environmentThe fundamental purpose of sewerage systems is preventing the spread of waterborne diseases and protecting the receiving environment from harm. Key management areas which support this goal are:
•Coordination of Infrastructure Capacity and Urban Development: The regional sanitary sewer system should be constructed to keep pace with development; the rate of urban development and redevelopment should be coordinated with the expansion of the regional sanitary sewer system.
•Sanitary Sewer Source Control: Three main objectives for managing liquid wastes at their source are protection of health and the environment, protection of infrastructure and worker safety, and prevention of sewer overflows. Pollution prevention programs keep out of the sewers the pollutants that cannot be effectively treated at wastewater treatment plants and those that are harmful to workers or infrastructure. This is achieved through permitting, enforcement and outreach programs. Reducing the risk of overflows is supported by actions that maintain sewer capacity, such as permitted limits on commercial discharge volumes and ongoing pipe maintenance programs to keep out excessive rainwater and groundwater.
•Sanitary Sewer Overflows: Sanitary sewers overflow when their capacity is exceeded, often due to large volumes of groundwater and rainwater entering the system. Preventing sanitary sewer overflows means keeping groundwater and rainwater out of sanitary sewers (referred to as inflow and infiltration management); this is done through ongoing inspection and targeted
This plan has three goals, which are addressed by nine strategies and supporting actions for Metro Vancouver
and member municipalities The supporting actions are linked and reinforce each other; their implementation
requires collaboration and integration to ensure that they are not undertaken in isolation
During implementation of the plan, there will be collaboration between Metro Vancouver, its members and
other partners to ensure an informed and coordinated process
maintenance programs. To be effective, all regional, municipal and private sanitary sewers must be properly maintained. Private sewers connect homes, business and institutions to the municipal and regional systems, and account for approximately 50% of the approximate 15,000 km of sewers in the region. While the regional and municipal sewers continue to be kept in good repair through ongoing maintenance programs, private sewers have not been part of any comprehensive strategy. Long-term overflow elimination strategies depend on the reduction of inflow and infiltration through inspection and maintenance for all sewers as part of maintenance and redevelopment cycles over the coming decades. For the interim, storage and temporary treatment of chronic sanitary sewer overflows will be used to mitigate risks to the environment.
• Stormwater and Rainwater: The region contains over one hundred watersheds with creeks and rivers of all sizes. These provide habitat for fish and wildlife, as well as recreation to many. Stormwater impacts the health of these watersheds and can degrade their ecosystems. Member municipalities continue to undertake and will implement integrated stormwater management plans to better protect their watersheds. Integrated stormwater management plans (ISMPs) include managing rainwater at the site level, thereby minimizing stormwater runoff. To be effective, municipalities will integrate land use into their stormwater management plans, and appropriate site-level rainwater management practices into their community development policies.
SDD-167
14 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
•Combined Sewer Overflows: The region’s first sewers were built as a network of combined sewers before wastewater was treated. They carried sanitary sewage, and water from drains and enclosed creeks to outfalls in the Fraser River, Burrard Inlet and English Bay. While new trunk sewers and wastewater treatment plants have been built, they cannot cope with the large amount of rainwater entering combined sewers during wet weather, and the combined sewer system continues to have overflows at its remaining outfalls. Reducing combined sewer overflows is ongoing and long-term; combined sewers continue to be replaced with separate sanitary and storm sewers. Ultimately, combined sewer overflows will be reduced to meet criteria for sanitary sewer overflows, and combined sewers will either be eliminated or phased to become stormwater outfalls. Interim solutions include flow containment tanks, sewer separation prioritization, and flow routing to minimize the amount of sanitary sewage in overflows.
Municipalites will develop and implement ISMPs for combined sewer areas so that the impacts from future stormwater systems are proactively mitigated. Opportunities will be sought that use some of the combined sewer system to send the first flush of stormwater to wastewater treatment plants or divert stormwater discharges from sensitive waterbodies.
• Wastewater Treatment: This plan’s commitment to upgrade the remaining primary wastewater treatment plants to secondary treatment is consistent with the Federal-Provincial policy for secondary level treatment as the minimum Canada-wide standard. The plan calls for continued monitoring and assessment of the performance of wastewater treatment, and using the results to inform the process to improve treatment.
STRATEGy 1.1
Reduce liquid wastes at their source
This strategy seeks to enhance the effectiveness of
regional wastewater treatment plants and municipal
stormwater management programs by minimizing
liquid wastes at their source Actions that keep
excessive rainwater and groundwater out of sanitary
sewers will reduce the risk of sewer overflows,
and help maintain sewer capacity and treatment
effectiveness Managing rainwater and stormwater
runoff at the site level will reduce negative quality
and quantity impacts
Metro Vancouver will increase enforcement of the Sewer Use Bylaw, improve source control tools and update outreach and education programs. Metro Vancouver and municipal actions will jointly seek to reduce groundwater and rainwater entering sanitary sewers over the long-term.
Annacis Island wastewater treatment plant provides treatment for over 1,000,000 people.
SDD-168
15N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
This strategy will be implemented by the following actions:
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
Source control
1.1.1 Review and enhance sewer use bylaws to reduce liquid waste at source, including contaminants identified by the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. 2012
1.1.2 Developnewregulatoryinstruments,such as Pollution Prevention Plans to complement existing regulations. 2014
1.1.3 Increase resources for permitting, and inspection to support and enforce sewer use bylaws. 2010
1.1.4 Investigate the implications of the use of domestic food grinders. 2012
1.1.5 Developandimplementtargetedoutreachplans to support liquid waste source control programs. Ongoing
Inflow and Infiltration and Rainwater Management
1.1.6 Developatemplatetoguidethepreparation and implementation of inflow and infiltration management plans as part of broader asset management plans and to support sanitary sewer overflow reduction strategies. 2011
1.1.7 Work with the real estate industry and their regulators, and the municipalities to develop and implement a process for the inspection and certification of private sewer laterals being in good condition as a required component of real estate transactions within Metro Vancouver. 2011
1.1.8 Developandimplementinflowandinfiltration management plans that identify reduction strategies and timelines to ensure wet weather inflow and infiltration are within targeted levels. 2012
1.1.9 Work with municipalities to review historical data and adjust as necessary the average inflow and infiltration allowance for regional trunk sewers and wastewater treatment
plants, and develop associated target allowances for municipal sewer catchments associated with a 1:5 year return frequency storm event for sanitary sewers to a level that ensures environmental and economic sustainability. 2013
1.1.10 Review progress in reducing inflow and infiltration every four years. every 4 years
1.1.11 Enhance enforcement of sewer use bylaw prohibition against the unauthorized discharge of rainwater and groundwater to sanitary sewers. 2010
1.1.12 Work with municipalities to: 2012
a) facilitate research on watershed-based stormwater management approaches;
b) identify improvements to stormwater bylaws to include on-site rainwater management requirements;
c) develop model utility design standards and options for neighbourhood design guidelines;
d) establish region wide baseline criteria for on-site rainfall management including variations for localized geology, rainfall and watershed conditions;
Private sewers connect homes and businesses to the municipal-regional sewer network.
SDD-169
16 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
e) establish mechanisms to ensure continued performance of on-site rainwater management systems; and
f) work with senior governments and industry to develop codes of practice, certification, guidelines and standards which support this plan.
1.1.13 Decreaseliquidwastevolumesthroughcomplementary initiatives in the Metro VancouverDrinkingWaterManagementPlan to reduce potable water consumption.Ongoing
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
Source control1.1.14 Review and enhance sewer use bylaws to
reduce liquid waste at source, including contaminants identified by the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. 2012
1.1.15 Continue existing programs of permitting and inspection to support and enforce sewer use bylaws. Ongoing
1.1.16 Identify and regulate pesticides and lawn care products which negatively affect rainwater runoff quality and urban stream health. 2014
1.1.17 Continue outreach plans to support liquid waste source control programs. Ongoing
Inflow and Infiltration and Rainwater Management
1.1.18 Developandimplementinflowandinfiltration management plans, using the Metro Vancouver template as a guide, to ensure wet weather infiltration inflow and infiltration volumes are within Metro Vancouver’s allowances as measured at Metro Vancouver’s flow metering stations.Develop by 2012
1.1.19 Enhance enforcement of sewer use bylaw prohibition against the unauthorized discharge of rainwater and groundwater to sanitary sewers. 2010
1.1.20 Update municipal bylaws to require on-site rainwater management sufficient to meet criteria established in municipal integrated stormwater plans or baseline region-wide criteria. 2014
1.1.21 Update municipal utility design standards and neighbourhood design guidelines to enable and encourage on-site rainwater management. 2014
Separating combined sewers is a long-term program.
SDD-170
17N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
STRATEGy 1.2 Reduce wet weather overflows
While reducing the amount of rainwater and ground-
water in sewage is vital to reducing sewer overflows
over the long-term, interim overflow treatment, pri-
oritized and targeted sewer renewal and separation,
and integrated municipal-Metro Vancouver operation
strategies will mitigate the risks of overflows over
the short-term
Key municipal actions are to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows and reduce the risk of spills by: improving and co-ordinating sewer rehabilitation programs to keep rainwater and groundwater out of sanitary sewers; constructing interim high rate overflow treatment facilities; and separating the remaining combined sewers in Burnaby, New Westminster and Vancouver.
This strategy will be implemented by the following actions:
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
1.2.1 Prohibit the construction of new combined sewer systems other than those functioning as part of a strategy to reduce combined sewer overflows or to manage stormwater quality. Ongoing
1.2.2 Address the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE) by working with Burnaby, New Westminster and Vancouver to develop and implement: priorities for sewer separation of catchments tributary to combined sewer outfalls; regional and municipal sequence for trunk and collector sewer separation; strategic use of existing combined sewers to manage rainwater quality runoff; and a strategy to separate combined sewer connections from private properties. 2014
1.2.3 Replace combined regional trunk sewers with separated sanitary and storm sewers as determined by the plans developed in 1.2.2. Ongoing
1.2.4 Work with municipalities to develop and implement municipal-regional sanitary overflow management plans which will: prevent sanitary overflows resulting from heavy rain and snowmelt occurring less than once every five years (for a 24 hour duration event); reduce emergency overflows due to power outages; and identify locations and schedules for appropriate system capacity improvements, wet weather containment, and point treatment and discharge to receiving waters of chronic overflows, including Cloverdale Pump Station, Katzie Pump Station, Lynn Pump Station. 2013
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
1.2.5 Work with Metro Vancouver to develop and implement municipal-regional sanitary overflow management plans as set out in 1.2.4. 2013
1.2.6 Burnaby, New Westminster and Vancouver will work with Metro Vancouver to give effect to 1.2.2 and, specifically, implement plans to prevent combined sewer overflows by 2050 for the Vancouver Sewerage Area and 2075 for the Fraser Sewerage Area and separate combined sewers at an average rate of 1% and 1.5% of the system per year in the Vancouver Sewerage Area and Fraser Sewerage Area respectively. Ongoing
SDD-171
18 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
STRATEGy 1.3 Reduce environmental impacts from liquid waste management to a minimum
Metro Vancouver and municipalities will maintain
and operate their liquid waste infrastructure and
make improvements to meet evolving regulatory
requirements and reduce risks to the environment
which may be identified through ongoing monitoring
and assessment programs Implementing secondary
level of wastewater treatment for the Vancouver and
North Shore Sewerage Areas is a significant action
supporting this strategy
Metro Vancouver and municipal actions include provision of basic sewer service levels and quantifying and managing air emissions including odours and greenhouse gases, associated with operating and maintaining wastewater collection systems.
This strategy will be implemented by the following actions:
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
System Operation and Maintenance
1.3.1 Developandimplementoperationalplansfor sewerage and wastewater treatment facilities to ensure infrastructure reliability and optimal performance. Ongoing
1.3.2 Maintain trunk sanitary sewer capacity for dry weather sewage conveyance levels plus the Metro Vancouver target inflow and infiltration allowance; as necessary upgrade trunk sewer systems to maintain hydraulic gradelines and safe operating levels which have been established based on measured flow. Ongoing
1.3.3 Work with municipalities to develop and implement emergency sanitary sewer overflow plans including contingency plans to minimize impacts of unavoidable sanitary sewer overflows resulting from extreme weather, system failures or unusual events. Ongoing
Secondary level wastewater treatment
1.3.4 Operate wastewater treatment plants which have secondary level treatment (Annacis Island, Lulu Island, North West Langley wastewater treatment plants) to meet requirements specified in each facility’s Operating Certificate and the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastwater Effluent (CWS-MMWE) National Performance Standards for wastewater effluent, including: Ongoing
(a) monthly average maximum Carbonaceous BiochemicalOxygenDemand(CBOD5 ): 25 mg/L; and
(b) monthly average maximum Total Suspended Solids (TSS): 25 mg/L.
Metro Vancouver and municipal sewer systems include a large network of sewage pumping stations.
SDD-172
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 19
1.3.5 Upgrade or replace Lions Gate (North Shore Sewerage Area) and Iona Island (Vancouver Sewerage Area) wastewater treatment plants to secondary level treatment to meet Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE) requirements and timelines.
a) The intended site for the North Shore Sewerage Area secondary facility is the Metro Vancouver owned property located between Pemberton, Philips, and McKeen AvenuesandWestFirstStreetintheDistrictof North Vancouver. The existing outfall will be retained as part of the upgraded facility. The outfall discharges to embayed marine waters as defined in the Environmental Management Act, Municipal Sewage Regulation.
b) The intended site for the Vancouver Sewerage Area is the property immediately adjacent and east of the existing Iona Island plant in the City of Richmond. The existing outfall will be retained as part of the upgraded facility. The outfall discharges to open marine waters as defined in the Environmental Management Act, Municipal Sewage Regulation.
c) Based on the CWS-MMWE and the assessment made by the Environmental Monitoring Committee, Lions Gate should proceed within a 10-year timeline and Iona Island within a 20-year timeline, subject to the appropriate financial arrangements being in place as indicated in the Financial Plan.
d) Metro Vancouver will seek assistance from both senior levels of government in resolving First Nations rights and title issues associated with these secondary treatment plant upgrades.
1.3.6 Maintain interim maximum daily concentration limits for wastewater effluent of130mg/LBOD5 at both Lions Gate and Iona Island plants and 130 mg/L TSS at Lions Gate and 100 mg/L TSS at Iona Island until such time as secondary treatment is operational, and operate the plants to meet requirements specified in each facility’s Operating Certificate. Ongoing
Other environmental impact mitigation actions:
1.3.7 Assess environmental monitoring results (see Strategy 3.3) to determine whether any actions are required to meet Ministry of Environment/Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE) requirements.Ongoing
1.3.8 Continue odour control programs at wastewater treatment plants and implement odour control programs for targeted facilities in the regional sewer system and for relevant energy and material recovery processes (see Action 3.3.4). Ongoing
1.3.9 Developandimplementairemissionsmanagement programs for standby power generators and biogas production, including assessment of desirability of retrofit and accelerated asset replacement where appropriate. 2014
1.3.10 Developandimplementprogramstoreduce greenhouse gas emissions from the regional liquid waste management systems to help achieve federal, provincial and Metro Vancouver greenhouse gas targets (see Action 3.3.4). 2015
SDD-173
20 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
System Operation and Maintenance
1.3.11 Developandimplementoperationalplans for municipal sewerage facilities to ensure infrastructure reliability and optimal performance. Ongoing
1.3.12 Work with Metro Vancouver to develop and implement emergency sanitary sewer overflow plans including contingency plans to minimize impacts of unavoidable sanitary sewer overflows resulting from extreme weather, system failures or unusual events. Ongoing
Other environmental impact mitigation actions:
1.3.13 Work with private marina operators, Ministry of Environment and Environment Canada to develop and implement regulations to ensure all new marinas and marinas where planned renovations exceed 50% of the assessed existing improvements value have pleasure craft pump-out facilities. Ongoing
1.3.14 Require all pleasure craft pump-out facilities to connect to a municipal sanitary sewerage system or a provincially permitted on-site treatment and disposal system or have established enforceable protocols for transporting liquid waste for disposal at a permitted liquid waste management facility. Ongoing
1.3.15 Continue existing municipal odour control programs and implement new programs for targeted municipal sewer facilities (see Action 3.3.4). Ongoing
1.3.16 Developandimplementairemissionsmanagement programs for standby power generators at municipal sewer pump stations. 2016
1.3.17 Developandimplementprogramstoreducegreenhouse gas emissions from municipal liquid waste management systems to help achieve federal, provincial and municipal greenhouse gas targets (see Action 3.1.5).Ongoing
REqUESt tHE MINIStRy oF ENVIRoNMENt:
1.3.18 Include Metro Vancouver and municipalities in the Ministry’s processes to review and establish official water uses and official water quality objectives for specific water bodies within Metro Vancouver. Ongoing
SDD-174
21N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
Goal 2: Use liquid waste as a resourceThe goal of using liquid waste as a resource marks two important advances in thinking about liquid waste in the context of Metro Vancouver’s sustainability framework.
The first is the recognition that the traditional and still vitally important functions of liquid waste management to protect public health and the environment will ultimately be achieved most beneficially by converting liquid waste into usable resources. Liquid waste is a source of green energy and nutrients and, in addition to stormwater, it can provide alternative sources of water. Strategies are included in this plan to address these opportunities.
The second, which follows logically from the first, is the recognition that the opportunities for cost-effective resource recovery from liquid waste are magnified when explored in the context of integrated resource recovery from the whole range of urban management systems. This is essentially the implementation of the second ‘overarching imperative’ of the SRI framework: “Recognize and reflect the interconnectedness and interdependence of systems...”.
A major challenge for Metro Vancouver and its members will be to adapt the legacy sewerage and stormwater infrastructure of the 20th century to a more sustainable, integrated 21st century system focussed on integrated resource recovery. This will involve embracing new technologies and reshaping communities and their infrastructure so that the resources and energy recovered can be used efficiently and effectively: integrating a new kind of liquid waste infrastructure with building design, community and nature. This involves managing liquid wastes as a resource, minimizing discharges, minimizing financial risks, and maximizing the quality of discharges.
Biogas produced from wastewater supplies heat and power to the Iona Island
wastewater treatment plant.
SDD-175
22 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
STRATEGy 2.1Pursue liquid waste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context
Metro Vancouver will continue with its Biosolids
Management Plan Framework programs until new
options and supporting business cases have been
developed and implemented under this Strategy
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
2.1.1 Assess each sewerage area using an integrated resource recovery business case model that: 2012
(a) evaluates opportunities to expand the recovery of energy, nutrients and water from the liquid waste system, specifically:
•energyfrombiogasatwastewatertreatment plants including investigating new sludge and wastewater treatment technologies and the co-digestion of other organic wastes such as organics in municipal solid waste, oils and greases;
•heatenergyfromnewpumpstations,sewer replacement and rehabilitation and major wastewater treatment plant projects;
•biodieselfromtruckedliquidwaste,wastegrease and sewer grease;
•energyfrombiosolidsandsludge;
•nutrients,suchasphosphorousfromliquidwaste and biosolids; and
•alternativestopotablewaterfornon-drinking purposes, such as rainwater harvesting, greywater reuse and reclaimed treated wastewater;
(b) identifies linkages between liquid waste resource recovery opportunities and other systems (solid waste, drinking water, land use/buildings, parks, air quality, energy); and
(c) develops and evaluates business cases for integrated resource recovery/use opportunities.
2.1.2 Implement appropriate business cases based on the results of 2.1.1. Ongoing
2.1.3 Work with municipalities to adapt plans and infrastructure for long term needs based on the results of 2.1.1. Ongoing
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
2.1.4 Work with Metro Vancouver to give effect to 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. Ongoing
SDD-176
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 23
Goal 3: Effective, affordable and collaborative managementTo be sustainable, liquid waste management requires programs and services that are affordable and effective, now and in the future. Innovation, monitoring and assessment, maintenance and reinvestment, resilient liquid waste systems and risk management are important activities which help achieve this goal.
Managing assets and optimizing their operation requires ongoing inspection, condition assessments and performance modelling. This is supported by an extensive data collection network for sewer flows, rainfall and stream flows that provides information essential to assessing and planning performance of wastewater and drainage systems. Environmental monitoring and assessment programs inform Metro Vancouver and the Ministry of Environment on the effectiveness of the region’s liquid waste management programs and whether changes may be needed.
Collaboration and program alignment among Metro Vancouver and its members help prioritize maintenance and reinvestment in wastewater collection and treatment systems. Stormwater management is made more effective by better integration of stormwater management and land useplanningandacommitmentbyGVS&DDmembers to implement their integrated stormwater management plans. Collaboration extends beyond Metro Vancouver and its members, and includes senior levels of government, academia and business—this fosters innovation. This plan promotes collaborative forums and dialogue through the development of a learning academy for liquid waste, partnerships in research, and advisory committees.
The new Columbia Street Pump Station helps reduce combined sewer overflows.
SDD-177
24 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
STRATEGy 3.1Manage assets and optimize existing sanitary sewerage operations
Long-term affordable sanitary sewerage
management requires ongoing assessment of
the system performance and its integrity Proper
maintenance of existing sewerage assets will, in the
long term, forestall the need for significantly higher
repair and replacement costs in the future
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:.
3.1.1 Assess the performance and condition of regional sewerage systems by: Ongoing
(a) inspecting regional sanitary sewers on a twenty year cycle; and
(b) maintaining current maps of sewerage inspection, condition, and repairs.
3.1.2 Create incentives to reduce inflow and infiltration by adjusting Tier I sewerage cost allocation formulae within each sewerage area from an average dry weather flow basis (25th percentile) to average wet weather flow (75th percentile) with appropriate adjustments for combined sewerage areas. Tier II cost allocation would remain unchanged. 2010
3.1.3 In consultation with municipalities, review Metro Vancouver’s safe-operating head for regional sewers. 2011
3.1.4 Developandimplementassetmanagementplans targeting a 100 year replacement or rehabilitation cycle for regional sewerage infrastructure. 2013 for plans
3.1.5 Update and implement asset management plans for wastewater treatment plants which address risks, including climate change and seismic events, and maintain performance in wet weather. 2013
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
3.1.6 Assess the performance and condition of municipal sewerage systems by: Ongoing
(a) inspecting municipal sanitary sewers on a twenty year cycle;
(b) maintaining current maps of sewerage inspection, condition and repairs; and
(c) using the Metro Vancouver “Sewer Condition Reporting Template Standard Report, November 2002” as a guide to ensure a consistent approach to sewer system evaluation and reporting.
3.1.7 Work with Metro Vancouver to give effect to 3.1.2, 3.1.3 and 3.1.4. Ongoing
3.1.8 Developandimplementassetmanagementplans targeting a 100 year replacement or rehabilitation cycle for municipal sewerage infrastructure and provide copies of such plans to Metro Vancouver. 2014 for plans
Installing Metro Vancouver trunk sewers, South Surrey.
SDD-178
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 25
STRATEGy 3.2
Use innovative approaches and technologies
This plan seeks improvement through innovation,
using local research and development and adapting
successes from elsewhere, to address pollutants
of emerging concern, improve wastewater
treatment, implement more sustainable stormwater
management practices and reduce long-term
financial burdens
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
3.2.1 With financial support from provincial and federal governments and the University of British Columbia, develop the Annacis Island Sustainability Academy to support innovative research and demonstration projects in liquid waste management. Facility by 2011
3.2.2 Collaborate with local and senior governments, academic institutions and industry in research on wastewater treatment technology and stormwater management and associated demonstration projects, training and development of educational toolkits. Ongoing
3.2.3 Undertake an annual internal audit of best practices of one regional liquid waste management sub program and environmental management system to identify opportunities for innovation and improvements. Annually
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
3.2.4 Undertake a tri-annual internal audit of best practices of one municipal liquid waste management sub-program in each municipality to identify opportunities for innovation and improvements. Triennially
STRATEGy 3.3 Monitor the performance of the liquid waste system and impacts on the receiving environment
Monitoring will inform the operation of infrastructure,
the understanding of the potential for impacts from
discharges and infrastructure planning
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
3.3.1 Continue to monitor the ambient environment conditions of relevant water bodies in the region in conformance with the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE) requirements, and work with the Ministry of Environment in developing EnvironmentalQualityObjectives.Ongoing
Rainwater infiltration treats stormwater and rebalances groundwater and creek flows.
SDD-179
26 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
3.3.2 Continue to monitor the quantity and characteristics of Metro Vancouver’s liquid waste point discharges to the environment in conformance with the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (CWS-MMWE) requirements to meet Environmental DischargeObjectives.Ongoing
3.3.3 Continue to operate its regional data collection network for sewers, rainfall and streams and use that data to assess the effectiveness of actions taken under this plan. Ongoing
3.3.4 In collaboration with municipalities, estimate and document the greenhouse gas emissions and odours associated with the operation of the municipal and regional liquid waste management systems (see Actions 1.3.8, 1.3.10, 1.3.15, and 1.3.17). 2012
3.3.5 Estimate and report on the frequency, location and volume of sewage overflows from regional combined and sanitary sewers, and where feasible identify and address the probable causes. Ongoing
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
3.3.6 In collaboration with Metro Vancouver, estimate and document the greenhouse gas emissions and odours associated with the operation of the municipal and regional liquid waste management systems. 2014
3.3.7 Estimate and report on the frequency, location and volume of sewage overflows from municipal combined and sanitary sewers, and where feasible identify and address the probable causes. Ongoing
3.3.8 Maintain and, if necessary, expand the existing municipal sewer flow and sewer level monitoring network. Ongoing
Monitoring at the Iona Island wastewater treatment plant laboratary.
SDD-180
27N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
STRATEGy 3.4Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term needs
Metro Vancouver and municipalities will identify risks
which threaten the continued integrity of liquid waste
management operations and infrastructure and
create more resilient and adaptable systems which
address these risks to contribute to the overall goal
of a resilient region
The actions in the strategy require integration
and collaboration This is essential to developing
and interpreting scenarios as well as developing
management plans such as integrated stormwater
management plans Climate change, Fraser
River freshet, demographic change and aging
infrastructure are examples of uncertainties
and factors which continue to be assessed and
assimilated into scenarios that assist Metro
Vancouver and municipalities in identifying options
that increase long-term resiliency and manage risks
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
3.4.1 Designandadaptinfrastructureandoperations to address identified risks and long-term needs, including risks associated with climate change. Ongoing
3.4.2 In collaboration with municipalities and the Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management (IPREM) develop emergency management strategies and response plans for municipal and regional wastewater collection and treatment systems, including identifying and maintaining a system of emergency wastewater overflow locations. 2015
3.4.3 Ensure liquid waste infrastructure and services are provided in accordance with the Regional Growth Strategy and coordinated with municipal Official Community Plans. Ongoing
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
3.4.4 In collaboration with Metro Vancouver and the Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management (IPREM) develop emergency management strategies and response plans for municipal and regional wastewater collection and treatment systems. 2015
3.4.5 Adapt infrastructure and operations to address risks and long-term needs. Ongoing
3.4.6 Ensure liquid waste infrastructure and services are provided in accordance with the Regional Growth Strategy and coordinated with municipal Official Community Plans. Ongoing
3.4.7 Developandimplementintegratedstormwater management plans at the watershed scale that integrate with land use to manage rainwater runoff. Plans by 2014
STRATEGy 3.5 Use collaborative management to address evolving needs
A key feature of the plan is collaborative
management— collaboration in monitoring progress,
identifying challenges, and finding solutions to
overcome challenges Through collaboration,
Metro Vancouver and its members will continue to
adapt and evolve their liquid waste management
operations and infrastructure and create more
resilient and adaptable systems
MEtRo VANcoUVER WILL:
3.5.1 Establish a new overarching committee, the Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee (IUMAC), to advise Metro Vancouver on plan implementation, particularly from the perspectives of integrated planning and resource recovery across utility systems. 2010
SDD-181
28 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
3.5.2 Continue to receive advice from the Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC) and Stormwater Interagency Liaison Group (SILG) as subcommittees under IUMAC. Ongoing
3.5.3 Use the Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program and the Fraser River Estuary Management Program Management Committee (BIEAP-FREMP) as the senior level forum for discussion of policy and assessment of the scientific work related to the plan, and for resolving toxicity concerns and any disputes among its members related to implementing the plan. Ongoing
3.5.4 Biennially produce a progress report on plan implementation for distribution to the Ministry of the Environment that: By July 1st biennially
(a) summarizes progress from the previous two years on plan implementation, for all Metro Vancouver actions, including the status of performance measures.
(b) includes summaries and budget estimates for proposed LWMP implementation programs for the subsequent two calendar years.
3.5.5 Hold a public accountability session based on the biennial reports (Actions 3.5.4 and 3.5.8 by making the report available through Metro Vancouver’s website and by holding a special meeting of the Metro Vancouver Waste Management Committee to receive public comments and input on the report.Biennially
3.5.6 Report directly to the Ministry of Environment annual progress on integrated stormwater management plan implementation and all occurrences of sanitary sewer overflows. By March 1st annually
3.5.7 In collaboration with members and the Ministry of Environment, undertake a comprehensive review and update of the plan on an eight year cycle. Every eight years
SDD-182
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 29
MUNIcIPALItIES WILL:
3.5.8 Biennially produce a progress report on plan implementation for distribution to the Ministry of the Environment that: By July 1st biennially
(a) summarizes progress from the previous two years on plan implementation for all municipal actions, including the status of performance measures.
(b) includes summaries and budget estimates for proposed LWMP implementation programs for the subsequent two calendar years.
3.5.9 Report through Metro Vancouver to the Ministry of Environment annual progress on integrated stormwater management plan implementation and all occurrences of sanitary sewer overflows. By March 1st annually
3.5.10 Work with Metro Vancouver to give effect to 3.5.2, 3.5.5, and 3.5.7. Ongoing
Trees improve habitat and reduce stormwater impacts, Still Creek, Vancouver.
SDD-183
30 N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9
Financial Plan Metro Vancouver and its members recover most of the costs to build, operate and maintain their liquid waste infrastructure from users. These are not adequate, however, to wholly finance major capital projects such as upgrading primary plants to secondary treatment, and therefore, historically senior levels of governments have provided significant cost sharing for major capital projects.
While pricing mechanisms can more equitably allocate the costs among the users of municipal and Metro Vancouver’s liquid waste management services, they do not offer new revenue sources.
Through the IRR process, opportunities to access resources from the liquid waste system to create new revenues may be possible, but these are uncertain and cannot be relied upon to address the funding needs of this plan.
This plan includes a commitment to upgrading both the Lions Gate and Iona Island primary treatment plants to secondary level treatment. Given the significant cost and that the work is designed to fulfill environmental policy goals shared by all three levels of government, this plan assumes provincial and federal financial commitments will be forthcoming.
Metro Vancouver and member municipalities will seek infrastructure funding from both senior levels of government consistent with the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent. In addition, Metro Vancouver will work with its member municipalities to ensure that the cumulative cost implications of this plan are mitigated through appropriate financial strategies such as rate smoothing.
SDD-184
N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 9 31
Performance Measures Performance measures document progress in achieving the goals of the LWMP, and are useful for the adaptive management process. Performance measures will be further developed by the Integrated Utility Management Advisory Committee, and will be used in reporting on the Liquid Waste Management Plan implementation progress.
Goal 1: Protect public health and the environment •compliancewithparametersspecifiedinthe
operating certificates for wastewater treatment plants
•dischargesthatdonotmeetProvincialwaterquality guidelines
•numberofsanitaryseweroverflows— frequency, location and volume
•sanitarysewagevolumesincombined sewer overflows
•beachclosuredaysandlocations
•watershedandstreamhealthindicatorsasset out in the integrated stormwater management plan template
Goal 2: Use liquid waste as a resource•quantitiesandtypesofenergyandmaterials
recovered from the liquid waste system
Goal 3: Effective, affordable and collaborative management•wetweatherpeakingfactorsatkeyregional
monitoring points
•average[24hour]flowsatregionalflowmonitoring stations and at wastewater treatment plants
•metresofsewerpipeinspectedand renewed annually
•annualoperations,maintenanceandcapitalexpenditures for liquid waste management
•numberandarea[hectares]ofintegratedstormwater management plans completed
SDD-185
PRINTEDINCANADAONRECYCLEDPAPER
SDD-186
Imp
lem
en
tatio
n o
f the L
iqu
id W
aste
Man
ag
em
en
t Pla
n
004994012 N
ovember 2009
1
Goal 1
Protect public health and the environment
Task By
Timeline
Implications
(additional cost &
resources to current level)
Strategy 1.1 R
educe liquid wastes at their source
Source control
1.1.1 R
eview and enhance sew
er use bylaws to reduce liquid w
aste at source, including contaminants
identified by the Canadian E
nvironmental P
rotection Act.
Metro Vancouver
2012 included in current
programs
1.1.2 D
evelop new regulatory instrum
ents, such as Pollution P
revention Plans to com
plement existing
regulations. M
etro Vancouver 2014
$100,000/y
1.1.3 Increase resources for perm
itting, and inspection to support and enforce sewer use bylaw
s. M
etro Vancouver 2010
$500,000/y for 4 additional
staff
1.1.4 Investigate the im
plications of the use of domestic food grinders.
Metro Vancouver
2012 included in current
programs
1.1.5 D
evelop and implem
ent targeted outreach plans to support liquid waste source control program
s. M
etro Vancouver ongoing
$100,000/y
Inflow and Infiltration and R
ainwater M
anagement
1.1.6 D
evelop a template to guide the preparation and im
plementation of inflow
and infiltration m
anagement plans as part of broader asset m
anagement plans and to support sanitary sew
er overflow
reduction strategies. M
etro Vancouver 2011
$200,000
1.1.7 W
ork with the real estate industry and their regulators, and the m
unicipalities to develop and im
plement a process for the inspection and certification of private sew
er laterals being in good com
ponent of real estate transactions within M
etro Vancouver.
Metro Vancouver
2011 $200,000
1.1.8 D
evelop and implem
ent inflow and infiltration m
anagement plans that identify reduction strategies
and timelines to ensure w
et weather inflow
and infiltration are within targeted levels.
Metro Vancouver
2012 $1,000,000/y
1.1.9 W
ork with m
unicipalities to review historical data and adjust as necessary the average inflow
and infiltration allow
ance for regional trunk sewers and w
astewater treatm
ent plants and develop associated target allow
ances for municipal sew
er catchments associated w
ith a 1:5 year return frequency storm
event for sanitary sewers to a level that ensures environm
ental and economic
sustainability.
Metro Vancouver
2013 $100,000
1.1.10 R
eview progress in reducing inflow
and infiltration every four years M
etro Vancouver
every four years
included in current program
s
1.1.11 E
nhance enforcement of sew
er use bylaw prohibition against the unauthorized discharge of
rainwater and groundw
ater to sanitary sewers.
Metro Vancouver
2010 $50,000/y for ½
additional staff
ATTA
CH
MEN
T2
SDD-187
N
ovember 2009
2
1.1.12 W
ork with m
unicipalities to:
(a) facilitate research on w
atershed-based stormw
ater managem
ent approaches;
(b) identify im
provements to storm
water bylaw
s to include on-site rainwater m
anagement
requirements;
(c) develop m
odel utility design standards and options for neighbourhood design guidelines;
(d) establish region-w
ide baseline criteria for on-site rainfall managem
ent including variations for localized geology, rainfall and w
atershed conditions;
(e) establish m
echanisms to ensure continued perform
ance of on-site rainwater m
anagement
systems; and
(f) w
ork with senior governm
ents and industry to develop codes of practice, certification, guidelines and standards w
hich support this plan.
Metro Vancouver
2012 $500,000
1.1.13 D
ecrease liquid waste volum
es through complem
entary initiatives in the Metro V
ancouver D
rinking Water M
anagement P
lan to reduce potable water consum
ption. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
Source control
1.1.14 R
eview and enhance sew
er use bylaws to reduce liquid w
aste at source, including contaminants
identified by the Canadian E
nvironmental P
rotection Act.
Municipalities
2012 $1,500,000
1.1.15 C
ontinue existing programs of perm
itting and inspection to support and enforce sewer use
bylaws.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
1.1.16 Identify and regulate pesticides and law
n care products which negatively affect rainw
ater runoff quality and urban stream
health M
unicipalities 2014
included in current program
s
1.1.17 C
ontinue outreach plans to support liquid waste source control program
s. M
unicipalities ongoing
Included in current program
s
Inflow and Infiltration and R
ainwater M
anagement
1.1.18 D
evelop and implem
ent inflow and infiltration m
anagement plans, using the M
etro Vancouver
template as a guide, to ensure w
et weather infiltration inflow
and infiltration volumes are w
ithin M
etro Vancouver’s allow
ances as measured at M
etro Vancouver’s flow
metering stations.
Municipalities
develop by 2012
$4,000,000 plus additional costs to
implem
ent
1.1.19 E
nhance enforcement of sew
er use bylaw prohibition against the unauthorized discharge of
rainwater and groundw
ater to sanitary sewers.
Municipalities
2010 to be determ
ined by each
municipality
1.1.20 U
pdate municipal bylaw
s to require on-site rainwater m
anagement sufficient to m
eet criteria established in m
unicipal integrated stormw
ater plans or baseline region-wide criteria.
Municipalities
2014 $1,500,000
SDD-188
N
ovember 2009
3
1.1.21 U
pdate municipal utility design standards and neighbourhood design guidelines to enable and
encourage on-site rainwater m
anagement.
Municipalities
2014 $1,500,000
Strategy 1.2 R
educe wet w
eather overflows
1.2.1 P
rohibit the construction of new com
bined sewer system
s other than those functioning as part of a strategy to reduce com
bined sewer overflow
s or to manage storm
water quality.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
1.2.2 A
ddress the Canada-w
ide Strategy for the M
anagement of M
unicipal Wastew
ater Effluent (C
WS
-M
MW
E) by w
orking with B
urnaby, New
Westm
inster and Vancouver to develop and im
plement:
priorities for sewer separation of catchm
ents tributary to combined sew
er outfalls; regional and m
unicipal sequence for trunk and collector sewer separation; strategic use of existing com
bined sew
ers to manage rainw
ater quality runoff; and a strategy to separate combined sew
er connections from
private properties.
Metro Vancouver
2014 included in current
programs
1.2.3 R
eplace combined regional trunk sew
ers with separated sanitary and storm
sewers as
determined by the plans developed in 1.2.2.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
1.2.4 W
ork with m
unicipalities to develop and implem
ent municipal-regional sanitary overflow
m
anagement plans w
hich will: prevent sanitary overflow
s resulting from heavy rain and snow
melt
occurring less than once every five years (for a 24 hour duration event); reduce emergency
overflows due to pow
er outages; and identify locations and schedules for appropriate system
capacity improvem
ents, wet w
eather containment, and point treatm
ent and discharge to receiving w
aters of chronic overflows, including C
loverdale Pum
p Station, K
atzie Pum
p Station, Lynn P
ump
Station.
Metro Vancouver
2013 $60,000,000
1.2.5 W
ork with M
etro Vancouver to develop and im
plement m
unicipal-regional sanitary overflow
managem
ent plans as set out in 1.2.4. M
unicipalities 2013
$1,500,000
1.2.6 B
urnaby, New
Westm
inster and Vancouver w
ill work w
ith Metro V
ancouver to give effect to 1.2.2 and, specifically, im
plement plans to prevent com
bined sewer overflow
s by 2050 for the Vancouver Sew
erage Area and 2075 for the Fraser Sewerage Area and separate com
bined sew
ers at an average rate of 1% and 1.5%
of the system per year in the V
ancouver Sew
erage A
rea and Fraser Sew
erage Area respectively.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
SDD-189
N
ovember 2009
4
Strategy 1.3 R
educe environmental im
pacts from liquid w
aste managem
ent to a m
inimum
System
Operation and M
aintenance
1.3.1 D
evelop and implem
ent operational plans for sewerage and w
astewater treatm
ent facilities to ensure infrastructure reliability and optim
al performance.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
1.3.2 M
aintain trunk sanitary sewer capacity for dry w
eather sewage conveyance levels plus the M
etro V
ancouver target inflow and infiltration allow
ance; as necessary upgrade trunk sewer system
s to m
aintain hydraulic gradelines and safe operating levels which have been established based on
measured flow
. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
1.3.3 W
ork with m
unicipalities to develop and implem
ent emergency sanitary sew
er overflow plans
including contingency plans to minim
ize impacts of unavoidable sanitary sew
er overflows resulting
from extrem
e weather, system
failures or unusual events. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
Secondary level wastew
ater treatment
1.3.4 O
perate wastew
ater treatment plants w
hich have secondary level treatment (A
nnacis Island, Lulu Island, N
orth West Langley w
astewater treatm
ent plants) to meet requirem
ents specified in each facility’s O
perating Certificate and the C
anada-wide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of Municipal
Wastew
ater Effluent (C
WS
-MM
WE
) National P
erformance S
tandards for wastew
ater effluent, including:
(a) monthly average m
aximum
Carbonaceous Biochem
ical Oxygen D
emand (C
BOD
5 ): 25 mg/L;
and (b) m
onthly average maxim
um Total S
uspended Solids (TS
S): 25 m
g/L.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
SDD-190
N
ovember 2009
5
1.3.5 U
pgrade or replace Lions Gate (N
orth Shore S
ewerage A
rea) and Iona Island (Vancouver
Sew
erage Area) w
astewater treatm
ent plants to secondary level treatment to m
eet Canada-w
ide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of Municipal W
astewater E
ffluent (CW
S-M
MW
E) requirem
ents and tim
elines. a)
The intended site for the North S
hore Sew
erage Area secondary facility is the Metro
Vancouver owned property located betw
een Pem
berton, Philips, and M
cKeen A
venues and W
est First Street in the D
istrict of North V
ancouver. The existing outfall will be retained
as part of the upgraded facility. The outfall discharges to embayed m
arine waters as
defined in the Environm
ental Managem
ent Act M
unicipal Sew
age Regulation.
b) The intended site for the V
ancouver Sew
erage Area is the property imm
ediately adjacent and east of the existing Iona Island plant in the C
ity of Richm
ond. The existing outfall will
be retained as part of the upgraded facility. The outfall discharges to open marine w
aters as defined in the E
nvironmental M
anagement A
ct, Municipal S
ewage R
egulation. c)
Based on the C
WS
-MM
WE
and the assessment m
ade by the Environm
ental Monitoring
Com
mittee, Lions G
ate should proceed within a 10-year tim
eline and Iona Island within a
20-year timeline, subject to the appropriate financial arrangem
ents being in place as indicated in the Financial P
lan. d)
Metro V
ancouver will seek assistance from
both senior levels of government in resolving
First Nations rights and title issues associated w
ith these secondary treatment plant
upgrades.
Metro V
ancouver
$1,400,000,000
1.3.6 M
aintain interim m
aximum
daily concentration limits for w
astewater effluent of 130 m
g/L BO
D5 at
both Lions Gate and Iona Island plants and 130 m
g/L TSS
at Lions Gate and 100 m
g/L TSS
at Iona Island until such tim
e as secondary treatment is operational, and operate the plants to m
eet requirem
ents specified in each facility’s Operating C
ertificate. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing $25,000,000 for Iona Is. by 2020
Other environm
ental impact m
itigation actions
1.3.7 A
ssess environmental m
onitoring results (see Strategy 3.3) to determ
ine whether any actions are
required to meet M
inistry of Environm
ent/ Canada-w
ide Strategy for the M
anagement of M
unicipal W
astewater E
ffluent (CW
S-M
MW
E) requirem
ents. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing
monitoring
included in current program
s cost of response to be determ
ined
1.3.8 C
ontinue odour control programs at w
astewater treatm
ent plants and implem
ent odour control program
s for targeted facilities in the regional sewer system
and for relevant energy and material
recovery processes (see Action 3.3.4).
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
1.3.9 D
evelop and implem
ent air emissions m
anagement program
s for standby power generators and
biogas production, including assessment of desirability of retrofit and accelerated asset
replacement w
here appropriate. M
etro Vancouver 2014
assessment
included in current program
s – im
plementation
costs to be determ
ined
SDD-191
N
ovember 2009
6
1.3.10 D
evelop and implem
ent programs to reduce greenhouse gas em
issions from the regional liquid
waste m
anagement system
s to help achieve federal, provincial and Metro Vancouver greenhouse
gas targets (see Action 3.3.4).
Metro Vancouver
2015
development
included in current program
s – im
plementation
costs to be determ
ined
System
Operation and M
aintenance
1.3.11 D
evelop and implem
ent operational plans for municipal sew
erage facilities to ensure infrastructure reliability and optim
al performance.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
1.3.12 W
ork with M
etro Vancouver to develop and im
plement em
ergency sanitary sewer overflow
plans including contingency plans to m
inimize im
pacts of unavoidable sanitary sewer overflow
s resulting from
extreme w
eather, system failures or unusual events.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
Other environm
ental impact m
itigation actions
1.3.13 W
ork with private m
arina operators, Ministry of E
nvironment and E
nvironment C
anada to develop and im
plement regulations to ensure all new
marinas and m
arinas where planned renovations
exceed 50% of the assessed existing im
provements value have pleasure craft pum
p-out facilities. M
unicipalities ongoing
included in current program
s
1.3.14 R
equire all pleasure craft pump out facilities to connect to a m
unicipal sanitary sewerage system
or a provincially perm
itted on-site treatment and disposal system
or have established enforceable protocols for transporting liquid w
aste for disposal at a permitted liquid w
aste managem
ent facility. M
unicipalities ongoing
included in current program
s
1.3.15 C
ontinue existing municipal odour control program
s and implem
ent new program
s for targeted m
unicipal sewer facilities (see A
ction 3.3.4). M
unicipalities ongoing
included in current program
s
1.3.16 D
evelop and implem
ent air emissions m
anagement program
s for standby power generators at
municipal sew
er pump stations.
Municipalities
2016 included in current
programs
1.3.17 D
evelop and implem
ent programs to reduce greenhouse gas em
issions from m
unicipal liquid w
aste managem
ent systems to help achieve federal, provincial and m
unicipal greenhouse gas targets (see A
ction 3.3.4). M
unicipalities ongoing
development
included in current program
s – im
plementation
costs to be determ
ined
1.3.18 Include M
etro Vancouver and m
unicipalities in the Ministry’s processes to review
and establish official w
ater uses and official water quality objectives for specific w
ater bodies within M
etro V
ancouver.
Request of the M
inistry of E
nvironment
ongoing included in current
programs
SDD-192
N
ovember 2009
7
Goal 2
Use liquid w
aste as a resource Task B
y Tim
eline Im
plications (additional cost &
resources to current
level)
Strategy 2.1 Pursue liquid w
aste resource recovery in an integrated resource recovery context
2.1.1 Assess each sew
erage area using an integrated resource recovery business case model that:
(a) evaluates opportunities to recover resources; specifically: •
energy from biogas at w
astewater treatm
ent plants including investigating new sludge
and wastew
ater treatment technologies and the co-digestion of other organic w
astes such as organics in m
unicipal solid waste, oils and greases;
• heat energy from
new pum
p stations, sewer replacem
ent and rehabilitation and major
wastew
ater treatment plant projects;
• biodiesel from
trucked liquid waste, w
aste grease and sewer grease.
• energy from
biosolids and sludge; •
nutrients, such as phosphorous from liquid w
aste and biosolids; and •
alternatives to potable water for non-drinking purposes, such as rainw
ater harvesting, greyw
ater reuse and reclaimed treated w
astewater;
(b) identifies linkages between liquid w
aste resource recovery opportunities and other systems
(solid waste, drinking w
ater, land use/buildings, parks, air quality, energy); and
(c) develops and evaluates business cases for integrated resource recovery/use opportunities.
Metro Vancouver
2012 $5,000,000
2.1.2 Im
plement appropriate business cases based on the results of 2.1.1.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
to be determined
2.1.3 W
ork with m
unicipalities to adapt plans and infrastructure for long term needs based on the
results of 2.1.1. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
2.1.4 W
ork Metro V
ancouver to give effect to 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. M
unicipalities ongoing
included in current program
s
SDD-193
N
ovember 2009
8
Goal 3
Effective, affordable and collaborative managem
ent Task B
y Tim
eline Im
plications (additional cost &
resources to current
level)
Strategy 3.1 M
anage assets and optimize existing liquid w
aste operations
3.1.1 A
ssess the performance and condition of regional sew
erage systems by:
(a) inspecting regional sanitary sewers on a tw
enty year cycle; and
(b) maintaining current m
aps of sewerage inspection, condition, and repairs.
Metro Vancouver
ongoing $150,000/y
3.1.2 C
reate incentives to reduce inflow and infiltration by adjusting Tier I sew
erage cost allocation form
ulae within each sew
erage area from an average dry w
eather flow basis (25
th percentile) to average w
et weather flow
(75th percentile) w
ith appropriate adjustments for com
bined sewerage
areas. Tier II cost allocation would rem
ain unchanged. M
etro Vancouver 2010
included in current program
s
3.1.3 In consultation w
ith municipalities, review
Metro V
ancouver’s safe-operating head for regional sew
ers. M
etro Vancouver 2011
included in current program
s
3.1.4 D
evelop and implem
ent asset managem
ent plans targeting a 100 year replacement or
rehabilitation cycle for regional sewerage infrastructure.
Metro V
ancouver 2013 for
plans $200,000/y
3.1.5 U
pdate and implem
ent asset managem
ent plans for wastew
ater treatment plants w
hich address risks, including clim
ate change and seismic events, and m
aintain performance in w
et weather.
Metro Vancouver
2013 included in current
programs
3.1.6 A
ssess the performance and condition of m
unicipal sewerage system
s by:
(a) inspecting municipal sanitary sew
ers on a twenty year cycle;
(b) maintaining current m
aps of sewerage inspection, condition and repairs; and
(c) using the Metro V
ancouver “Sew
er Condition R
eporting Template S
tandard Report, N
ovember
2002” as a guide to ensure a consistent approach to sewer system
evaluation and reporting.
Municipalities
ongoing
development
included in current program
s – im
plementation to
be determined
3.1.7 W
ork with M
etro Vancouver to give effect to 3.1.2, 3.1.3 and 3.1.4.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
3.1.8 D
evelop and implem
ent asset managem
ent plans targeting a 100 year replacement or
rehabilitation cycle for municipal sew
erage infrastructure and provide copies of such plans to M
etro Vancouver.
Municipalities
2014 for plans
to be determined
in plans (1% of
region equals $60,000,000/y)
Strategy 3.2 U
se innovative approaches and technologies
3.2.1 W
ith financial support from provincial and federal governm
ents and the University of B
ritish C
olumbia, develop the Annacis Island Sustainability Academ
y to support innovative research and dem
onstration projects in liquid waste m
anagement.
Metro V
ancouver facility by
2011 $9,000,000
SDD-194
N
ovember 2009
9
Goal 3
Effective, affordable and collaborative managem
ent Task B
y Tim
eline Im
plications (additional cost &
resources to current
level)
3.2.2 C
ollaborate with local and senior governm
ents, academic institutions and industry in research on
wastew
ater treatment technology and storm
water m
anagement and associated dem
onstration projects, training and developm
ent of educational toolkits. M
etro Vancouver ongoing
$800,000/y
3.2.3 U
ndertake an annual internal audit of best practices of one regional liquid waste m
anagement
sub program and environm
ental managem
ent system to identify opportunities for innovation and
improvem
ents. M
etro Vancouver annually
$150,000/y
3.2.4 U
ndertake a tri-annual internal audit of best practices of one municipal liquid w
aste managem
ent sub-program
in each municipality to identify opportunities for innovation and im
provements.
Municipalities
triennially $720,000/y
Strategy 3.3 M
onitor the performance of the liquid w
aste system and im
pacts on the receiving environm
ent
3.3.1 C
ontinue to monitor the am
bient environment conditions of relevant w
ater bodies in the region in conform
ance with the C
anada-wide S
trategy for the Managem
ent of Municipal W
astewater
Effluent (C
WS
-MM
WE
) requirements, and w
ork with the M
inistry of Environm
ent in developing E
nvironmental Q
uality Objectives.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
3.3.2 C
ontinue to monitor the quantity and characteristics of M
etro Vancouver’s liquid w
aste point discharges to the environm
ent in conformance w
ith the Canada-w
ide Strategy for the
Managem
ent of Municipal W
astewater E
ffluent (CW
S-M
MW
E) requirem
ents to meet
Environm
ental Discharge O
bjectives. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
3.3.3 C
ontinue to operate its regional data collection network for sew
ers, rainfall and streams and use
that data to assess the effectiveness of actions taken under this plan. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
3.3.4 In collaboration w
ith municipalities, estim
ate and document the greenhouse gas em
issions and odours associated w
ith the operation of the municipal and regional liquid w
aste managem
ent system
s (see Actions 1.3.8, 1.3.10, 1.3.15, and 1.3.17).
Metro Vancouver
2012 $200,000
3.3.5 E
stimate and report on the frequency, location and volum
e of sewage overflow
s from regional
combined and sanitary sew
ers, and where feasible identify and address the probable causes.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
3.3.6 In collaboration w
ith Metro V
ancouver, estimate and docum
ent the greenhouse gas emissions
and odours associated with the operation of the m
unicipal and regional liquid waste m
anagement
systems.
Municipalities
2014 $1,500,000
3.3.7 E
stimate and report on the frequency, location and volum
e of sewage overflow
s from m
unicipal com
bined and sanitary sewers, and w
here feasible identify and address the probable causes. M
unicipalities ongoing
included in current program
s
SDD-195
N
ovember 2009
10
Goal 3
Effective, affordable and collaborative managem
ent Task B
y Tim
eline Im
plications (additional cost &
resources to current
level)
3.3.8 M
aintain and, if necessary, expand the existing municipal sew
er flow and sew
er level monitoring
network.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
Strategy 3.4 Provide resilient infrastructure to address risks and long-term
needs
3.4.1 D
esign and adapt infrastructure and operations to address identified risks and long-term needs
including risks associated with clim
ate change. M
etro Vancouver
Ongoing
included in current program
s
3.4.2 In collaboration w
ith municipalities and the Integrated P
artnership for Regional E
mergency
Managem
ent (IPREM
) develop emergency m
anagement strategies and response plans for
municipal and regional w
astewater collection and treatm
ent systems, including identifying and
maintaining a system
of emergency w
astewater overflow
locations. M
etro Vancouver 2015
included in current program
s
3.4.3 E
nsure liquid waste infrastructure and services are provided in accordance w
ith the Regional
Grow
th Strategy and coordinated w
ith municipal O
fficial Com
munity P
lans. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing included in current
programs
3.4.4 In collaboration w
ith Metro V
ancouver and the Integrated Partnership for Regional Em
ergency M
anagement (IPR
EM) develop em
ergency managem
ent strategies and response plans for m
unicipal and regional wastew
ater collection and treatment system
s. M
unicipalities 2015
included in current program
s
3.4.5 A
dapt infrastructure and operations to address risks and long-term needs.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
3.4.6 E
nsure liquid waste infrastructure and services are provided in accordance w
ith the Regional
Grow
th Strategy and coordinated w
ith municipal O
fficial Com
munity P
lans. M
unicipalities ongoing
included in current program
s
3.4.7 D
evelop and implem
ent integrated stormw
ater managem
ent plans at the watershed scale that
integrates with land use to m
anage rainwater runoff
Municipalities
plans by 2014
costs vary by w
atershed – range from
m
illions to tens of m
illions of dollars spread over
decades
Strategy 3.5 U
se collaborative managem
ent to address evolving needs
3.5.1 Establish a new
overarching comm
ittee, the Integrated Utility M
anagement A
dvisory Com
mittee
(IUM
AC
), to advise Metro V
ancouver on plan implem
entation, particularly from the perspectives
of integrated planning and resource recovery across utility systems.
Metro Vancouver
2010 included in current
programs
3.5.2 C
ontinue to receive advice from the E
nvironmental M
onitoring Com
mittee (E
MC
) and Storm
water
Interagency Liaison Group (S
ILG) as subcom
mittees under IU
MA
C.
Metro V
ancouver ongoing
included in current program
s
SDD-196
N
ovember 2009
11
Goal 3
Effective, affordable and collaborative managem
ent Task B
y Tim
eline Im
plications (additional cost &
resources to current
level)
3.5.3 U
se the Burrard Inlet E
nvironmental A
ction Program
and the Fraser River E
stuary Managem
ent P
rogram M
anagement C
omm
ittee (BIEA
P-FR
EM
P) as the senior level forum
for discussion of policy and assessm
ent of the scientific work related to the plan, and for resolving toxicity
concerns and any disputes among its m
embers related to im
plementing the plan.
Metro V
ancouver O
ngoing included in current
programs
3.5.4 B
iennially produce a progress report on plan implem
entation for distribution to the Ministry of the
Environm
ent that:
(a) summ
arizes progress from the previous tw
o years on plan implem
entation for all Metro
Vancouver actions, including the status of perform
ance measures
(b) includes summ
aries and budget estimates for proposed LW
MP
implem
entation programs for
the subsequent two calendar years.
Metro V
ancouver by July 1
st biennially
included in current program
s
3.5.5 H
old a public accountability session based on the biennial reports (Actions 3.5.4 and 3.5.8) by
making the report available through M
etro Vancouver’s w
ebsite and by holding a special meeting
of the Metro V
ancouver Waste M
anagement C
omm
ittee to receive public comm
ents and input on the report.
Metro Vancouver
biennially included in current
programs
3.5.6 R
eport directly to the Ministry of E
nvironment annual progress on integrated storm
water
managem
ent plan implem
entation and all occurrences of sanitary sewer overflow
s. M
etro Vancouver
by March 1
st annually
included in current program
s
3.5.7 In collaboration w
ith mem
bers and the Ministry of E
nvironment, undertake a com
prehensive review
and update of the plan on an eight year cycle. M
etro Vancouver
ongoing every eight
years
included in current program
s
3.5.8 B
iennially, through Metro V
ancouver, produce a progress report on plan implem
entation for distribution to the M
inistry of the Environm
ent that:
(a) summ
arizes progress from the previous tw
o years on plan implem
entation for all municipal
actions, including the status of performance m
easures.
(b) includes summ
aries and budget estimates for proposed LW
MP
implem
entation programs for
the subsequent two calendar years.
Municipalities
by July 1st
biennially included in current
programs
3.5.9 R
eport through Metro V
ancouver to the Ministry of E
nvironment annual progress on integrated
stormw
ater managem
ent plan implem
entation and all occurrences of sanitary sewer overflow
s. M
etro Vancouver
by March 1
st annually
included in current program
s
3.5.10 W
ork with M
etro Vancouver to give effect to 3.5.2, 3.5.5 and 3.5.7.
Municipalities
ongoing included in current
programs
SDD-197
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-198
Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
To: Waste Management Committee From: Mike Stringer, Senior Engineer, Policy and Planning Department Date: September 15, 2009 Subject: Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson
Crescent, Township of Langley Recommendation: That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the footprint of the residential building at 24845 Robertson Crescent in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 49 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson Crescent, Township of Langley”. 1. PURPOSE This report responds to a request from the Township of Langley for Board approval to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary. 2. CONTEXT Sewerage and Drainage area boundaries are occasionally amended at the request of a member municipality in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act. District procedure regarding amendments to sewerage area boundaries requires the examination of financial, technical and operational impacts, land use compliance, effect on service levels, local and community interests and regional interests. The GVS&DD has received a request from the Township of Langley to expand the Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) boundary to include the property at 24845 Robertson Crescent as illustrated on Drawing No. SA-2376, Sheet 49 (Attachment). The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion:
• The application was approved by Township of Langley Council on June 22, 2009. • An existing municipal sewer is adjacent to the parcel in question. • There will be no financial impact on the GVS&DD. • There will be no significant impact to the service levels provided by the GVS&DD
system. • The onsite sewage treatment system on this property is no longer working properly.
Current environmental and health setback regulations do not allow for a new septic system due to the proximity of the potable well serving the property and an environmentally sensitive creek tributary to the Salmon River.
Section E 1.3
SDD-199
Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson Crescent, Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 2 of 3
4972553
• The subject property is located within the Liveable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) Green Zone. However, there is an existing municipal sewer adjacent to the property and the service expansion will not have a significant affect on LRSP policies provided the FSA expansion includes the building footprint only.
3. ALTERNATIVES The Board may: a) approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the footprint of the
residential building at 24845 Robertson Crescent in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 49 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson Crescent, Township of Langley”.
The onsite sewage treatment system at this property is no longer functioning properly. A new onsite system cannot be installed as it would be unable to meet current provincial regulations regarding separation between septic fields and drinking water wells. A municipal trunk sewer is currently under construction adjacent to the property. To avoid large areas of Green Zone lands being included in the sewerage area, the proposed expansion should be limited to the footprint of the building to be connected. or b) Reject the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the footprint of the
residential building at 24845 Robertson Crescent in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 49 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 24845 Robertson Crescent, Township of Langley”
Rejecting the FSA expansion to include these properties would prevent measures to safely manage sewage. 4. CONCLUSION Staff recommends alternative a) above - that the application be approved with the FSA expansion limited to the footprint of the building to be connected. Attachment Drawing No. SA-2376, Sheet 49
SDD-200
SDD-201
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-202
Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
To: Waste Management Committee From: Mike Stringer, Senior Engineer, Policy and Planning Department Date: September 15, 2009 Subject: Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th
Ave., Township of Langley Recommendation: That the Board approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the building footprint of the structures proposed to be built on the properties described as LT 2 & 3, SEC 2, TWP 7, NWD, PL BCP11402 in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 48 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th Ave., Township of Langley”. 1. PURPOSE This report responds to a request from the Township of Langley for Board approval to amend the Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary. 2. CONTEXT Sewerage and Drainage area boundaries are occasionally amended at the request of a member municipality in accordance with Sections 31 and 32 of the GVS&DD Act. District procedure regarding amendments to sewerage area boundaries requires the examination of financial, technical and operational impacts, land use compliance, effect on service levels, local and community interests and regional interests. Municipal sewer lines have recently been extended to service the Highpoint subdivision in south Langley and as a result properties along 200th Street are now adjacent to a sanitary sewer. The township is considering an application for an equestrian themed nine lot subdivision along 200th street which would include a limited scale equestrian service centre. The minimum proposed lot size is 1.72 ha. The zoning will remain RU-1 after the subdivision and all newly created lots will conform to the Small Farm/Country Estate designation. The GVS&DD has received a request from the Township of Langley to expand the Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) boundary to include:
a) LT2, SEC 2 TWP 7, NWD, PL BCP11402 b) LT3, SEC 2 TWP 7, NWD, PL BCP11402
as illustrated on Drawing No. SA-2376, Sheet 48 (Attachment).
Section E 1.4
SDD-203
Amendment – Fraser Sewearge Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th Ave., Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 2 of 3
4972544
The following summarizes the considerations for this boundary expansion: • The applications were approved by Township of Langley Council on September 26,
2006. • An existing municipal sewer is adjacent to the two parcels in question. • There will be no financial impact on the GVS&DD. • There will be no significant impact to the service levels provided by the GVS&DD
system. • Properties in this area currently use traditional private septic systems to handle their
sewage. A number of the septic fields are failing. The Langley Surficial Soil Map indicates that soil in this area has poor drainage characteristics and a geotechnical site assessment carried out in 2005 indicates the water table is very high.
• Environmentally sensitive watercourses running through and adjacent to the subject properties would be protected from potential septic system failures by providing a permanent sanitary sewer connection to these properties.
• The two parcels are within the ALR and Green Zone. The land usage will be limited to the use and lot size policies as specified for the Small Farm/Country Estate designation as per the Township’s current Rural Plan.
• The Agricultural Land commission has approved subdivision of the parcels into nine equestrian themed lots.
• The land use is supported by the ALC and an existing municipal sewer is adjacent to the property. The proposed expansion of the FSA would not have a significant affect on Liveable Region Strategic Plan policies provided that the expansion is limited to include only the building footprint of the structures proposed to be built on the subject properties.
3. ALTERNATIVES The Board may: a) approve the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the building footprint of
the structures proposed to be built on the properties described as LT 2 & 3, SEC 2, TWP 7, NWD, PL BCP11402 in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 48 and described in the report titled “Amendment – Fraser Sewerage Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th Ave., Township of Langley”.
A Fraser Sewerage Area (FSA) expansion for the subject properties would help maintain the quality of water in the Brookswood aquifer. Proposed land use would not be inconsistent with the Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) policy to the extent that the properties remain within the Agriculture Land Reserve (ALR) and land use is consistent with ALR regulations. To minimize development pressures on Green Zone lands, the proposed sewerage area expansion should be limited to include only the area defined by the footprint of the buildings to be connected on each of the subject properties. or b) Reject the expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area to include the properties located
along 200th Street in the Township of Langley as shown on plan SA-2376, Sheet 32. The properties in this area are currently using traditional private septic systems to handle their sewage. The septic fields of a number of these systems are failing. Much of the area is underlain with fine textured soil that has poor drainage characteristics. Groundwater in
SDD-204
Amendment – Fraser Sewearge Area Boundary – 200th Street, North of 4th Ave., Township of Langley Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009
Page 3 of 3
4972544
the area can be high enough to flood septic fields. The water from these systems eventually makes its way into the Brookswood aquifer which is the main source of drinking water for a large portion of the area. Rejecting the FSA expansion to include these properties would prevent measures to improve wastewater management for these properties. 4. CONCLUSION Staff recommends alternative a) above - that the application be approved with the FSA expansion limited to the footprint of buildings. Attachment Drawing No. SA-2376, Sheet 48
SDD-205
SDD-206
004992319
GVS&DD Board Meeting: November 27, 2009
To: Board of Directors From: Environment and Energy Committee Date: November 10, 2009 Subject: Discharge of Grease into the Sewer System Environment and Energy Committee Recommendation: That the Board send a letter to the Treasury Board Cabinet Committee, the Ministry of Community and Rural Development, and a copy to the Premier’s office, underscoring the importance of amendments to provincial legislation which would provide the GVS&DD with ticketing powers and the ability to increase the level of fines available under the Sewer Use Bylaw; and highlighting both the economic and environmental reasons why the legislative amendments are required. At its November 10, 2009 meeting, the Environment and Energy Committee was provided with an update under the “Manager’s Report” on the discharge of fats, oils and greases into the sewer system. The Committee was informed that Metro Vancouver has previously requested that the provincial government amend its legislation to enable ticketing and more substantive fines for Sewer Use Bylaw violations, and that Minister of Environment has submitted a request to the Treasury Board proposing that the necessary legislative changes be considered in 2011. Concerns were expressed about the timeline, noting that without the provincial legislative amendments, the GVS&DD does not have a credible deterrent to violators. Concerns were also expressed that the discharge of these materials to sewer may cause costly blockages and repairs, sewage overflows, expensive treatment, breaches of provincial law and/or adverse environmental impacts. The Committee subsequently passed the recommendation as presented above. Attachment: “Discharge of Grease into the Sewer System”, an excerpt from the “Manager’s Report” dated October 30, 2009.
Section E 2.1
SDD-207
ATTACHMENT Discharge of Grease Into the Sewer System At its October 6, 2009 meeting, the Environment and Energy Committee requested that staff provide information on measures taken to control the discharge of grease into the sewer system. The discharge of fats, oils and greases to sewer from restaurants and other sources to sewers represents a substantial and unfair cost to municipal taxpayers. Metro Vancouver’s Sewer Use Bylaw contains a Code of Practice (Code) which imposes conditions upon restaurants discharging to sewer. The Code is currently under review to enhance requirements. However, the level of compliance with the current code is very poor. Ticketing of non-compliant restaurants is considered the most effective means of improving compliance, as the cost of taking a restaurant to court and the small fines available for violations of Metro Vancouver’s Sewer Use Bylaw make prosecution impractical. However, Metro Vancouver’s sewerage utility, the GVS&DD, does not have ticketing powers similar to municipalities or regional districts. Various staff, legal counsel and Chairpersons for the GVS&DD, over the years dating back at least until 1994, have requested that the province amend its laws to enable ticketing and increase the level of fines available for prosecution of Sewer Use Bylaw violations. We are advised that the province has plans to amend its legislation in 2011 to provide the GVS&DD ticketing powers and also to increase the level of fines available under the bylaw. However, there is no guarantee that this will be done. Consequently, until such time as Metro Vancouver is able to offer a credible deterrent to violators, it is likely that restaurants will continue to discharge fats, oils and grease to sewers and taxpayers will incur unnecessary and unfair costs for maintaining sewer lines and treatment of these wastes. Further the discharge of these materials to sewer results in an increased risk that Metro Vancouver will violate federal or provincial laws at its primary plants, Iona and Lions Gate, as these plants are currently operating close to permitted levels.
SDD-208
GVS&DD Board Meeting Date: November 27, 2009
To: Board of Directors From: Kelly Weilbacher, Office Manager and Assistant to the Corporate Secretary Date: November 18, 2009 Subject: Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – November
2009 Recommendation: That the Board receive for information the report dated November 18, 2009, titled “Delegations’ Executive Summaries Presented at Committee – November 2009”. Attachment(s): A. Covanta
Section E 3.1
SDD-209
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-210
Gold River EfW Project Introduction Covanta Energy Corporation, in partnership with Green Island Energy are pleased to present a summary of our proposal for a long-term, sustainable waste disposal option that will serve as an integral part of Metro Vancouver�s solution for the region�s waste disposal challenges. Covanta�s proposal includes the construction of an Energy-from-Waste (�EfW�) facility in Gold River as well as enhancements to Metro Vancouver�s local resource recovery and recycling systems that would create more than $1 billion in economic stimulus for the Province.
With current landfill resources expected to close or reach capacity in 2010, Covanta is offering Metro Vancouver an alternative sustainable waste management solution. Covanta will redevelop the former Gold River Pulp and Paper Mill into a �State of the Art� EfW facility capable of converting as much as 750,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste into 90 megawatts (735 gigawatts) of clean, renewable energy annually.
Covanta has also identified a site near the Fraser River to serve as a new integrated resource recycling facility. This facility will capture and divert recyclables from the waste stream and facilitate the transfer of unrecyclable waste to Gold River after the waste is turned into Refuse Derived Fuel (�RDF�). The site has direct barge access for shipping RDF to Gold River and can be operational and able to receive waste as early as Q1, 2013.
The financial impact of the development, construction, and operation of the Project would create significant economic stimulus to the British Columbia. The Project, which has received the endorsement of the Village of Gold River, the Strathcona Regional District and the Council of Chiefs of the Mowachaht / Muchalaht First Nations.
The Project will act as an integral part of the Metro Vancouver system and offers synergies with long-term plans to increase recycling rates and develop �In Region� EfW facilities. The Project will have one of the largest processing capacities of any facility in North America and enjoy economies of scale that will provide Metro Vancouver with cost-effective and firm disposal capacity.
The Project is permitted by the Ministry of Environment (�MOE�) and has the support of the host community and local First Nations. In 2006, BC Hydro awarded the Project an Electricity Purchase Agreement, which was approved by the BC Utilities Commission. Covanta is North America�s leading provider of waste-related energy services to the public sector. Each year, our modern EfW facilities turn approximately 16 million tons (US) of waste into nearly 8 million megawatt hours of clean renewable electricity and 10 billion pounds of steam. Covanta owns and/or operates 60 power and/or steam generation facilities.
Synergy with the Integrated Solid Waste Management System The Project can serve as an integral part of the Metro Vancouver waste management system and can compliment Metro Vancouver�s current plans to increase recycling rates and site new EfW capacity within the Region. The flexible terms of our proposal would allow Metro Vancouver to continue to pursue future development of a local EfW facility to meet the increase in waste volume while benefiting from an immediate solution. With our integrated resource recycling facility in operation within two years, the Project allows for immediately available capacity to solve the Region�s waste disposal supply and demand imbalance.
Environmental Benefits Covanta�s experience demonstrates that EfW is the most responsible means of solid waste disposal. In addition to its energy benefits, EfW avoids the conversion of greenfields into landfills. Although North America is blessed with abundant open land, the continuous use of this land for burying waste is not sustainable. EfW offers Metro Vancouver a more environmentally responsible means of solid waste disposal than landfilling. It uses a state-of-the-art process to reduce the volume of waste which must ultimately be disposed of, generates valuable renewable energy, protects valuable ground water supplies and results in a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions when compared to current landfilling practices in the Province. To help clarify this matter, Covanta commissioned an apples-to-apples comparative life cycle analysis (LCA) of waste management options which include Covanta�s Gold River Power Project and a similarly-sized WTE facility located in the Lower Mainland. WTE scenarios (either in region or in Gold River) were found to have a superior greenhouse gas (GHG) profile than landfilling. The Gold River project yielded a higher GHG reduction than �in region� EfW primarily due our ability to be operational by 2013.
Proposed Business Structure Covanta proposes to provide Metro Vancouver with a solution to its growing waste needs that is competitive with current disposal costs and environmentally superior to current disposal methods. The proposed structure is designed to coincide with Metro Vancouver�s efforts to increase recycling rates within the Region. The proposal offers a Service Fee paid per tonne of waste received at the Covanta resource recovery facility. The price per tonne would escalate with the CPI index. The project could accept as much as 750,000 tonnes per year. The contracted volumes would decrease in step with improvements to recycling rates and would permit MV to reduce the contract tonnage
SDD-211
when it commissions its own �In Region� EfW facility in the MV area. In the business arrangement proposed, Covanta/GIE would assume all of the risk for the development, construction cost escalation, energy pricing volatility, financing, and operational risk for the entire term of the contract. Based on currently schedules, the plant will be operational in the first quarter of 2013.
Technical Overview Covanta plans to capitalize on the existing infrastructure at the former Gold River Pulp and Paper Mill, including a deep-sea port, power transmission lines and existing power generation assets. Covanta will modernize these assets to allow us to operate a major �green� energy power project at the site that will deliver 90 MWs of electrical power to the BC Hydro grid. New assets will include two new boilers, a fuel unloading and RDF handling system, a state-of-the-art air pollution control system and a turbine generator. The Project is connected to the grid via existing transmission lines. Pre-processed RDF will be delivered in bales by barge/ship. State-of-the-art air pollution control equipment will be utilized for the Project at the onset. As an industry leader in environmental services, Covanta utilizes advanced air pollution control devices on its EfW facilities that historically perform significantly better than governmental requirements.
Conclusion Covanta is pleased to present our proposal for a long-term, sustainable waste disposal option that can serve as an integral part of Metro Vancouver�s solution for the Region�s waste disposal challenges. In summary, the Project offers Metro Vancouver and the region the following benefits:
► EfW provides a secure long-term waste disposal option for Metro Vancouver that will provide clean, renewable power to the BC Hydro system;
► The Project, which has received the endorsement of the Village of Gold River, Strathcona Regional District and the Council of Chiefs of the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nations, would generate an estimated $1 billion in economic activity within the Province;
► The proposed business structure will fit with Metro Vancouver�s goal of increasing recycling and diversion;
► The Project provides an environmentally superior means of disposing of waste that results in a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions when compared to current landfilling practices in the Province;
► As the lead developer and operator for the Project, Covanta brings an unequaled depth of experience in the planning, design, development, construction and operation of EfW facilities;
► The Project will have no negative impact to the Fraser Valley air shed; and
► Covanta/GIE would assume all of the risk for the development, construction cost escalation, energy pricing volatility, financing, and operational risk for the entire term of the contract.
SDD-212
REPORTS NOT INCLUDED ON CONSENT AGENDA
SDD-213
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-214
Section G 1
Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 18, 2009
To: Waste Management Committee From: Ray Robb, Division Manager, Policy and Planning Department Jeff Gogol, Environmental Regulatory Planner, Policy and Planning Department Date: October 7, 2009 Subject: Amendment to GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 Recommendation: That the Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Sewerage
and Drainage District Amending Bylaw No. 252, 2009”;
b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Amending Bylaw No. 252, 2009”.
1. PURPOSE To propose amendments to the “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”. The amendments include new disposal rates for trucked liquid waste and revision of language for radioactive waste discharges to sanitary sewer. 2. CONTEXT The GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 (the Bylaw) as amended on May 23, 2008 is enabled by the Environmental Management Act and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act to regulate the discharge of non-domestic waste to sewer. The Bylaw provides the regulatory framework to control, at source, non-domestic effluent from industrial, commercial and institutional sources. The Bylaw is implemented and enforced through the Liquid Waste Regulatory program. Metro Vancouver presently accepts domestic trucked waste, such as septic tank, holding tank and portable toilet wastes at the Iona, Annacis and North West Langley Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP). Non-domestic trucked wastes are primarily accepted at the Iona Wastewater Treatment Plant. The bylaw specifies the rate to be charged for the loads accepted at the wastewater treatment plants and is updated on an annual basis. The rates were last changed in May 2008. The new rates, proposed to be effective January 1, 2010, are as follows (with 2008 rates in brackets): Septic Tank Waste (Domestic) $7.62/m3 ($6.93/m3)
Trucked Waste (Non-Domestic) $86.40/m3 ($73.23/m3)
SDD-215
Amendment to GVS&DD Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007 Waste Management Committee Meeting Date: November 23, 2009 Page 2 of 2
The proposed increase in the rates is to recover the increased costs of treating liquid wastes at the wastewater treatment plants. The proposed change in the text for Radioactive Wastes in Schedule “A” is to achieve consistency with federal laws governing the discharge of radioactive substances to the environment, specifically the Federal Nuclear Safety and Control Act and its regulations. The attached proposed amendment brings the bylaw in line with the Federal statutes. 3. ALTERNATIVES The Board could:
a) provide comments on the revised bylaw and request staff to incorporate these comments into a further revision; or
b) give three readings to and adopt the revised bylaw Staff recommends alternative (b). 4. CONCLUSION This amendment updates the Sewer Use Bylaw to better recover Metro Vancouver’s costs to treat Trucked Liquid Waste and to reflect Federal statutes with respect to Radioactive Waste. Attachment Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Amending Bylaw No. 252, 2009 (004979567)
SDD-216
ATTACHMENT
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT AMENDING BYLAW NO. 252, 2009
A Bylaw to Amend “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District
Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”
WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District has adopted “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”, to manage the direct or indirect discharge of non-domestic waste to any sewers and drains connected to a Sewage Facility operated by the District; AND WHEREAS the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District wishes to amend “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007”; NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Sewer Use Bylaw No. 299, 2007” is
hereby amended as follows:
(a) Replacing section 1.1 of Schedule “F” with the following: “1.1 For disposal of Septic Tank Waste or Trucked Waste: Septic Tank Waste $7.62 per cubic metre Trucked Waste $86.40 per cubic metre Rates become effective January 1, 2010.”
(b) Replacing the text in section 5 of Schedule “A” with the following:
“Waste radioactive substances in excess of quantities or concentrations specified for release to the environment under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act and Regulations or amended versions thereof, or under a licence issued in accordance with s. 24(1) of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act.”
2. This Bylaw shall be cited as “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District
Amending Bylaw No. 252, 2008”.
SDD-217
ATTACHMENT
READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this ____ day of ____________ 2009. RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this ____ day of ____________ 2009. Chairperson
Secretary
SDD-218
Housing Committee Meeting Date: November 20, 2009
To: Housing Committee From: Lorraine Copas, Senior Housing Planner, Policy and Planning Department Eric Aderneck, Regional Planner, Policy and Planning Department Date: November 5, 2009 Subject: Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost
Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Recommendations: That the GVS&DD Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to the Greater Vancouver
Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009; and
b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009.
1. PURPOSE At the GVS&DD meeting on July 31, 2009, the Board directed staff to amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge By-Law No. 187, 1996, to allow regional development cost charges to be waived for Not For Profit Rental Housing, Transitional and Supportive Housing, and For Profit Affordable Rental Housing where affordability is secured for a minimum of 20 years. This report puts forward a new Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw for consideration and adoption by the GVS&DD Board. If adopted, the Bylaw will take effect January 1, 2010. 2. CONTEXT Waiving regional development cost charges to support the development of affordable housing was identified as one of the possible actions to be implemented through the Board adopted Regional Affordable Housing Strategy. Following discussion of the alternatives as well as consideration of the potential financial implications, at their meeting on July 31, 2009, the GVS&DD Board directed staff to amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge By-Law No. 187, 1996. In support of this direction, staff has prepared the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 which has been included as Attachment 1 to this report. This Bylaw sets out the conditions under which a wavier or refund of regional development cost charges will be granted for affordable housing purposes along with the
Section G 2
SDD-219
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Housing Committee Meeting Date: November 20, 2009 Page 2 of 5 criteria that will be used to determine eligible developments. Rather than amending the existing Bylaw, the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 will replace the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 187, 1996 as this has the same effect and is administratively easier to accommodate. In addition to establishing the conditions under which regional development cost charges will be waived or refunded for affordable housing purposes, the new Bylaw also includes some minor housekeeping items such as refinements or clarification of the definitions used in the Bylaw. These changes, however, are housekeeping in nature and not material in consequence. The new Bylaw includes provisions to waive the collection of regional development cost charges for self-contained residential units that are no larger in area than 29 square metres. These exemptions are in keeping with the exemptions granted under Bill 27- 2008 –The Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act adopted by the Provincial government in May 2008. In addition to setting out the conditions under which regional development cost charges will be waived, the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 also make provisions for regional development cost charges to be refunded. These provisions are discussed in more detail in the implementation section of this report and apply to instances where the conditions for waiver may not be fully met at the subdivision approval or building permit stage as required under the Bylaw but which could be met at the time of occupancy. Taking these situations into consideration, provisions have been included in the Bylaw which allow for a refund or credit to be granted once the conditions as set out in the Bylaw are fully satisfied. The specific details related to this provision are discussed in more detail under the implementation section in this report. Eligible Developments This section sets out the criteria used to determine which developments are eligible for a waiver or refund of regional development cost charges. In keeping with the directions put forward to the GVS&DD Board in July 31, 2009, eligible developments included: • Not For Profit Rental Housing • Transitional and Supportive Housing • For Profit Affordable Rental Housing where affordability is secured for 20 years. Not For Profit Rental Housing Including Transitional and Supportive Housing In the case of Not For Profit Rental Housing, the waiver or refund of regional development cost charges would apply to developments which have secured capital or operating funding under government supported housing supply programs. This includes housing for low income families, seniors and those with special housing needs including Transitional and Supportive Housing for those who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. As set out in the Bylaw, a waiver or refund will be granted for Dwelling Units that are owned, managed and operated for affordable housing purposes where day to day management including tenant selection and tenant placement is the responsibility of a Public Housing Body.
SDD-220
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Housing Committee Meeting Date: November 20, 2009
Page 3 of 5
The Bylaw defines Public Housing Body as it is defined in the Residential Tenancy Act and includes British Columbia Housing Management Commission, the Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation, the City of Vancouver, the City of Vancouver Public Housing Corporation, the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation, or any housing society or not-for-profit municipal housing corporation that has an agreement regarding the operation of a residential property with the government of British Columbia, the British Columbia Housing Management Commission, or Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. For Profit Affordable Rental Housing In the case of a For Profit Affordable Rental Housing development, the development may be owned or managed by either a private or institutional owner that does not meet the definition of Public Housing Body. Regional development cost charges would be waived or refunded only for the Dwelling Units which are rented at below market rates consistent with the criteria set out in the Bylaw and where the units are secured for a minimum of 20 years through a lease agreement with a Public Housing Body or through a covenant registered on title pursuant to Section 219 of the Land Title Act. Under the proposed Bylaw, regional development cost charges will also be waived or refunded for rental units in strata developments provided that the rent that is charged for the unit includes any and all strata fees and that the rent for the unit meets the conditions set out in the Bylaw. This includes rents at below market rates as well as provisions to ensure that the units remain affordable for a minimum of 20 years. Attachment 2 provides some examples of the rent and income criteria that would apply to For Profit Affordable Rental Housing based on the eligibility criteria and conditions set out in the Bylaw. Implementation The Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act authorizes the GVS&DD to waive or reduce regional development cost changes for eligible developments. As set out in the Bylaw, member municipalities must collect regional development cost charges at the time that approval of a subdivision is granted or at the time that a building permit is obtained. In the case of the changes which have been proposed under the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009, one of the challenges in the implementation is that it is possible that all of the conditions as set out in the Bylaw may not be fully satisfied at the subdivision approval or building permit stage. Therefore, the implementation of the Bylaw contemplates a system where Metro Vancouver through the GVS&DD will waive or refund development cost charges for any new developments which reaches completion after January 1, 2010 provided the conditions set out in the Bylaw are met at the time of occupancy. In adopting this approach in the implementation of the Bylaw, the objective is to complement municipal actions and strategies currently in place to support the development of affordable housing as well as to provide the development sector with an opportunity to benefit from the changes which have been introduced through this Bylaw provided they meet the requirements around affordability and that they are willing to make the units available either through a lease with a Public Housing Body as defined in the Bylaw or through a covenant registered on title. The Bylaw also waives the collection of regional development cost charges for self-contained, residential units that are no larger in area than 29 square metres.
SDD-221
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Housing Committee Meeting Date: November 20, 2009 Page 4 of 5 In terms of the collection and remittance of regional development cost charges, it is anticipated that member municipalities will be responsible for the implementation of the policies set out in the Bylaw including confirming that a development is eligible to be considered for either a waiver or a refund of regional development cost charges. Member municipalities will also be responsible for collecting and remitting regional development cost charges to Metro Vancouver until such time as it can be demonstrated that the conditions as set out in the Bylaw have been fully met. In the event that the conditions have been satisfied subsequent to the collection and remittance of regional development cost charges, a member municipality may apply for a refund or credit provided the necessary documentation is in place. A letter will be sent out to all of the member municipalities indicating that the GVS&DD Board will be considering the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253 2009 and that if adopted the new Bylaw will take effect January 1, 2010. In addition, staff has been working with members of the region’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and TAC Housing Subcommittee to ensure that this initiative complements and supports municipal actions. 3. ALTERNATIVES It is recommended that the GVS&DD Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage
and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009, and b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage
District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 [Recommended] or c) direct staff to undertake further analysis on specific implementation questions and report back at a future meeting. 4. CONCLUSION The waiver of regional development cost charges for affordable housing was identified as an important priority in the Regional Affordable Housing Strategy which was adopted by the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors in November 2007. At the meeting of the GVS&DD Board on July 31, 2009, the Board directed staff to amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge By-Law No. 187, 1996, to allow regional development cost charges to be waived for Not For Profit Rental Housing, Transitional and Supportive Housing, and For Profit Affordable Rental Housing where affordability is secured for a minimum of 20 years. This report puts forward a new Bylaw -Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009, for consideration and adoption by the GVS&DD Board to accommodate these changes. If the Bylaw as set out in Attachment 1 to this report is adopted, it would take effect January 1, 2010.
SDD-222
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Housing Committee Meeting Date: November 20, 2009
Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENTS 1 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 (eRIM doc. #004989949). 2 Examples of Target Rent Ranges and Income Thresholds for the For Profit Affordable Rental Housing (eRIM doc. #004990009). 004987911
SDD-223
This page left blank intentionally.
SDD-224
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 1 of 17
GREATER VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE BYLAW NO. 253, 2009
WHEREAS: A. Pursuant to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act, the Greater
Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (“the GVS&DD”) may, by bylaw, impose development cost charges on every person who obtains approval of a subdivision or a building permit authorizing the construction, alteration or extension of a building or structure from a Member Municipality;
B. Development cost charges provide funds to assist the GVS&DD in paying capital costs
incurred to provide, construct, alter or expand sewerage facilities to service development within the area of the GVS&DD, excluding the portion of capital costs charged by the GVS&DD to Member Municipalities under section 54 of the Act;
C. Pursuant to the Act, development cost charges are not payable in certain circumstance
and the GVS&DD may waive or reduce development cost charges for eligible developments;
D. Member Municipalities collect the development cost charges imposed under this Bylaw
and remit them to the GVSⅅ E. The GVS&DD and a Member Municipality may enter into an agreement under section
58.3 of the Act under which all, some or some portion of the development cost charges under this Bylaw that would otherwise apply are not required to be collected and remitted by the Member Municipality and the Member Municipality agrees to pay to the GVS&DD an amount equal to the development cost charges that the Member Municipality would have collected under this Bylaw but for such an agreement; and
F. In setting development cost charges under this Bylaw, the GVS&DD has considered:
a. future land use patterns and development and the phasing of works and services; and
b. how development designed to result in a low environmental impact may affect
the capital costs of infrastructure referred to in section 58.2(2) of the Act.
NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District in open meeting assembled enacts as follows:
1.0 REPEAL OF BYLAW
1.1 Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 187, 1996 is hereby repealed.
ATTACHMENT 1
SDD-225
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 2 of 17
2.0 CITATION
2.1 The official citation for this Bylaw is “Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009”.
2.2 This Bylaw may be cited as the “Development Cost Charge Bylaw”.
3.0 INTERPRETATION 3.1 Definitions. In this Bylaw:
(a) “Apartment Residential Use” means any Dwelling Unit which is or will be situated in any building or structure that consists of, or will consist of, at least two floors containing four or more Dwelling Units, other than Dwelling Units that are Townhouse Residential Use;
(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 Residential Use; (ii) Single Family Residential Use; (iii) Townhouse Residential Use; 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 a room, a suite of rooms or a building or structure that is used or is intended to be used as an individual self-contained private residence which must contain cooking appliances, a sink, a toilet, a washbasin and 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, building or structure or are shared and includes accessory uses that are customary ancillary uses to such residences;
(g) “Effective Date” means January 1, 2010;
(h) “Floor Area” means:
SDD-226
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 3 of 17
(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 or more bedrooms; (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 and shown outlined on the drawing attached as Schedule A to this Bylaw;
SDD-227
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 4 of 17
(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 and shown outlined on the drawing attached as Schedule A to the Bylaw;
(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:
(i) a municipality that is a member of the GVSⅅ and (ii) with respect to Electoral Area “A”, the Greater Vancouver Regional
District;
(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: (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;
SDD-228
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 5 of 17
(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 Residential Use, Single Family Residential Use or Townhouse Residential Use 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 and shown outlined on the drawing attached as Schedule A to this Bylaw;
(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 B, C, D and E 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 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;
SDD-229
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 6 of 17
(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 Residential Use, Single Family Residential Use and Townhouse Residential Use;
(cc) “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;
(dd) “Sewage Facility” means any work, service or plant of the GVS&DD for
conveying, disposing of or treating sewage or waste water; (ee) “Single Family Residential Use” means:
(i) a Parcel that results from a Subdivision that is used or may be used for a single building or structure that contains up to three Dwelling Units; or
(ii) a Dwelling Unit that is or will be situated in a single building or
structure that is constructed, altered or extended on a single Parcel and that contains up to three Dwelling Units;
(ff) “Strata Property Act” means the Strata Property Act, SBC 1998, c. 43;
(gg) “Subdivision” means a subdivision 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;
(hh) “Townhouse Residential Use” means any Dwelling Unit which is or will be
situated in any building or structure containing four or more Dwelling Units and which has a principal entrance which provides direct outdoor access at or from ground level;
(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 and shown outlined on the drawing attached as Schedule A to this Bylaw;
4.0 DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES 4.1 Application of Development Cost Charges. Subject to sections 4.2 and 4.3, every
person who obtains:
(a) approval of a Subdivision from a Member Municipality; or
SDD-230
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 7 of 17
(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.
4.2 Exemptions from Development Cost Charges. Development cost charges are not payable under this Bylaw if:
(a) the Development is not and will not be capable of being serviced by a Sewerage
Facility of the GVS&DD or by a Sewerage Facility of a Member Municipality that is connected to a Sewerage Facility of the GVSⅅ
(b) the Development will not impose new capital cost burdens on the GVSⅅ
(c) a development cost charge has previously been paid for the same Development
unless, as a result of further Development, new capital cost burdens will be imposed on the GVSⅅ
(d) the Building Permit authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of a
building or structure or part of a building or structure that is, or will be, after the construction, alteration or extension, exempt from taxation under subsection 220(1)(h) of the Community Charter;
(e) the Building Permit authorizes the construction, alteration or extension of a
building that will, after the construction, alteration or extension:
(i) contain fewer than four self-contained Dwelling Units; and
(ii) be put to no other use other than the Residential Use in those Dwelling Units;
(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. 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:
SDD-231
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 8 of 17
(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 January 1, 2010;
and
(ii) 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
(iii) 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
(iv) 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 January 1, 2010.
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;
(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
SDD-232
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 9 of 17
Residential Use, Single Family Residential Use, Townhouse Residential Use 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
(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
SDD-233
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 10 of 17
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;
(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.
SDD-234
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 11 of 17
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.
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”, “D” and “E” are attached to and form part of this
Bylaw.
SDD-235
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 12 of 17
8.0 EFFECTIVE DATE 8.1 This Bylaw comes into force and takes effect on January 1, 2010. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this _____ day of _____________________2009. RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this _____ day of _____________2009.
__________________________________________ Lois E. Jackson, Chair
__________________________________________ Paulette A. Vetleson, Secretary
SDD-236
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 13 of 17
SCHEDULE A
SDD-237
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 14 of 17
SCHEDULE B
FRASER SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description
1. Single Family Residential Use 2. Townhouse Residential Use 3. Apartment Residential Use 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.
SDD-238
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 15 of 17
SCHEDULE C
LULU ISLAND WEST SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description
1. Single Family Residential Use 2. Townhouse Residential Use 3. Apartment Residential Use 4. Non-Residential Use
Rate
$1,077 per Dwelling Unit $942 per Dwelling Unit $673 per Dwelling Unit $0.505 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
SDD-239
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 16 of 17
SCHEDULE D
NORTH SHORE SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description
1. Single Family Residential Use 2. Townhouse Residential Use 3. Apartment Residential Use 4. Non-Residential Use
Rate
$1,291 per Dwelling Unit $1,129 per Dwelling Unit $807 per Dwelling Unit $0.605 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
SDD-240
Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Development Cost Charge Bylaw No. 253, 2009 Page 17 of 17
SCHEDULE E
VANCOUVER SEWERAGE AREA – DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGE RATES
Description 1. Single Family Residential Use 2. Townhouse Residential Use 3. Apartment Residential Use 4. Non-Residential Use 004989949
Rate
$944 per Dwelling Unit $826 per Dwelling Unit $590 per Dwelling Unit $0.443 multiplied by the number of square feet of Floor Area.
SDD-241
Examples of Target Rent Ranges and Income Thresholds For the For Profit Affordable Rental Housing
Rent Levels At 80% of Market Rates (CMHC 2008) Bachelor 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 BedroomMetro Vancouver 604$ 748$ 923$ 1,014$ North Shore Sewerage Area Nort Vancouver City 609$ 695$ 866$ 1,105$ North Vancouver District 638$ 753$ 908$ 1,067$ West Vancouver District 714$ 923$ 1,403$ 2,186$ Fraser Sewerage Area Burnaby 529$ 654$ 825$ 925$ New Westminster 498$ 592$ 746$ 942$ Delta 493$ 578$ 740$ 861$ Surrey 462$ 567$ 702$ 770$ White Rock 528$ 625$ 794$ 1,022$ Langley City and Langley Township 492$ 592$ 698$ 794$ Tri-Cities 510$ 597$ 746$ 917$ Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows 420$ 522$ 669$ 790$ Vancouver Sewerage AreaCity of Vancouver/UBC/UEL 623$ 749$ 1,054$ 1,399$ Lulu Island Sewerage Area City of Richmond 594$ 714$ 850$ 969$
Income Thresholds -Eligible Households Bachelor 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 BedroomMetro Vancouver 24,160$ 29,920$ 36,928$ 40,576$ North Shore Sewerage Area Nort Vancouver City 24,352$ 27,808$ 34,656$ 44,192$ North Vancouver District 25,536$ 30,112$ 36,320$ 42,688$ West Vancouver District 28,544$ 36,928$ 56,128$ 87,456$ Fraser Sewerage Area Burnaby 21,152$ 26,144$ 32,992$ 36,992$ New Westminster 19,936$ 23,680$ 29,824$ 37,696$ Delta 19,712$ 23,136$ 29,600$ 34,432$ Surrey 18,464$ 22,688$ 28,096$ 30,784$ White Rock 21,120$ 24,992$ 31,744$ 40,864$ Langley City and Langley Township 19,680$ 23,680$ 27,936$ 31,776$ Tri-Cities 20,416$ 23,872$ 29,856$ 36,672$ Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows 16,800$ 20,864$ 26,752$ 31,616$ Vancouver Sewerage AreaCity of Vancouver/UBC/UEL 24,928$ 29,952$ 42,176$ 55,968$ Lulu Island Sewerage Area City of Richmond 23,776$ 28,576$ 34,016$ 38,752$
Targeted Income Range (For Profit Affordable Rental Housing)Targeted Income Threshold
Targeted Rent Range (For Profit Affordable Rental Housing)Targeted Rent Range (80% of market)
004990009
ATTACHMENT 2
SDD-242