Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-05-21 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 21, 2015 CITY OF KITCHENER The Environmental Committee met this date commencing at 4:01 p.m. Present: Ms. S. Danckert, Chair Councillor Y. Fernandes, Messrs. J. Jackson, V. Salajan and M. Yaeger and Ms. C. Gaetani, Ms. A. MacKinnon, Ms. T. Belanger and Ms. K. Milicic Staff: S. Turner, Director, By-law Enforcement G. Hummel, Acting Director, Operations B. Sloan, Manager, Long Range Planning N. Gollan, Manager, Stormwater Utility B. Cronkite, Transportation Planning Project Manager L. Walter, Design & Construction Project Manager B. Steiner, Senior Environmental Planner D. Saunderson, Committee Administrator SIDEWALK SNOW CLEARING - POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. The Committee considered a memorandum entitled “Chapter 687 – Sidewalk Snow/Ice Removal”, dated May 6, 2015, regarding a Council directed public consultation on the City’s sidewalk snow clearing policies and operations. Messrs S. Turner and G. Hummel presented the memorandum, noting that on February 23, 2015, as part of the 2015 Budget deliberations, Council directed staff to undertake a review of the City’s sidewalk snow clearing policies and practices. Mr. Turner advised that as part of the review of the sidewalk snow clearing By-law, specifically Chapter 687 (Sidewalk Snow/Ice Removal) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code, staff were directed to undergo a community consultation process to determine if any changes are required. He stated that as part of the review, the two main issues that are likely to be discussed, are: the requirement to wait a minimum of 24 hours after a snowfall to initiate enforcement action; and, the requirement to completely remove all snow/ice from the sidewalk. Mr. Turner advised that the item likely of greatest interest to the Committee would relate to the requirement Standard within the By-law to completely remove all snow/ice from the sidewalk, as in many instances salt is seen as the method most often used for de-icing. He stated that one option staff are considering is an amendment to the By-law Standard by changing the wording that currently states, residents are to completely clear all the snow/ice, to wording such as ‘reasonably passable.’ He indicated that if a change of that nature is approved, it may have an effect on the variety of removal methods available to citizens and businesses. He commented that one of the challenges with changing the terminology to ‘reasonably passable’ is that the requirement for ‘passable’ is more subjective for enforcement purposes. Mr. Hummel advised that he is undertaking a review of the City’s operational sidewalk snow- clearing practises in relation to other municipalities. He noted they are currently seeking information from the City of Guelph, City of London and Township of North Dumfries on their procedures regarding sidewalk snow clearing. He stated that there are currently 1300 kms of sidewalk in Kitchener and 176 kms are maintained by the City. He indicated that clearing 176 kms of sidewalk comprises 13 separate operational routes which need to be checked daily to ensure that they are clear from snow and ice. He indicated that staff, under the current practise, ensure that the City is complying with the Standard as outlined in the By-law that are applied to all residents. Mr. Hummel stated if the City amended their practise and began clearing all sidewalks within the City; the cost could be approximately $3 million dollars annually in additional resources to complete the work. He further advised that along with the additional costs, the City would also be subject to increased liability if an individual injured themselves on an icy sidewalk. He noted that the City of Brantford just undertook a similar review on sidewalk snow clearing and they opted to maintain their existing practises due to the increased risk and liability to taking over the winter maintenance of the sidewalks. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 21, 2015 - 21 - CITY OF KITCHENER SIDEWALK SNOW CLEARING - POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (CONT’D) 1. Mr. Turner advised that staff are in attendance this date seeking feedback from the Committee as part of the public consultation process, noting the potential environmental impacts for using salt as a de-icing agent. In response to questions, Mr. Turner advised that there are alternative products available other than salt that would assist residents with clearing their sidewalk, noting however, that it wasn’t something that could be regulated. Mr. Hummel further advised that public awareness is a significant challenge. He noted that there are a number of alternative de-icing products available, some of which also have adverse environmental impacts. Ms. A. MacKinnon stated in her opinion, one of the challenges with the Standard currently outlined in the By-law is that people seek to clear their sidewalk by any means necessary in order to avoid being fined. She commented that in most cases that involves using a significant amount of salt to clear to bare pavement. She noted that she would be in support of amending the Standard within the By-law to a sidewalk that is ‘reasonably passable’. She questioned whether consideration had been given to identifying priority accessibility areas within the City to increase City maintenance in those areas. Mr. Turner noted the idea and mentioned that any and all suggestions are welcome. He stated that there may be varying opinions from residents on which sidewalks should be deemed priorities regarding accessibility, but it will be given further consideration as part of the review. Mr. J. Jackson stated in his opinion, with the increased desire to reduce reliance on the personal automobile by promoting walkability and increased transit ridership, the focus needs to include the winter months. He commented that in the winter the City’s goal is to have all streets plowed within 24 hours of a snowfall event, with less emphasis on the sidewalks in the winter, which is a challenge to walkability and decreasing reliance on the automobile. Mr. Hummel advised that staff must adhere to Provincial Legislation regulating minimum maintenance standards for the roadway. He noted that the minimum maintenance standards for sidewalks are outlined within the City’s By-law. He indicated one additional challenge that staff have regarding sidewalk snow clearing is the amount of time that lapses prior to staff enforcing the By-law. He stated that residents have 24 hours following the end of a snow fall event to clear their sidewalk. He commented that another snow fall event could occur prior to the 24-hour enforcement time period lapsing, which delays staff’s ability to enforce sidewalk snow clearing. In response to questions, Mr. Turner advised that the current enforcement fine is a minimum charge of $300. to a maximum charge of $500. He stated that it was previously $100. which was increased due to the number of homeowners that were opting not to clear their sidewalks, requiring the City to undertake the work on their behalf. Mr. Turner advised that as part of the report brought forward to Council, he will note that he sought feedback from the Environmental Committee who indicated a concern for the over-use of salt to maintain the current Standard as outlined within the current By-law. He noted that if time permits, staff could endeavour to seek additional feedback from the Committee or the Committee could put forward a recommendation to Council on the subject matter for Council’s consideration. He further advised that he was unsure this date on when the final report is anticipated to be brought forward for Council’s consideration. Mr. Turner added that if any members have any additional feedback on the topic, either on the environmental concerns relating to sidewalk snow clearing, or on other concerns relating to the topic that may be outside of the Committee’s jurisdiction, they are welcome to contact him via email at shayne.turner@kitchener.ca. 2014 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AUDIT RESULTS 2. The Committee was in receipt this date of a presentation entitled “2014 Stormwater Management (SWM) Audit”. Ms. L. Walter and Mr. N. Gollan presented an overview of the 2014 SWM Audit, which included a brief summary of the evolution of SWM over the past 40 years. Ms. Walter advised that as part the current SWM Policy, an annual monitoring program is to be completed each year. She ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 21, 2015 - 22 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2014 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AUDIT RESULTS (CONT’D) 2. noted in 2014 water quality testing and biological monitoring was undertaken at 7 different sites throughout the City to determine the chemical and biological characteristics of the watercourses and whether any trends could be identified, with two additional sites monitored using flow proportionate systems. She indicated the consultant that has been retained has taken grab samples, 5 “wet”, 1 “melt/wet” and 5 “dry”, throughout the year, which are tested for a range of chemical parameters. Ms. Walter reviewed a summary of the findings from the 2014 SWM Audit and the projects that were conducted as part of the Program which included: Overall Water Quality Testing Results: Montgomery (MG1), Sandrock (SR2) and Balzer (BZ1) were poor performers; they are densely developed catchment areas and channelized water courses; Strasburg (SB2) was a high performer; it is more naturalized watercourse. Biological Results – Bethics: Strasburg (SB2), Shoemaker 1 (SM1) and Kolb Creek 1 (KD1) scored highes; Sandrock (SR2) scored lowest; overall the results were consistent with previous years. Biological Results – Fish: Overall species richness and types of indicator fish species similar to previous years; Decrease in Brook Trout collected at Strasburg 2 (SB2). Stormwater Management Facilities (SWMF) Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Sampling: 114 ponds sampled; 74% returned positive removal efficiency, 27% returned negative efficiency; Average positive removal efficiency is 59%, target is 80% removal for quality control ponds. Cash-in-Lieu (CiL) Program: Applies to redevelopment/infill sites; collected $232,470. from CiL charges from 3.8 ha of development; treated 7.2 ha of stormwater costing the City a total of $97,000.; net gain of 3.2 ha of treated stormwater. 2014 SWM Projects included: SWM Master Plan; Filsinger Park Stream Naturalization; SWMF sediment testing; Balzer Creek & Idlewood Creek Environmental Assessments (EA); and, SWMF Inspections and signage. Ms. Walter further advised as part of the SWM Audit, the recommendations for 2015 include: continue with monitoring 10 stations; and, continue to proceed with the recommendations from the 2013 SWM Audit Report prepared by Aquafor Beech Ltd. Questions were raised regarding the decrease in Brook Trout found in SB2. Mr. Gollan advised that the decrease in number was minimal and there is not enough data at this time to determine the cause for the decrease. In response to questions regarding the CiL program, Mr. Gollan advised that the current goal of the program is to treat a higher amount of area for stormwater than the amount of area identified through the CiL program where funds have been collected. He noted that through the development of the SWM Master Plan, the CiL Program will be reviewed. Questions were raised regarding how staff determines which creeks are selected for EA’s. Mr. Gollan advised that Idlewood Creek was selected through a decision from the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) through the development process; and, Balzer Creek was identified by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) due to concerns identified with erosion. He further advised that as part of the development of the SWM Master Plan, the consultant has begun creek walks to assess the current conditions of all the creeks to assist with establishing a priority ranking for EA projects yet to be completed. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 21, 2015 - 23 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2014 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AUDIT RESULTS (CONT’D) 2. Mr. Gollan stated that the current SWM Audit process will also be reviewed as part of the development of the SWM Plan. He noted that the next E-newsletter is due to be circulated to the Public Advisory Committee (PAC) representative within the next two to three weeks. He further advised that a report will be going forward for consideration regarding the 2014 SWM Audit on May 25, 2015 to the Community and Infrastructure Services Committee. BALZER CREEK – SCHEDULE “B” CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 3. The Committee was in receipt this date of a presentation entitled “Class Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design for Balzer Creek”, dated May 21, 2015. Ms. L. Walter presented an overview of the Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for Balzer Creek, noting that the presentation is a summary of the information that was presented at a Public Information Centre (PIC) that was held on April 28, 2015. She stated that staff are currently undertaking a Schedule ‘B’ EA Study for the entirety of Balzer Creek which begins at Old Country Drive and flows beneath Homer Watson Boulevard and Fallowfield Drive to the confluence with Schneider Creek. She indicated the Study is being initiated in order to address erosion concerns and associated potential impacts to private and public infrastructure. She stated the Study will also explore opportunities to improve the watercourse, natural landscape, and potential trail connections in the area. Ms. Walter advised that there have been 3 Reaches identified within the study area with an initial list of potential alternatives identified. She stated that those potential alternatives will be evaluated against a number of criteria within various categories, including: technical; economic; environmental; and, social, to determine the preferred alternatives for each of the 3 Reaches. She provided a brief summary of the potential alternatives that have been identified for Reach 1, including: do nothing; spot improvements; and, channel improvements. She indicated the potential alternatives for Reach 2 are: do nothing; relocating the sanitary sewer; and, channel re-alignment, and provided a brief summary of what was included in those alternatives. She further advised that the potential alternatives for Reach 3 included: do nothing; stabilizing the channel; and, re-alignment of the channel, and provided a brief summary on what was included in those alternatives. In response to questions, Mr. N. Gollan advised that the residential homes that currently back onto the Creek where erosion concerns have been identified, were constructed prior to concerns identified with the Creek in 2010. He noted that one of the challenges with the development around the Creek was that it received draft plan approval for development in the 1980’s when the evolution of stormwater management was not as advanced as it is today. He stated that when the development was approved, the number of studies that were required for approval were not as significant as they are today. Questions were raised regarding Reach 3 and if re-aligning the Channel was identified as the preferred alternative, what would the impacts be on future development. Ms. Walter advised that Geotechnical Studies have been conducted on the Creek to determine the slope stabilization of the lots still yet to be developed. She noted that the draft plan of subdivision may need to be amended to address those lots that are being impacted by the Creek. Ms. B. Steiner advised that the lots are subject to the requirements from the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) and would not receive building permits until they satisfy the permit requirements from the GRCA. Ms. S. Danckert questioned whether there were added incentives from the City for developers if they were choosing low-impact development options. Mr. Gollan advised that staff are revisiting the SWM Rebate Program through the development of the SWM Plan. He noted that there has been some disappointment in the amount of interest in the program, particularly on behalf of commercial property owners, and stated that the return on investment is not timely enough to encourage the implementation of SWM initiatives. Councillor Y. Fernandes and Mr. M. Yaeger left the meeting at this time. Ms. Walter stated that the next steps for the project include summarizing the input received from the initial questionnaires handed out as part of the first PIC, and evaluating the ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 21, 2015 - 24 - CITY OF KITCHENER BALZER CREEK – SCHEDULE “B” CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 3. (CONT’D) alternatives more closely against the evaluation criteria to determine the preliminary preferred alternatives. She indicated once the preferred alternatives are selected, staff anticipates presenting a subsequent report to the Environmental Committee; and, hosting a second PIC in August / September 2015. She further advised that the EA final report is anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration in Fall 2015. Ms. Walter requested feedback from the Committee on the proposed alternatives as well as the evaluation criteria and whether members had any additional criteria that should be considered. She indicated that following the meeting, if any member had additional feedback the could contact her via email at leah.walter@kitchener.ca. LIGHT EMITTING DIODE (LED) STREET LIGHT CONVERSION - UPDATE - BEST BET 4. (RECOMMENDED ACTION 5.2A – 2010 AIR QUALITY IN KITCHENER REPORT) Mr. B. Cronkite and Ms. A. MacKinnon presented an update regarding the Light Emitting Diode (LED) street light conversion project and recommended Action 5.2A from the 2010 Air Quality in Kitchener report. Mr. Cronkite advised that the Light Emitting Diode (LED) has been available for street lighting for approximately 8 years, but was initially cost prohibitive and the technology was not sustainable to consider a City-wide retro-fit. He indicated that since that time, procurement costs have decreased, the technology has improved and the life cycle of the fixtures has increased. He noted that the City is approaching the scope of the street light conversion project in two areas, including; City-wide retro-fit to update the existing street light standards; and, in the development of new subdivisions where street lights are installed for the first time, noting that the Mattamy subdivision currently being developed within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan will be the first subdivision within the City to have all LED lighting at the time of development. Mr. Cronkite further advised that staff are currently establishing standards around the use of LED lights that will be used as a guideline for future development. He indicated that staff anticipate reporting back to Council on those design standards in August 2015. Mr. Cronkite stated that regarding a City-wide retro-fit, there are options that the City is currently reviewing, includeing: private, of public partnerships; and, completing the retrofit internally. He noted that if the City undertook the retro-fit internally, it would cost approximately $5 to $8 million dollars, noting that the payback would be somewhere between 5 to 7 years. If the City opted to enter into a partnership with a private firm to complete the retro-fit, the payback time would be extended but it would not be a direct payment from the tax base. In response to questions, Ms. B. Steiner advised that the street light conversion project was suggested as an Action Item for the Air Quality in Kitchener report as a means of promoting energy conservation and reducing the electricity needs from the coal-fired power plants. She further advised that all Best Bets currently being undertaken by the various Sub-Committees will be responsible for providing a brief update on the work undertaken by the Committee sometime in the Fall 2015, to enable staff to complete a final report on the various Action Items. APPROVAL OF THE 2015-2016 ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE WORK PLAN 5. The Committee was in receipt this date of an updated draft Work Plan based on the Committee’s existing goals, objectives and priorities, as well as a summary of the already appointed Sub-Committees that have been established by the Environmental Committee. Ms. B. Steiner advised that staff are seeking a recommendation from the Committee on the proposed Work Plan, noting that the Committee could approve it in principle with the intention that it would be a living document that is updated throughout the term as new projects / ideas are being undertaken by the Committee. She stated that the Work Plan could then be used to help keep members up-to-date on all of the initiatives being completed and any Sub- Committees assigned to those projects, including any timelines associated with action item. Several members spoke in support of the document being a living document and it was accepted unanimously by all members present. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 21, 2015 - 25 - CITY OF KITCHENER APPROVAL OF THE 2015-2016 ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE WORK PLAN (CONT’D) 5. On motion by Ms. A. MacKinnon - it was resolved: “That the Environmental Committee Work Plan (2015/2016), as outlined within the May 21, 2015 Environmental Committee Agenda, be approved. ADJOURNMENT 8. On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:04 p.m. Dianna Saunderson Committee Administrator