Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-06-18ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 18, 2009 CITY OF KITCHENER The Environmental Committee met this date commencing at 4:08 p. m. Present: Mr. B. McColl -Chair Ms. S. Smith and Messrs. C. Schneider, D. Ryrie and G. Zador Staff: L. Bensason, Interim Director of Long Range and Policy Planning C. Musselman, Senior Environmental Planner D. Miller, Director of Fleet S. Allen, Manager, Engineering Design and Approvals B. Steiner, Senior Environmental Planner K. Mick, Design and Approvals Engineer L. Korabo, Committee Administrator 1. PRESENTATION -ISO 14001 CERTIFICATION UPDATE Mr. D. Miller advised that in April 2008 the City was granted ISO 14001 Certification putting in place a management philosophy ensuring that environmental considerations are part of every operational decision. As there is a focus on continuous improvement, annual surveillance audits will be held and an assessment report prepared identifying items requiring work and items that are being done well. The first surveillance audit was conducted in April 2009 and, in addition to Fleet, Fire Department mechanical, pumping stations and golf course operations were also audited. He commented on the Environmental Committee's "Best Bet" concerning air quality and while noting that this is a small piece of the ISO certification process, it did assist in providing direction in the areas of environmental maintenance with regard to purchasing of vehicles, repair maintenance /monitoring and follow-up. In conjunction with the work being done on vehicles, repair activities have also been positively affected in ways such as more environmental friendly cleaning solvents being used. Moving forward, Mr. D. Miller noted that staff is currently investigating other areas within the Corporation that could join the environmental management system by identifying all environmental aspects and finding areas that are significant enough to join or have their own full corporate registration. He commented on the Consolidated Maintenance Facility currently in the design stages that will bring together staff groups from various locations and will change how things are now done. By the end of 2009, Mr. Miller hoped to bring forward a staff report on future involvement of other City operational areas in ISO 14001. In response to the presentation, members raised questions concerning the City's purchase and use of hybrid vehicles versus conventional ones, specifically concerning: performance and fuel consumption; reduction in carbon dioxide emissions; purchase costs; government rebates; and, repair costs. Mr. Miller advised that he would provide members of the Committee with information summarizing cost comparisons as requested. 2. PRESENTATION - BRIGADOON AND WARDS PONDS PRELIMINARY DESIGN Ms. M. Pushkar and Messrs. D. Maunder and C. Parent, Aquafor Beech Limited, and Mr. M. Schollen, Schollen and Company Inc., attended to provide information on the preliminary designs for the Brigadoon and Wards Ponds, part of the Strasburg Creek Rehabilitation Project. Mr. C. Parent advised that Wards and Brigadoon Ponds had both been created 50+ years ago through the construction of dams and earthen embankments across Strasburg Creek. The current review of the ponds has been undertaken as a result of damages to the Brigadoon Pond dam caused by a significant storm in 2003. At that time, seepage was also observed at the Wards Pond dam, suggesting the potential of dam failure. The City of Kitchener undertook a Schedule 'B' Class Environmental Assessment (EA) to develop and assess remediation alternatives including the retention or removal of one or both ponds. The preferred solution identified by the EA involves the elimination of both existing ponds and the rehabilitation of a ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 18, 2009 - 20 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. PRESENTATION - BRIGADOON AND WARDS PONDS PRELIMINARY DESIGN (CONT'D) portion of Strasburg Creek. This alternative provides the greatest overall environmental benefits, enhances fish habitat and, eliminates the risks associated with the potential for future dam failures. The EA outlined design objectives based on the preferred approach to rehabilitation. These objectives are: • removal of the dam structures; • elimination of barriers to fish movement; • enhancement of the habitat for cold /cool water fish species; • replacement of existing on-line ponds with off-line wetlands; • creation of a stable, self-sustaining stream channel through the decommissioned ponds; • compensation for any wetland loss and provision of enhanced wildlife habitat; • provision of opportunities for outdoor recreation; and, • consideration of the visual aesthetic of open water. The preferred alternative required the preparation of detailed plans to address the following: • removal of the dam structures at both ponds; • restoration of Strasburg Creek channel and natural vegetation communities at both ponds; and, • post-construction monitoring to track the success of the rehabilitation. Mr. M. Schollen gave a presentation on the details of both preliminary designs. Members were provided with colour renderings of each pond displaying the various design elements. Mr. Schollen advised that the steps to moving forward with the preliminary concept included reviewing detailed topographic surveys; conducting a tree inventory and undertaking tree assessments; conducting a hydraulic analysis; doing field investigations; determining design parameters for key components (stream channel, wetlands and habitats) and finally, completing design refinement. The Committee was advised that 4 design options were prepared for each pond for review and evaluation by the Project Team and Steering Committee. Members had previously been circulated with information on all design options. Design Option 2 is preferred for Brigadoon Pond and proposes a new bermed stream channel, 2 new off-line wetlands, a diverse habitat with ephemeral pools, a new trail system that is in keeping with the Trail Master Plan, an open water component, and 2 overlooks. Design Option 3 is preferred for Wards Pond and proposes development of a new channel for Strasburg Creek along an unnamed tributary. This new watercourse will have different elevations and refuge pools. Fifty percent of the current pond will be retained with the balance to be off-line wetlands creating an environment that will support a high diversity of potential wildlife. The new trail system will be located westerly of the current trail along the new creek. All vegetation will be retained along both sides; however, the east side of the dam requires reinforcement. Some tree removal may be required but these trees will be replaced and some smaller trees currently on the site will be relocated within. Mr. Schollen advised that over the next 6 months the rehabilitation of Strasburg Creek at Wards and Brigadoon Ponds is anticipated to proceed as follows, being staged to avoid any seasonal habitat concerns: Stage Date Completion of detailed design October 2009 Second public open house to review construction details November 2009 Pre aration of tender documents November 2009 Initiation of dam removal December 2009 Initiation of stream and wetland restoration January 2010 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 18, 2009 - 21 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. PRESENTATION - BRIGADOON AND WARDS PONDS PRELIMINARY DESIGN (CONT'D) Committee members asked questions concerning the current physical layout of both ponds as well as the proposed works being discussed and were responded to by Mr. Schollen. Ms. Y. Fernandes attended and posed several questions to clarify the preferred design options of both ponds. Mr. Schollen responded to questions concerning: clarification of terms; control structures; water temperatures; length of construction; water depth; retention of habitat; and, stream channel alignments. In conclusion, Mr. Schollen noted that these preferred options, as presented to the Committee this date, are not final but represent what are considered to be the best solutions. The Project Team and Steering Committee will entertain minor modifications and will continue to interface with owners of neighbouring properties to achieve a final document. It was noted that the preliminary design options will be available on the City's website and a further open house is planned. 3. PRESENTATION - LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION FUND (LEAF) UPDATE Ms. B. Steiner attended to provide an update on the success of the first intake of grant applications by the Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF). She advised that approved funds had not yet been distributed as there were still administrative requirements being finalized. She further advised that LEAF was established by Council in 2007 with a $5M contribution and is considered a key tool to move Kitchener forward in dealing with current issues of environmental concern. Ms. B. Steiner then reviewed the assessment criteria for application to the fund, being its goal / objectives. A Steering Committee was established to review applications received and consisted of: • Chief Administrative Officer; • all 4 General Managers of City Departments; • Director of Corporate Communications and Marketing; • Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning; • Senior Environmental Planner; and, • 2 Citizen Advisors. In its first intake, 29 applications were received. Nineteen applications for grants of less than $50,000. and the balance for grants of $50,000. or more. The total amount of monies requested was $7,189,701. Ms. Steiner reviewed the list of approved LEAF grants in both categories, providing a brief verbal description of each project. Nine projects were approved in the category of less than $50,000. and 6 for grants of $50.000. or more, with the 15 approved projects totalling $1.16M and address a good cross-section of environmental concerns. A concern was raised that there appear to be organizations being granted funds by the City through 2 different application processes, namely, LEAF and the Community Environmental Improvement Grant Program (CEIG). Clarification was requested as there appeared to be "double dipping". Ms. C. Musselman clarified that these programs are 2 separate entities and may cross paths in that they both deal with environmental issues but the criteria to qualify for each are different. With respect to the specific application in question, Ms. Steiner explained the circumstances surrounding approval of LEAF monies and advised that, at the time this organization would have applied for the CEIG program, information on how to apply for LEAF would not have been available therefore there would have been no knowledge of a pending second application. In addition, Ms. Musselman noted that the scope of the 2 projects proposed by the organization were not the same, therefore there was no conflict or overlap with monies being approved by both CEIG and LEAF. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 18, 2009 - 22 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. PRESENTATION - LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION FUND (LEAF) UPDATE (CONT'D) Keeping in mind the explanation provided by staff, some members of the Committee were still mindful of funding being approved for the same groups when there appeared to be many potentially beneficial applications received. The request was made that the staff administering both funds be aware of allocations being approved so lessening the possibility of some organizations receiving funding from both programs and increasing the number of different groups receiving funds for worthwhile submissions. It was pointed out that LEAF will not exist in perpetuity as there is a finite allocation. Ms. Steiner noted that the criteria for applications to LEAF will not be reviewed again; however, suggested that a review of the CEIG criteria could be undertaken. A question was raised concerning the monitoring of funds being expended and it was noted that staff will be conducting monitoring and auditing processes of the organizations who have received funding. Every approved applicant will be required to enter into a legal agreement setting out their work program and reporting requirements. Reporting may be required on an interim and / or final basis dependent upon the amount of monies granted. It was further suggested that when the next intake of applications for CEIG is scheduled, applicants be asked if they will also be submitting requests to LEAF. Staff was requested to bring forward for discussion a review of the CEIG's selection criteria in light of the LEAF now available. 4. GENERAL DISCUSSION -SUGGESTED REVISIONS FOR THE AIR QUALITY IN KITCHENER REPORT Mr. B McColl introduced this item by stating that there will be a full review of the Air Quality in Kitchener report in 2010. Ms. C. Musselman asked members to begin thinking about updates to the report by reviewing that which are currently listed. She reviewed the list of 50 Best Bets from the 2006 report, commenting that some have been completed, some are ongoing and some have been superceded by other organizations or governmental regulations. She suggested that when the Committee reconvenes in the Fall, members provide input concerning new initiatives to add to the action plan and then create another short list of Best Bets. Ms. S. Smith asked if it would make sense to refine the old list and remove actions that now seem unpopular or unnecessary, retaining ones that still have merit. Members agreed to compile Best Bet ideas and bring them back to the Committee in the fall. As a full review of the Air Quality in Kitchener report will be a lengthy and time consuming process, it would be good to get a start on Best Bets in 2009. Ms. C. Musselman suggested that if members identified best management practices that have been implemented by other municipalities, staff could review these for possible inclusion in the revised report. She further suggested that it may be ideal to target 5 Best Bets for each of the 5 years of the next plan (25 Best Bets rather than 50) and also include implementation strategies for each. The new report can take a different approach and have a different appearance than the 2006 report. 5. ADJOURNMENT On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6.02 p.m Linda Korabo Committee Administrator