The August 24, 2011 regular board meeting has been cancelled. There was not enough business (none of it time-critical) to justify having a meeting. The next regular board meeting will be on September 14, 2011.
Also, a remainder that the Cultus Lake Community Association is having their annual general meeting on August 21, 2011 at 1:00pm at the Cultus Lake Elementary School.
There were 4 commissioners present this meeting; Commissioners Cameron, Enns and Hall were away.
The following is some colour on the thoughts I had regarding select board business of the day:
1. Adoption of the Bylaws concerning the Cabins at Cultus Lake Park and the Sunnyside Campground bylaw. The Sunnyside bylaw is the result of a few months of reviewing and massaging, including consulting the public and Sunnyside seasonal campers.
2. The board carried a motion to send a letter to the various senior government authorities expressing our displeasure concerning the decision that will potentially allow garbage incineration in the Fraser Valley. While I have not read the Metro Vancouver technical reports from the supporting and opposing side and will personally not make pronouncements until I find the time to do so and really educate myself on the matter, I am quite concerned with respect to air quality in the region. In particular, I find pollutants of the airshed (such as ozone, sulphur dioxide and small particulate matter) to be an infinitely higher concern than carbon dioxide emissions. It is indeed too bad that so much attention has been paid to carbon dioxide that almost everything else has been neglected, including paying attention to air and water quality.
However, when I read the history books, we have made great strides over the past two generations. We don’t use leaded gasoline anymore. Acid rain has been mitigated. Pollution levels from unspent hydrocarbons and automobile emissions have decreased dramatically. The overall trend with respect to pollution has been positive, but we cannot assume the trend will extrapolate on its own – people must innovate and find creative ways to utilize energy and this will take time. Solid waste management has also had innovate solutions applied to it – especially with the advent of recycling.
It seems absurd to think that incineration of garbage will not contaminate the airshed, but it also seems absurd to continue the status quo of trucking trash all the way up to Cache Creek (a 350 kilometer, 4.5 hour drive) just to bury it there.
3. A variance permit at 520 Park Drive was deferred to the next meeting so commissioners could obtain more information on the application. It is not appropriate to discuss this one until the August 24th meeting where it will come up for consideration again with hopefully more commissioners attending.
4. Likewise, a memorandum regarding commercial signage was deferred until staff could provide a report on the matter concerning the history of four signs located on park property. Also cited was that it would be better if more commissioners were present to deliberate on the matter.
5. The board made a decision with respect to the Cultus Lake Dragon Boat Club’s request for what the board may potentially allow pertaining to the 2012 season. The board is open to a two day event, but matters concerning dock closure and food sales will have to be further discussed with the applicant.
On August 9, 2011 I appeared as a delegation to the Fraser Valley Regional District Community and Regulatory Services Committee. The topic was to request resources from the FVRD to assist in updating the Park Use Plan.
The following speaking notes are not exactly what was spoken during the delegation but is a material summary.
————————————————
Speaking Notes – August 9, 2011 FVRD CARSC Committee Meeting
Prepared by Sacha Peter, Cultus Lake Park Board (CLPB) Chair
The issue:
Cultus Lake Park (CLP) requires FVRD assistance with the update of the CLP Park Use Plan (PUP) document.
Background:
The PUP was dated December 1997 and adopted on March 18, 1998. The PUP, while not an OCP, details objectives and policies respecting land use issues, including service development standards, environmental protection, and recreation.
The plan was constructed with significant help provided by the FVRD. CLP presently does not have the resources (financial or intellectual) to update this plan.
What the CLPB has done:
The CLPB has struck a Future Plan Advisory (Select) Committee that currently has 9 community members to discuss and recommend changes to the PUP which could be utilized by planners in their deliberations.
What the CLPB can do:
Assist with the extensive public consultation process and provide support for the process. We also have a member of our staff, a building inspector (10 years experience in residential design and construction experience), that can provide technical support.
Why an update is needed:
Within the PUP states: “… the Board will review and update the Plan every five years.” This has never occurred, short of three minor[1] amendments.
Some elements of the report are out of date with modern practice and no longer relevant in the 14 years since the report was written.
Finally, the FVRD OSP for Electoral Area ‘E’ states, “… there are no zoning or subdivision controls in Cultus Lake Park to reflect the land uses in place.” It also states, “A two-step planning process, as provided for in the Official Regional Plan and the Official Settlement Plan for Electoral Area “E”, should be implemented, leading to the writing of zoning, regulatory and subdivision control bylaws for Cultus Lake Park in the manner provided for in the Municipal Act; and enacted by resolution of the Cultus Lake Park Board.”
Why it would benefit the FVRD:
The FVRD and CLPB have discussed a possibility of a future joint planning process[2], while an April 1, 2010 memo (before the governance process formally was terminated) indicated that the CLP area will not be included in the OCP/OSP update process, presumably due to the lack of resolution on governance.
The governance process is finished and there will be no changes. The provincial government has also indicated they will not change the Cultus Lake Park Act and thus we must assume the status quo will exist for the indefinite future. CLP and FVRD will both benefit with harmonization of bylaws and policies.
Tighter coordination between the CLPB and FVRD will smooth out jurisdictional issues concerning developments going through CLP land (e.g. the most recent example being the sewage system connecting to the old marina site on East Cultus Lake). It would resolve ambiguity concerning such proposals if they were planned for in advance.
It was noted in an FVRD memo[3] that “While within Electoral Area “E”, the Cultus Lake Park Board lands (CLPB) will be the focus of a separate planning project in the future and will not be included in the proposed OSP update. The CLPB lands are unique and bring a host of local issues which are best addressed through a separate process which is tailored to the community. The outcome of the CLPB planning process could be incorporated into the updated OSP in the future. The Regional Board may wish to consider budgeting for the CLPB planning needs in future FVRD Planning Department work priorities.” – That time is now.
Why now?
CLP has the largest residential jurisdiction (by population) of area ‘E’ and the OCP/OSP update will be incomplete without it. The quicker it occurs, the less likely it will be that there will be adverse land usage decisions made.
To conclude, CLP is asking for:
The FVRD to commit to providing human resources toward re-writing the PUP in 2012.
[1] Amendments minor in terms of the whole document body; two of the three amendments had significant impact on the park; one was for the Waterpark expansion, while the other was for the creation of the 14 lots.
[2] Electoral Area E Official Community Plan Update: Scope and Limitations, page 3/7.
[3] Area ‘E’ Official Settlement Plan Update, April 1, 2010
There were 6 commissioners present this meeting; Commissioner Cameron was away.
The following is some colour on the thoughts I had regarding select board business of the day:
1. The board received a financial report from our manager of financial services. Although there are some negative variances on the revenue side (Sunnyside is down about approximately 5% from year to year, parking revenues are significantly less than forecasted), that shortfall has been made up for by cutting expenses to compensate.
There are four capital projects of significance that will be implemented (including the dump truck purchase and the roof repairs to the forestry building), but these projects have sufficient reserves to pay for them. Our financial picture is miles above than when it was back two years ago in June 2009 and we will be able to continue building on our reserves as we restore our financial solvency to a safer level.
One of the best insurance policies any person or business can have is idle cash sitting in short term deposits at the bank. Although some might look at it and see the piddly yield you would achieve with it (your average 1-year GIC can get around 1.75% if you shopped around), the cash is not held to earn money – it is there for insurance purposes against both expected and unexpected events. Cash gives you options.
When examining the half year financials from the past couple years, the fiscal consciousness of the present board and our staff has been commendable. We have come a long way and I hope to continue building on this momentum by continuing to see our reserves build to safe levels.
2. Third reading of the amended Sunnyside bylaw was carried 5-1 (Commissioner Woodrow against). This bylaw amendment went through a thorough review by the board and external stakeholders and is much improved over the previous bylaw. There is remaining language that could use some further clarification, but in the whole this bylaw is better than the one it is replacing.
There was a matter in the bylaw concerning moorage buoys. This interesting interlude lead me to research the legislation governing waterways, and this is a federal government concern with the Navigable Waters Protection Act, a fairly easy to read document. There is a good rationale for using Transport Canada sanctioned moorage buoys, mainly that the symbols and colourings used on buoys are supposed to be standardized across the country.
I am far from an expert on marine navigation issues (although if you get me on land with a GPS or even map and compass I can do a lot better!) but the rationale seems to make sense. It should also be noted that the United States has a different standard, depending on what state you are in.
3. We approved a variance application for 227 1st avenue regarding the height of stone masonry walls. There was one letter sent in support, and nobody else commented on the application from the audience. As we now have a dedicated staff position for building inspection and bylaw enforcement, the board now receives recommendations and further information to help us make an informed decision, subject to public input.
4. An interesting issue concerning bylaw enforcement and compliance came up during question period. Legislation and bylaws are written and judged as if they are black and white documents. For example, most of the driving public today has contravened section 146 of the Motor Vehicle Act, the section dealing with speeding. Section 146(1) says that if you are going more than 50km/h in a municipality (unless otherwise different by bylaw) then you are in violation. The law makes no difference between a person going 51km/h and 70km/h (the latter speed is much more likely to get stopped by the police at a speed trap). However, in terms of enforcement, the person going 70km/h is more selectively targeted than the person going 51km/h. If you show up to court and tell the Justice of the Peace “Your worship, I was just going 51km/h”, he will still convict you for speeding.
There is quite a bit of legislation/bylaws in most governments that have such sections of varying practicality in enforcement. From an engineering perspective it is annoying to have what are seemingly loose ends, but ultimately this legislation is in place to allow staff discretion. For example, in both the recently passed Sunnyside bylaw and the old Sunnyside bylaw, there is a provision that campfires should be out by 11:00pm. Sunnyside staff have not snuffed out fires at 11:01pm, but it is one tool to enable the calming down of a rowdy crowd that has been drinking heavily around the campfire at this time. Our park patrol finds that this evening time is the most volatile with respect to safety, especially after people have been drinking.
