THE CORPORATIOI'I OF THE CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECITON COMMITTEE

Wednesday, June 8, 1994

Meeting Room No. 2
2580 Shaughnessy Street, Port Coriuitlam, BC
5:00 n.m

PERSONNEL IN A'I TENDANCE
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

I

i

'

I

IT~EM:

PROPOSED DIVERSION OF CREEK - 4000 BLOCK TORONTO

ITEM II:

JEI'KIES/POWER BOATS ON PITT RIVER AND DEBOUVILLE SLOUGH

ITEiVI III:

PARTICIPATION IN CLEAN AIR DAY

ITEM IV:

OTHER BUSINESS

ll SSSI ~ SI-

IijuaaMI

IiklPil

HI'UNO8

rl%JIi jj+
S SSIJ II'
i I s 1 Kt
I

jt'

jii

rggi

--''-:-jii~-"-','...',.".;=: --:

==:=='4 i@mt)a--'+

Ri l'-:— —

=

~ "~recall'l

~~min.:

i

''=~"

-:

—
- == =
R I ji Nil/~ jIIIji~ iss iii 'gij il. "
jaj~ - ~ ~ml
"
—
—-Ij
'"isjsI~isaii 0% I' -=. — -=-= ~)m i~s'jji II i ei Iiiji j jSt jg~
'tti ss -~
I
— — -II I

I

.

mSIUMCjjmjjjil~

=

~

j[l'll/ fjIQ/iPs'hi:=

~j g~~lKI I~It

ISI ~ sIIIS
I

.==
j

eO~

"

ie'W-=s —

-

~4/5

IIgs gI Ij

-

--=.
ssllslll" lIII N

IFSSII I/ail II ill

Igjj~ijjss stuIjsg+ jig yIf ~— iI—.--".
....—,—
j

ssasatjuaijilimiijjjjj

~~~~~

jib iS

—

'g

+m

~(gggjaa~iss~

CO@~
'NMENTAL PROTECIION CO~M

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PORT
ENVIRP

MINUTES
A meeting of the Environmental Protection Committee was held at City Hall, 2580 Shaughnessy
Street. Port Coquitlam, on Wednesday, June 8, 1994 at 5:00 p.m. in Meeting Room ¹2.

In attendance were:

Councillor M. Gates, Chairman
Councillor R. Talbot, Co-Chairman
J.E. Yip, P. Eng., Deputy City Engineer
F. Cheung, P. Eng., Project Engineer
C. Deakin, Engineering Secretary
The minutes for the May 25, 1994 Committee meeting were considered, read and adopted.
i

1TEM I:

DIVERSION OF CREEK 4000 BLOCK TORONm
—

Committee received this update for information.

ITEM Ht

JEI'KIS/POWER BOATS - PXIT ~EBOUVILLE SLOUGH

Committee asked the Deputy Engineer to contact Carmen Germain and the Ministry of Lands
regarding regulations for jet skis and power boats on these water bodies.
1TEM IIL

CLEAN AIR

DAY'ommittee

received this item for information.

a)

Native Snorts Publication

The Committee approved the offer to place a recycling ad in the next Native Sports
Publication. Funding to come from the Recycling Budget.

Cont'd .../2

@fill /0

WI I+
%II 88m
5I IIII'
I

JUN 08 1994

-2-

b)

Dourdas Island

Committee received the report regarding Douglas Island and asked that the Deputy
Engineer forward the report to the City Solicitor for his review and comment.
Specifically Committee asked that the point regarding liability on as"essed value
and the City's control over Douglas Island involving what ramifications be
addressed. Also to see that if we do not implement the RS-3 rezoning could
development still proceed. Conunittee also asked that the Deputy Engineer contact
FREMP to see if they are in favour of the RS-3 rezoning.
c)

GVRD Solid Waste Manaaement Plan

Committee received this item for information.

There being no fmther business the meeting adjourned at 5i45 pm.

n~
D

JEY/cd

Couttetllor M. Gates
Committee Chairman

utyCity Engineer

N(ATE

Minutes not read and adopted by the Committee until certified correct by Ihe
Chairman's signature.

CC:

Mayor and CounciUors
City Administrator
City Engineer
Project Engineer
Project 't'echnician

JUN 08 1994

u ital I I)l
,,

z
... a s i s a I, si~z
Laa
~

~

-...~~,„..
~

. ~ .,

g,

I

~I I

lNISINIIIN11 - I M I al I s I

tssta s attn'"„.LSI IIIgttl4INI:

I

~

~
~ g
= — p
I

'

I

Q

',3l

I
&

- — - ".-sts
itttsn, g p p s
HR„.'...a.

I

ttl! 11 I

Iiii'l III'

THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

TO:

Environmental Protection Committee

DATE: June 02, 1994

FROM:

Francis K.K. Cheung, P. Eng.
Project Engineer

FILE No: EPC

SIJBJECT: DIVERSION OF CREEK - 4000 BLOCK OF TOIIONTO

RECOMMKNDATI~NI
That Committee receive this memorandum for information only.

BACKOROIJND & COMMENTSI
Councillor M. Gates requested the Engineering Department to investigate a proposed creek
diversion at the 4000
Block of Toronto Street.
I have contacted Mr. Rolf Sickmuller of Envirowest who is responsible for
this project'. Mr. Sickmuiler stated
that Hockaday Creek will be diverted closer to the north property line of Lot 11
(See Figure 1) to accommodate a
building envelope on Lot 11.

The proposed creek diversion must be approved by the Department of Fisheries and
Oceans (D.F.O.) and
Ministry of Environment (M.O.E.), Water Management Branch. These two agencies also set
any covenant
where it is necessary (i.e, floodplain covenant). The City do not have any authority to
prevent the proposed
creek diversion should both the D.F.O. and M.O.E. approved the creek diversion application.
I have also checked with our Building Department to see if a Building Permit has been
granted to this
development. The Building Department has not received an application for Building Permit, from
the developer,
for Lot 11 and Lot 12.

Z~ JM

IRII

Project Engineer

NIQ

FKKCI
euechment

IIIWI

g

I

Ia I
I

l i&mii

I

g

jmm

IIITI% IN+ P
!m',lb 1 hllgi

JUN 0 8 1994

I

I%% ~ %ll

i N)~)il

I

I

&I!''„'=:

0,'
'h

ll

Ig(

'i! 515 Q $

. =
45,

'-'

-

~,, „, ~,,gag

N)ml im~&i l& I,—;

— —;

aKLI

''
'ws! sII'!Ls IIIIss'I SSI Ig 1!g yIs 'lml~„ ll,
„,
=
«~ '-- -='-",. "- SR~I/+~
—
~ -m= sIIIm
s:." - -'-5I5I Ru",'mamtu~,s
.-i=:.: ~g.e
~a ~ ts~

sg gggll 08 If.!."

LUIIRI Iles"Ie =' ---- — = ==
Imllgm uai.'ll —

'

I

~

—

—

—

—

—

~

-—

"~gg/gg

PL 6//'79a
TORONTO PL,
/4//a

/aa/aa

65

64

6'OURT
4+te'C-L.
325

el

SION kA

T

I

'C

6/9V'RAK.I/'-a

/ - ~
a
//I pp//. ca/ e///tK L c c//j 7/ea

PL.

W%aa e a ~ a
I

~

a

QgLI j I I@I
I

~i'/

saiiiigllI-

'IL
I/

LWR
~ eeI

6.".

jg]
llkliiHL;mi

5 I& — '

'LIa

-:

Ga &

Z

/e6 I6/a66 6 9 ~9

a/;;S '~

-"C

l)jgii, II

a

T4

C.,

'

':

9'

le

lep 9'

q

N

'

a

I

I

N II

'')

'%~ ~mggmgls&ii

~b

Dp

~a

ae

~

I

l

I

,SC /aj Q /

I:/

Q

aea

eel I/I

~'p Ci aa Oa

I

g I3 p ',p !76 4/

I'a

I&

el 3,

j

P
'117 /;S

Sgg/a/i gm/aaa eaaeaea~ ea~eaggllmBI Ifm~g

"RiaIII 'I'~1'=" '" I
m ae ae " —
a

s

&

R I I, I Isa e eae ~ ii ~ a . =
I

91'ea 'C
9PI ~; ~

I

Iaaei ~

'5 II I'I

C'

e'a''a',/ae

pa

a:

I/

J3//

i

ae ~ &I+i19g

$

/Ilia ~

i

'" —:lm''~~1'Is'IIiiImj[fg
~' a'a~ Il
aa
''j~e
....

ie

mmmm& I
'

—

—

I

I iii ~ jaaallllaeaie

Ialleii) ]J IRltL

"-=.:-" Qadi"II

a m

~

I.II-",-::=::;

g N

g

'=13

THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

ro:

Environmental Protection Committee

DATE: May 31, 1994

FROM:

Francis K.K. Cheung, P. Eng.
Project Engineer

FILE No: EPC

SUBJECT: JKT SI&IES AND POWER BOATS ON PITT RIVER AND DeBOVILLK SLOUGH

RKCOMMKNDA TION:
1.

That Committee receive this memorandum for information only.

BACKGROUiiD & COMMKNTS:
The Fraser River Harbour Commission has responded to my letter of April 29, 1994 regarding jet skies and
power boats on Pitt River and DeBoville Slough.

Captain Allen Domaas recommended that it may be possible, under the Canada Shipping Act, to control jet skies
on Pitt River. If the City wishes to proceed with this process, an application must be made from the City to the
B.C. Ministry of Environment.
Captain Domaas also stated that DeBoville Slough is under the jurisdiction of the B.C. Ministry of Environment
and the City should forward our concerns to them directly.

Francis K.K. Cheung, P. Eng
Project Engineer
rtrJtry
aaachment

IIla
IR I gga i~~a
I

I

'1118[I
11111%

IIIISI

IIIIIlII0
II

ll! ! "

[j]/III I IiIIIj
IIDllg lllilg
Ii
%thmiIia
illlF,P

egg

y

,

~ =

sRII I aa I I%I aIFI

—,-I=,

I

JUN 0 8 1994

~

S»I,- -I r SSI &JR~I ~IL

'=-

)I„„IIII '

I

n

I

I

l

Our Pile:

A00

n''1!

ru",:

v
E':

CII I

-'qA'I

3 I

IBAD'1

Pi!.E 45

May 26, 1994

Mr. Francis K.K. Ching
Project Engineer
City of Port Coquitlam
2580 Shaughnessy Street
Port Coquitlam, B.C. V3C 2A8

Dear Mr. Ching,
Re:

Jet Skis and Power Boats on the Pitt River and DeBoville Slouah

The Fraser River Flarbour Commission acknowledges receipt of your letter dated April 29, 1994
on the above-noted matter. We apologire if our response appears slow, but we have taken some
time to investigate our possible responses.

Prior to discussing this matter, it is important that vic. state the Fraser River Harbour
Commission's jurisdiction extends only on the Pitt River and not on DeBoville Slough. Should
you wish assistance in dealing with DeBoville Slough, we suggest you contact the B.C. Ministry
of Environment, Lands Branch. Their office is on Kingssvay, in Bumaby. The Regional Director
is Mr. Roberts (660-5500).
The Pitt River is a navigable waterway used by a wide variety of crafts that range from jet skis
to commercial tugboat. Our quick review suggests there may be very little that can be done
about the water skiers, however we believe it may be possible under the Canada Shipping Act
to have some effect on the jet skis. To set this action in motion, we would require an application
from the Municipality to the B.C. Ministry of Environment. We would be pleased to discuss
such an application with you. Pleas contact the writer or Catmen Getmain at your earliest
convenience to establish a convenient time and place for a meeting.

tiiill

Yours very truly,

FRASER:RIVER HARBOUR COMMISSION
,.(I

Captain A.O. Domaas
Director of Operations
I

Steve Davis

cc:
el ail el

II'6l

I

NIP'I@

)L PPL

A'ga

N

i

CSOATAXWPUXII4A

IS

!'3 uea~w@~5— — g gg~gN ~moeo

SlllllFlftIILta!!!II!Npi m
g

25LlR.DON

FRASER R(VER 1 HARBOOR COMMISS(OIV
500- 713 Calvmhia Slreel, Hear Was(minster, Orilish Cvlvmhia. Canada

II IO

m a~

~me NIglal~t anjh c

=="", E.-..I Nggjlllif, „ua!K..... -.

3

~

'ia5LII

~

-- —

'e

IK',=

IL
/IL=—

--

„-

—

~M~

m= ===

II

—.—

--".'.=a!!~i=a

==.'

Imaam in 1 r SII amIa:: .. =..'-==

===""

-

liLIg»~
%IIII, .I1»
+
I
I

Telephone (604) 524.6455 Fax (604(SZ4-11ZT

Im~ IIamg}~ „",, mph'/~y~,
—

qtt

03lfl 10Z

~

"-

~

NIII ael m

!

mIn

.:;.

'""" »!5''"' Ili &hIL!ltI'" " '"
~

'-'

=--.15(gi~ .y ll hs(anle~lN &UICllmsmmlloe

aa

Poar Commun'awed

2Sso SEAUOHNESST STREET. I'ORT COQVITCAN. E.C. VSC As / PHONE: 944-SAI / FAX: 9~-5402
I

FILE: 302.5

April 29, 1994

Mr. Allen Domaas
Harbour Master

Fraser River Harbour Commission
713 Columbia Street
New Westminister BC V3M 1B2
Dear Mr. Domaas,

SUBJECT:

JET SI&IES AND PO'IVER 13OAT ON PIT f IHVER AND DeBOVILLE SLOUGH

The Environmental Protection Committee at the Committee meeting of April 27, 1 994 revievved the letter
."rom Mr. Allen Therrien and Ms. Kathleen Hunter regarding their concerns with jet skies and power boat
on Pitt River and DeBovilte Slough. The Comrnittec recommended to forward the letter to the Fraser
River Harbour Commission for contments.
It is appreciated if you can provide me with a reply to Mr. Therrien and Ms. Hunter concerns at your

earliest convenience.
Enclosed please find the letter front Mr. Therrien and Ms. Ilunter. Should you have any further inquiries,
please do not hesitate to contact me at 944-541 1.
Yours very truly,

H5

Francis K.K. Cheung, P. E g.
Project Engineer

1 mal I I a ~
I

% III

FKKC/
encl.

Councillor M. Gates, Chair, Environmental Protection Commince
Councillor R Talbot, Cu-Chair, Environmental Protection Committee
J. B. Vip, P. Eng., Deputy City Engineer
A. Therricn and K. Hunter
35 I 5 St. Anne Street
Part Coquitiam BC V3B 4GG

cc:

II,"=":;~

~

~ to

IR IS m I o

JUN 08 $ 94

ill II

il
jl ~ al

IR
IIIjR', '.."@

e',i ~Imaurnjiii 'i:l:.„",I

I Ia r i iil'Iljili IIiI

M1 Ill

-=: .=.

EIigy Eig; —

/lummm

I

lllmlRR

m :-=''.:„;;-,-,—;.-;; ~j
III',",
~isa Ijj ~llgjjj ItlllllllntuiniriI a I~

~rrru~~lk

~ams

Iat

—

I ( I+ IVI XIIIIII%&'&I

II
~g
nIm=
mtmlgpa
(

2::. ~ s~ta ~mu I~LA%
r

"'"It L~

~~

@&

I

~~~

iggSOW I

g'ill

3515 St. Anne Street
Port Coquitlam, B C

March 31, 1994

V3B 4G6

Dear Mayor Traboulay and Council,

With the approach of spring there are a few items which we would like
to draw your attention to. pirst there is a proble«a, that although it may
not be in your jurisdiction, we feel that as our local government
representative you should address it on our behalf.

the mouth of DeBoville slough a small number

of recreationalists
rsist in creating a major disruption. They are the operators
of water
A«:

p

vehicles in the form of Jet skies and power boats. They can often bo seen on
kends and during the evenings wt«en thc days become longer and l.h .'e: l.l«er
better. Tt«oir form of el«tertainment Ls to sp, rt around 11«e reland Ltu«t rs
ju t nortt«of Ll«u confluence or the pi" L R«ver and DeBoville slough. 't'hey
speed around and around the island which is well known as a nesting area of
Canadian Geese and other various water fowl. In the trees on the west shore
there is a colony of Herons which are known to be very sensitive to any form
of disturbance, let alone the amount and intensity caused by these
we

recreationalists-

The volume is extraordinary and easily exceeds that of chain saws, or
even some aeroplanes
.They can be heard quite distinctly as far away as the
rails in Minnekhada park. It is even worse if you are out for an evening
troll along the dike system which is quite popular in this area. In fact, we
ave personally heard the noise well up the slope of Burke Mountain. we are
ure that all of us can agree that no one individual or small group should be
ntitled to pollute, in this case with noise, to this extent. We hope that
ou can find the time and energy to enquire as to ti«e responsible department
r ministry and deal with this problem.

Another item of concern is the increasing use of motorised trail bikes

and automobiles in the coquitl m River green apace. once again there are a
few individuals that think because they own a trail bike or a four wheel

drive they can avage an area that is not patrolled by the local police.
Often in the morning, when we take our dogs down to this area, we can easily
see the destruction that has occurred the previous evening.

IRRKi~
g~a rlR

Again, we would like to see you look into this matter and deal
appropriately. This should include a banning of these vehicles from all parks
and a form of enforcement that will dissuade their future use. These areas
are very special and are very well used by a large number of citizens that
feel an affinity with nature and the presence of these motorised intrusions
are a considerable disturbance. Since places like these are quickly
disappearing, the ones that we have intact must be cared for and protected.
The last item which we would like to draw your attention to is one of

m I m «s
I

IIIIIII+t40

the most annoying symptoms of our time There is nothing worse than sitting
in ones living room with the family and have some obnoxious, inconsiderate
fool's stereo permeate ones privacy. we are not talking about just sound

Ills&I
.'sillll
$ 55I%554,

Pill~+
@JgeiitR&

~
I

N~gl'g/ t/

Wl iKs44 NS44S mattmtmsa~

I a

sl Illg

Q gpss
a««as

St laal«S«4«IIII « ~
g'

I~ ~

"

"= 44

~

"

...slam las balll

i

- "-

«S4

m

'mlR&li

««tt«t

ms
tnt'' '-''"'" '"-=:

lalll «" am

m

~

la malml

=- —

-"ll't«igfgi» a" m'—

i«dtstt ii at Ill il 414m" s 4 a iiiaIhmtglltl5$
I

tf4

~

~

g llsf

"

'"litt I

!

m

ss m «s g

coming t.hrough our open window which certainly occurs, but at times even

pounding into our sealed house. There is nothing worse than some individual
or group forcing an entire neighbourhood to endure their particular whim or
fancy at anytime of the day. stereos in cars today, for instance, can be
heard up to a mile away and without fail the first sunny day inevitably finds
some inconsiderate moron washing his car to s he pounding rhythm of so&ac
current "chart stopper". Actually this last weekend our favourite neighbour
had his stereo up quite loud so that he could hear it over the revving cars
that he was working on for hours. The same individual seesned to think it OK
to play vollyball, with a large group of his friends, in his backyard
2
a.m. last summer on a couple of occasions

till

Although we are sure that: the present bylaws are more than adequate to
deal with this kind of problem, there doesn't seem to be enough being done.
Assy ti&ss
that w have mad com&la inta so th hyl,. d .P..rtmont w, receive
little or no cons& duration. ssor instant., ti&c lass. t':n 'v called to
complain about a loud stereo on a -unny dav, thn perso&i who answered the
telephone ss&ated tha" it wousd be s&wo or three days before anyone could come
and address.the situation. I'o had to sit and endure and finally wes.e forced
out. of house to f ind some peace. Other times e have had to phone the
Rcssp(who quickly responded) before the situation was resolved. 1 don' see
why situations of this nature must be dealt with by the police for whom there
are much more pressing chores. perhaps a member of the city hall could be
made available to deal with these kinds of problesas as they occur, and in
fact it could becosne a summer job for some local, needy student or two.
.

We both personally love music dearly, and play and sing sshenever we
can, however, we would never consider forcing the neighbours to endure our
pleasure we have had to insulate a roosn specifically so as to have a place
in our house where sse can have a modicum of quiet and ensure that our privacy
is maintained. 1 f a member of the community wants to play the drums it should
be up to them to ensure that their neighbours are not disturbed. Again, we
think that the council should review the current bylaws and bring them up to

the 1990s

We believe that in order to make a region livable not only must we
ensure a preservation of things such as green space, but consider how people
must live together. Barmony and consideration are values that reflect a
caring society and as the leading citizens of our community, you must set the
guidelines of what our community must stand for and ensure that all of our
community's interests are met. No group or individual should have the right
to disturb and destroy what little dignitv is left to us in a world that
seems less and less respectful of others.

+~a f%

IIIKjj jlR
Rll'll

We

res pons e .

appreciate your consideration of these matters and await your

JJ

sincerel

iii51

ssathleen Ranter

Sssmmwssimm s smmI

IIIIRIIiiI RII

IIIQiiiljl
~!

~I~~

lt'-:- ';;~ ':-'iias
~
I.=.--.:-=-:,@1
~
j
!

~

~ ~

!~ ~

~

~~
~!

~

iilgiI
!~ i
~

~ t~~I II~I ~

~ ~Ia~~

e~

I~

~

l~ ~ ~

!~

~
s

s

~
i&II

a~
~

~

~

.—.—

—

-miiiiim, —
~

11II/g

$/

Isss

~~

'.

~ "—

~~

',

~ ~
~~ ~
~~~ ~~
~
I f ~~
'--=='=- --:--:--=..—:--wi.„':
I!l."':2!i
~

~

i

~

1 1«

~

i~IIzmms~am"
ff'-egg
'~
,

~

I

"l

IS s ssmt

I

i

I

IiIjjjjP

i=----."'."--=
~ giwgmiIIig
1¹ W','

—

~

I

I

'NIII~---'-

] jIW ~ m m sI IIlf ] 'jjj]LIj Iss simis i'isis 'ms~
— = Ism

i

~

I~

IIL gggmgm

gII'I9IIII// /jP f jm
I

I

-—

~!":&IGNIS 8 ls

'

- — mI =- '-~II +&IIIIMIWllLse— -:: —; ~gggmm i/ [gg is~=-m

~

'

Ii + ILI~=&»: — ~j

q~t,
&)
5gn S!4ALICBNESSY STBBET

I

GBT COQIIITLAhl B,C

V3C ZAR / PRONE: 944.54II / FAX 944.5401

April 23, 1994

FILE: 302.5
Mr. Allen Therrien
Ms. Kathleen Hunter
3515 St. Anne Street
Port Coquitlam BC 5/38 4G6

Dear Sir and Madam,

Your Letter ol IVlarch 31, 1994

SUBJECT:

5Vc arc nl fcecipt Ol 1'Ollr fvncr RII hillrch 3 I

II/9 I rcgllrdIBL 1 oui'nnevnls,

The Environmental Protection Commltlce at thc Colnmincc meetingt of April 27, 1994 rcviclvcd your
letter. The Committee noted that the Irraser River, pin River and DeBovillc Slough aro under lhc
jurisdiction of the Fraser River Iqarbour Commission. Thercl'ore, the Comm iuec lvill forward your letter
to them for their comments.
The Committee also considered your concerns regard ing thc motorized trail bikes and automobiles in the
Coquitlann River green space and the noise problem. This Committee will forvvard your letter to the
Protective Services Committee for their consideration.
Thank you for bringing your concmas to the attention of thc City. Should you have any further inquiries,
please do not has/tate to contact me at 944-5411.

Yours very truly,

Francis K.K. Cheung, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
FKKC/

cc:

Mayor L. Traboulay
Councillor M. Gales, Chair, Environmental Protection Committee
Councillor R. Talbot, Co-Chail, Environmental Protection Committee
l. P, Yip, P. Eag., Deputy City Engineer

74=,"I: alii
"al lf
IRMR:

n::,-

I

f III llqli
ll P I I glg gi I I
f I I II I Ill g

j

I Ig

NIIIII 8 ~IIII

IIg ill'jj

"

'RnaM- — --'

II

I

.

RI

"— —

a&g

~ ml&iii@jlajyplmse
~==-; -MkijIRP~g~
I Rlg

RRRI

+

IM

4~4~

~ti g/NIIIW,

I
=;

''l 'i
~"

pkl

'JIii imrwi IIII

'

'~amgtRIig~&L
—
—
5

'"'a ~

P

RRB

Rf ig 15

— ~ —.Mjeigggtggg

il]iiiiigjjg

i

~jNgmtiiRI

IIII:,.
'ee II% a

Iae~

llf 111NIii ream

~'meRl%tlngIme1nj"-

'
. III
— ~e ijlI

e I'IHW

~

II

~~

~'ae Ja

- —

Mll,

JUN 08 1994

R~

~aI

~: = -",'- '„','.";
—

.

— III-===
a

III'ej

eg aa

/lj~aiae;; ~:'' - — ~ geiIiaeT

'::: aIII$IIIYI
8

I IIII: -.~;&gia'aiee lehaLImelaaiwei IHjaiag

e„,w
I

—.:=-,

Greater Vancouver Regional District
4330 Kingsusag, Bumabg, gnash Columbia. Canada VSH 4C(8

lc

iW

/l.

+ i~(

i
To: All Greater Vancouver Regional District i-I
isa
I~

I

In .1992 the Greater Vancouver Regional District Boar
region's first Clean Air Day, to raise public awareness

to improve the air we all breathe. This year, on June 8,
and Province of B.C. will declare the third annual Clean
part of Canada's national Environment Week. Please j
efforts by officially proclaiming June 8 as Clean Air Da
community, and by holding a municipal clean air event

reduction challenge for your municipal/city hall empl

A commitment to clean air will require changes to both
policies and practices. The GVRD's air ouality bylaw
new requirements for industrial and commercial operat
reduce emissions and apply the polluter-pay'rincipl
emission fees and higher fines for polluters. And the
released draft GVRD Air Quality Management Plan rec
air strategies that will serve the region well into the n
Public, stakeholder and municipal consultation on the P
underway, prior to its final consideration by the GVRD Board this fa

Public participation and action play a fundamental ro!e towards the
goal of clean air. To underscore this, the GVRD has an ongoing public
awareness program in which information materials and advertising
describe the positive actions individuals can take to help improve the
air. A new GVRD education program for elementary and secondary
schools also contains a unit on air quality and transportation.
On Clean Air Day, local citizens will be asked to take a breather from
the single occupant vehicle trip to work and try an alternate mode of
transportation -- such as walking, cycling, carpooling or transit. This
initial taste of freedom from traffic and smog is intended to
encourage Lower Mainland residents to make the switch more often.

N
IIIIIII'
)II'! IIII
i

aaiiii gr
:..a

I s i 8 8 (Ss aa m

i,

=:=I ~ 1s ~ era
~~

I HI

~

a

"''g ii 'I1i III SW = ='--—

II

=

iMI

il l( 4
5I

is~a~

'li5155
1 III 5 »I Ill@I

sa II(1

@ym

J(11+

~

i

/IIIILIRN

ji~
i,~ii
IIIRsil1
ll

I

~pi E
/gjjg~jjg g

''

~qgllglgi 1!Ia

Nll@lilht

—

~

Municipal support for these initiatives is an important part of
commitment to clean air and prompts our request that all
local councils officially declare June 8, 1994 as Clean Air Day within
their community. As well,. each municipa}iry can participate in this
year's Clean Air Day by holding a community clean air event or by
issuing a municipal/city hall employee trip-reduction challenge to
neighbouring municipalities. As with all environmental
improvement measures, public awareness is greatly enhanced if
e"eryone joins in the effort.

the'egion's

The GVRD will also be contacting local media, Crown Corporations and
other large employers around the Lower Mainland to solicit their
participation in the Clean Air Day Challenge, and gain media attention
for the efforts of those municipalities and coporation that participate.

If you would like more information on how your community can
participate in Clean Air Day 1994, please call Mairi Welman of the
GVRD Communications & Education department at 432-6339.
Please join us on June 8th ... for a breath of fresh air.

Sincerely,

Rj

IIIII
11W N.%

Greg Hairy-Brandt

Doug D'rdmmond
Chair
Air Quality Committee

Chair
Board of Directors
I 'Ilki~i',

cc:

I1 I

R I 5 Rl
I

GVRD Member tdunicipality:

Managers/Administrators
Chief Engineers
Communications Directors
Parks Directors

1151% fl

K&s ~ s~ se

I

I SR'5 III)/

IBS'I
I'm III II

R I ~RI tt t NI II I @

gI

+nil ~ emg
'

Sg

I

I

Jill

N I

ref m u &

i

a~
8

+I'

t

~

Iil

g" ~1I

II

~

'

+

~~
II w
i

ILII g

min m IIIII, 'I 5
,

I

Q)III I = =.'.'«jag ~„.,'5 Itt~g gh lssmegPSII IIIWII IIIPjjg jjlgj

May 11, 1994

Valerie van Meel
Personnel Director
City of Port Coquitiam
2580 Shaughnessy Street
Port Coquitlam, B.C.
V3C 2A8

Dear Vai:

Clean Air Day - June 8, 1994

Re:

The City of Port Moody employees challenge Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam
employees in reducing the use of automobiles and trucks to get to work on
Clean Air Day.

'IIIN

)S IIII/
asimmqIII
==-:.',=3 ti

The Greater Vancouver Regional District has declared Wednesday June 8, 1994
as the Region's Clean Air Day and are chaHenging citizens to use alternate
forms of transportation to get to work They are doing this to raise awareness
about the quality of air in the Region and that it will continue to become
degraded unless we ail take steps to reduce our individual use of our
automobiles.
Port Moody employees are meeting the GVRD challenge by either walking,
cycling, busing or car pooling work on June 8. We challenge your employees to
show the greatest proportion of staff using alternate transport on that date.

ll'UA '

Ill)JHI I)
Ea
s EEs )at
aa

I

LI

)II
Malaa

Bill Guest

Personnel Manager

1 II(r)IEn)sm

FAX: (604) 936
TELI (604) 936 . 1211
2423 ST. JORN'6 STREET, PORT MOODY, S.C.
MAILIND ADDRESS: P,O. DOX 36, PORT MOODY, S.C: 93H 3EI

NIIII

9630

II
"2~%'Rlt )lit%
':

I ta

~

-"

'Emg)) (499'

—

——
A4 Ililisael) IIIA la, 9:
aa Sa

mica=-=a'~9~1(N)taaii~ C=SSS

Iaa(INWII)i

IP

aa)mmelall 5
a Sa 96—

~

29I

~~

I

)

li Blat
i

l

ti Es a)

SHE lP-

s

"'(D Ilaal
"' '" ~

I

~)

IEEP%

r2s)

STEERS;.,

Is E ISE2mlaLa =

I I 4E(

~

I II I

~

I

I

I

la I a

70(Z//Zr CJC/ej CI 11/i do/ 07 1 ISC

)

J UN E

(Icc12si C fo gee el& o((I(d.

C'Iill(2'' Ol(1" 27 (1(II2a /i(1/Ji lD; 10
C(717. C/eo('('/Oeli!II

//oe Lo((&c( /) 7/ni17/c((lc/(r (oi/"I((.fc(
t((!JQ f(ICC'(2SC'I lol(S(1(1 CJ((((IJI)'(&ll&/7/C'll7.

(7 O(7fe

l(&es/7(7(Z'(IIIC/

(I C/e(2(2C'I; /71) rr/J(C'I ji i(1071 fm. O(O

('/ll/C/i F17. Dl(I 2OC'777((t7. Ill/'C'(7C(7017 (70(IJ.

IJse tl iis tlii id annual Clean (fir Day to find reasonable olternati ves to

driving alone an!( cho lie nge fn enrJs and co- workers to do the same
Cliallenge o(her companies or communities fo match or beat your
cornmi tment, o. join the Jack Bell )(anpoo(program by calling 925-9596

Cl&n//a((gest

)J Use traiisft orodethare to work or do errands. J Aide a bfcycleor walk
I

toworkordoerrinds JComhineerrands-inakeoneeffiaenttnp.

fJ Rtttrtt:-ar toom.,-ceo'ace ifd sharfnci fJ

Te!ecommute
vta,,'I(div('(/lln/
mt) J Iialteooefrtendsand family to partfcipate

e )Ill
pl
I!

%I I e

I /Jo1«./i(»
C&1 I yi/I I'Ci
&/I((I 'C'.

~

IF)II@

l

Clnnlir 0() i C/&nl!e((&AC:
." ».:;

t mi

i

t

tt

J Iviit n tm is pisces oi
'

inv sit!i ivtv

sih,i;i',irti

'I

I

t

Iiii

I

stoi Ieaii"i li:ioi

'iivii ii s

J

Iii ti n .

wl !tat 4 iri fo; v..ii

g/I!151111
FII 15LI![

'.: - ','

~

taaiiii wlahl

fy)(ark from

Iii

;',tttl io sir, t:iv,I,

i

'

iii i t ii I iii vi I r,

t(
iii \

( iii'ilti'I

tain ..
lii;Ioiivl
i

"';

Rli It!)El
8 III)) 81

IIIII'll
JUN 0 8 ]Qg4

t

v

W::
li

Iivi~
ii i

tfl )1)iir

ta

tl5 iw

sat)ilta w'~~twi&IQ

i

taia i ~
II

7-"%1st

'tll ~ ISfms

ll $ 8 tg@5$ $

iIii Ills

lpga~, .— ~

18'tat

w IR

mN) Jl

~

~ %I
tf

I I

:'~Isa)K'

'mamas ma tea t s

H as a I lk
a ta

WHEREAS:

June 8, 1994 has been declared CLEAN AlR DAY, and;

WHEREAS:

The citizens in the Lower Fraser Valley Air Basin have recognized
the need for the individual and group action by govermnents,
industry and the general public, to improve the quality of the air we
breath, and;

WHEREAS:

The Greater Vancouver Regional District, is responsible for
regional air quality management and requests the support and
participation of all communities in the effort to reduce air pollution,
and;

THEREFORE,

I, Leonard M. Traboulay, Mayor of the Corporation of the City of
Port Coquitlam DO HEREBY PROCLAIM June 8th, 1994 as

"CLEAN AIR DAY"
in the City of Port Coquitlam.

'IPR15
L.M. Traboulay
Mayor

)[

glllllll

IIa IVI uJ
(g /)
wmta ai
I

)[] J)

[g t~ leiiiiil
a

/rl ll

I

I

rm e

I

8

ml

i

1111 u

ILhiigsai

s; ttim&IF---

IE

~

WM N

~ ~ a~u w

:. seam

3

At'a

~u

ll&g

~

~l v

R IRa
I

„...'~gtal ~ ~ g / 51::
3l

I

l1 or nasa

~ 's

a

—

~ g~

'-

ea

)

'rn, ~
~
~S~S~IILSQJ~(~
l I

M

I Ia'

'

]

aa

—

-gp

~1lra

Q

6

S2e1218

z~~ P)P
y,.t". zwnvK Stern S-j'UBLrC&'nows
27088-3410!G!&tGSS'Ai;
VAPO&JVER, B.C. V5RGA8

Phone: 520-22&0 Fax: J.000-277+977

9V"/- S&7
9+c&c - 5 Yo7

Q/ rcf

D«ciir

&v»

/D&cs

C~ Ipcc &rzspa7

&/&l~&

I rrust rhc folio!Ping !!ill give youi comparih rlre intc»mnrion you &»ciiiire conc»isring iln!

n&rrsual

M I'IVE SPORTSDIREC7VRY '94.

The direcro&y covers sports that oi»'young people ni&e involvecl in including canoe pi&i!iiiy.
rodeo, hocl ey, soccer, baseball, basketball and more. 1'ocus i s c&n youti& dcvelopmeiit i'c&r b!&Is
and girls ages 6 ro 18. -l.s vou probably ts&ohv, c&ur tec!nnu&e .suicide is amoncr rhe higli»sr irl rii«
cor&nr&y&, Loci& of ndulr lendership has been onc! of rh» reasons for tliis t&ageCv. Crave'&'r»nc&nr
fiinding hvif1 only go so far... hve need hc&lp'i om the busi&sess secror. ) oin. suppoi r !vill lselp
hvirh seminars, coaclring classes, softh»c»'e fo& rc!cim developmenr. 0 avc!1 and
pla! c i
elec!&fopmeiit. lpe Iva&it tc& get th» k&'cls ahva!& li'o&ii .I'ui&h'ta&ice abui'» a&i!i orilc& tire c'oiirts a&i&'i
st&o&

rs f&sids.

Bs taldng an ad or a listing in tlr«bpc" '- I3i&ecto&3.you are shou&ingyniii. Juppo& t mid seri&i&(&

I'he t)r&recto!rv&is in rh«8!." bh ll" for»in&.
Distribution
coach»s, reams, l&n&ids, native organization!,.
libraries,
and
associar»d
govern&ment,
sporrs organizations in rhe UZd., I u&'ope a&id Japari.

aAantag«of the rax breal&'t th» sc..

ri&n!.

hi&ill include mnnagers, og/icicrls&

lge print on

'luna-br(re" stock in r»d and blaclc a&rheo&% - oui tradi&ional native colors.
Deadline will be 8&IS!94 for 0 &sin of approx. 10,000 oi more, please do nor &vair until the last
minute ro make a decision. or it becomes a lavour &ii &hlmciin,
$
On behalf of the board of 4bo&iginal Sports of I5(.';, n&icl nll thi! athletes thev
represent, mnv I
extend our thanks fory our financial nssi srance,
P

ll
[III

FEOsc

Cn-irrdir

pjRI II
~(bins &nu
&

~

It I I W

I

I

I

8

DEPT.

JUN

IHlifl

I&& &K

PQQ7 CQQQITLAM

C&INEE&ONC&

Sincere&l

JI&PHD-1994

p
n I

13 c 59

~

I

Di»TE

Page Size(8 I&2X II.)

Fait Page(71&2 X 10)
Hair Page(71&2 X 5)
Quarter Page ( 3 3/4 X 2 Ii2)
gigbtb Page ( 3 X 2)
Business Listing ( IX2)
Supper( Lbting (I/2 X 2)
Patron Listing ( 2 Lines )
5281218

A4, „..4=&K

$ 090.00
$396.00
$ 247.00
$ 95.00

$ GS.OO
$ 45.(IO

P. 881

JUN Q 8 1994

h.

n the same was considered at a regular
resolution was passed:

las Island (see attached) be

n Committee for research and

l15" "
51/1

jRI)
:.,'.',:."~9
I

il Rl

Ilijg .,
IIIR5jj lIL g
I

l&~m~~~~l

INIS I ]I/I
:: —: jt

L

sjRuma&a

RN

~~~'R

JUN 08 1990

— — IRW

HIM
SR Rg

FRIENDS OF DQ U 6LAS ISLAND
1827 HARBOUR STREET
PORT COQUITLAM, B,C.
V3C 1A4

Mayor L. Traboulay and Council,
City of P or t Co qu it 1am.

5/30/94

We, The Friends of Douglas Island have recently been advised that still
another Real Estate company has expressed an interest in developing
Doug! as Island.
We feel that the present status of the proposed RS3 zoning as well as the RS3
zoning itself, encourages development interests in the Island to surface from
time to time. As this whole situation is confusing for all concerned, we feei
a clearly defined format is long overdue.

The confusion over what, if any, developmenr. protection the island has with
the proposed RS3 zoning(which at present is sitting between third and fourth
readings) should be clarified. Acceptance of the RS3 zoning, we understand, will not
provide protection for the Island but will again add to the confusion.

Port Coquitlam's Director of Planning advises that if we do not implement the

RS3 zoning development is free to proceed on the Island.

IF.R.E.M,P.'S Environmental Protection Committee states that if the RS3
zoning is implemented, development could proceed on the Island.
We agree with F.R.E.M.P.'s assessment and, again, wish to register our
opposition to the RS3 zoning prepared for Douglas Island.

As an alternative to the RS3 zoning we request that the City Council give
serious consideration to the following four proposals as outlined below:
asrsa a r

~

l.

~~

]

vr

1~i

~II%
wv

!

PI%

A policy statement in the Official Community Plan that states;

Development on Douglas Island would not be desirable or beneficial to
the community considering the Island is completely without dykes and
well wirhin the floodplain, and provides a significant habitat for bird and
'nimal life.
2. Due to the fact that RS3 zoning is a holding category for future development
it should not be used in this instance.
3.

A new ~oning category that provides full protection in perpetuity for

environmentaly sensitive lands be drafted.

Illli

4. This new comprenhensive honing category be applied to ail areas in

Port Coquitlam that require full environmental protection. As examples
Douglas Island, Colony Farm, buffer strips along dykes etc.

a

III

II fl

]~a
r

l

i

li~jsI fl

Itsy ~ s

&

l!!

JUN 0 8

199'l

FRIENDS OF DOUGLAS ISLAND
1827 HARBOUR STREET
PORT COQUITLAM, B.C.
VSO 1A4

olution to this situation regarding Douglas Island would
sell the Island to the Nature Trust for $ 1.00.
WE CAN DREAM CAN'T WE?

Coquitlam expect our.,City Council to give extreme care
decisions that have a lasting effect on the well being of
t your immediate attention to the above, a reply would be

H-,xc ~~ ~.-:
E r ling C r en age r
Friends of Douglas Island

Environment

ginal Affairs
ipal

Affairs'UN
08 199JI

THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

TO;

Environmental Protection Committee

DATE: June 07, 1994

FROM:

Francis K.K, Cheung, P. Eng.
Project Engineer

FILE No: EPC

SUBJECT: G.V.R.D. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW - STAGE 2 REPORT

RECOMMFNDATION.
I,

That Committee receive this memorandum for information only.

QACKGROIIND:
This report is a summary of the recommended Solid Waste Management Plan for the Greater Vancouver
Regional District. The Plan is to reduce per capita garbage disposal in the year 2000 by at least 50 percent
through new and expanded "3R" programs involving source Reduction, Reuse and Recycling. The remaining

waste would be processed through Recovery and Residuals management facilities. The
purpose of Stage 2 is to
develop a recommended solid waste management system to achieve the Plan objectives.

Principles and Themes
Several principles and themes were developed during the planning process of the Plan and became fundamental
to the recommended Strategy:

ll

~

I.

The "out of sight, out of mind" attitude is no longer acceptable. There must be a feeling of personal
responsibility for reducing the environutental and social impacts of waste.

2.

All levels of government must be fully committed to doing their part over the long haul.

3.

The waste management SR hierarchy beginning with the most important (source reduction) must be
respected and emphasized.

4.

The polluter must pay. Residents who generate more waste should pay proportionately more than those
who generate less. A financial incentive to reduce waste and the associated costs and environmental
impacts is essential.

JmJi

J

~MI1
&mml

5.

msiigj
6.

Manufacturers must pay at least a part of the cost of managing the waste Irom the pmducts which they
manufacture (i.e. reduce materials in their products and packaging, develop markets for recycling their
products.).

Funds raised through taxes and charges should remain dedicated to purpose for which they were

obtained.

7.

Il |I I!ill
~

Iuu c ~ lg mg

/iP III All llm

Programs and systems must be flexible tc make the most cost etfective use of existing programs and
infrastructure, while keeping the door open to future changes.

glj)J 0 8 f99I

recovery/transfer and disposal facthttes.

Cont'd..../3

system of operational certificates and/or waste management stream hcenses for all waste
processing (recycling and composting) facilities and all DLC disposal facilities. For
processing facilities, the GVRD would set standards and ensure a levei playing field
while using existing private-sector/municipality processing and marketing capabilities
and capacities in a flexible and competitive manner.

II.

ilklll

Sill! P.i

t It~it

h

'

1illisii all 'IIsglta II,"! !'~~I w-

ga~

i

I

I IRIS

JUN 08 1994
144

i~ lii

~

I

II

414

I~
A II

~

I

I

~

~

iggli'g Ig J

ii li

'

m'

[

i

I

I

Iau II a II
14'I

~K

—::: a

I

I

II

I48

I~
~ I~

I Pl I Im %III ~

w
!

)I ~h!riluhn

'liVIII I

Cont'd..../4

I(1IRi'i
1

ill

e ~

!

I'

I!,',
4

'= lI t

~

I

41 ~

s Jlgngli ~

I

~

Ill l

I

~ 1%

'!/
glJi 1!
a a!
~

~

~

I~

I

U III!I

41 ~

5.

The GVRD (and/or other appropriate government body) would implement a system of
permits of licenses for waste hauling companies operating within the GVRD. This
recommendation may be applied as a backdrop measure.

6.

The GVRD would coordinate with member municipalities to procure additional invessel composting capacity.

7.

As soon as variable alternatives to disposal are operational, phase in disposal bans of
recyclable and compostable materials generated by the residential, IC&I and DLC
sectors at all disposal facilities.
Maintain the current system of standardized tipping fees at GVRD/municipal disposal
facilities, and use differential tipping fees and tipping fee surcharges to support program
implementation at all disposal facilities (including DLC) to support 3Rs program
implementation.

If practical on a site specific basis, maintain staffed recycling depots at all transfer,

9.

disposal, centralized cornOsting,, and multimaterial recyclables processing facilities in
the region.

f

5 ma a Q

1(L

The GVRD and municipalities would expand public information/education programs
targeted at residential, IC&I and DLC generators. The GVRD and all municipalities
would develop formal communications plans, and develop ongoing programs of
audience research to support overall educational promotional campaigns.

11.

The private sector would continue its role in providing processing capacity for
residential and IC&I recyclables under competitive conditions. The GVRD could assist
in the development of cooperative arrangements among local municipalities.

12.

The GVRD and municipalities would increase government procurement of reusables
and products containing post consumer recyclable secondary materials.

13.

The GVRD would develop a waste exchange database for all materials.

14.

Market development (i.e. technical advice, grants, loans) would become an integral part
of municipalities'conomic development function, and be viewed as a local strategy for
both .vaste reduction and job creation.

15.

Municipalities would support the establishment of local reuse and repair centres.

16.

The GVRD, with the City of Surrey, would construct a transfer station for residual
wastes from Surrey that cuaently go to the Port Mann landfill.

17.

The GVRD would continue to monitor population trends and transfer station waste
records throughout the district, monitor tne potential for transfer capacity shortages at
the Coquitlam Resource Recovery Plan and at Maple Ridge, and prepare and revise
annually a 5-year plan that identifies any need to expand, augment, or replace each
existing transfer facility.

I

I

IJUllgl
3

l'u% Ill/

Ilk Ill'I
IIII
'I7lii

SIII I

Ii

I'lI 'I I

b I, I! I
I

I

I

yP

Sill lilar- -- -P 0 I I!.

'if
I4

nll ''

Illa'

'III S Sll

Ill

I

SJI g] 'li F

e.'-

,a w a

asu a

Q'P

s ~'

IIg

I

$ p

I I

I

~111Ifl

n ' I Hu aSSS11

'ax
—

'ss

IS

I'it

I

II

I

II lt
1

us tall te

S

ttaa

I'I! ~ Ilail ss

..., =- II a ateeIINII'.~1
t
IH,

s

Stll

at

4ll, S SI S el a

I 11

I

,'g Pltl I
I

I

iQ

le vS

jjI aj
~

I

I'e =-; -.,;.
IP vsl Ills

;l Itl I a

)IPS

ip IK i s H

'P

1

I

5

~ III

g Ilg

1

i

'S

I

luS Iu Is s s I 5

—

I

I

III Ilail ]
asttilll I I ~ I

II'ont'd..../5

S

M&i I&)
~~

Sll I P

ill I I It I uli

''I n

'=gisllgIIIIII glRika .

I

I

I

S

I

I 11 ~ ~

IP HIS

,

": its 5

-5-

3.

Piljj

d I Ilies tu I

20,

The City of Vancouver would continue operating the Vancouver landfill at Burns Bog
subject to the outcome of the facility evaluations recommended.

21.

The GVRD would fulfill the existing contract with Wastech for transportation and
disposal of waste at the Cache Creek landfill unless changes in environmental, financial,
or operational conditions warrant otherwise.

22.

Subject to the results of Key Recommendation 18 and as the end of the existing contract
with Wastech approaches, the GVRD should enter into discussions with Wastech to
develop acceptable terms for expanding the Cache Creek landfill to provide extended
disposal services to the GVRD. Simultaneously, the GVRD should plan for and issue a
request for proposals or bids for waste transport and disposal services from competing
providers, including Wastech.

23.

Components of the strategy which regulate the operation of waste management facilities
and the flow of waste under Bi1129 would be implemented as an advance component of
the Revised Plan immediately upon approval of such action by the Minister of
Environment, Lands and Parks. In the interim, all municipalities would ensure all
buildings permits for facilities which transfer waste residuals undergo an appropriate
environmental review.

3.2

The Province would be required to accept the responsibility for the legislative framework
necessary to enable implementation of recommended activities and to regulate facilities,
including disposal services outside the District. The Province would also establish manufacturer
responsibility programs which reduce waste products, develop markets and provide funds to
support the waste management programs for the municipalities and the IC&I sector. They also
would issue operational certificates for and regulate the operation of major facilities to ensure
compliance with Provincial criteria and standards.

3.3

The District would establish standards for recycling and composting programs undertaken by
the municipalities primarily to serve the residential sector.

3.4

All municipalities would continue to plan ar.d operate the programs serving the residential
sector up to and including delivery of garbage, recyclables and compostables to transfer,
disposal and processing facilities.

1m~&
II1IW8$ /

The GVRD would continue operating the Burnaby incinerator at near maximum
capacity and in accordance with upgraded air emissions criteria throughout the plan
period unless changes in environmental, financial, or operational conditions warrant
otherwise.

The GVRD has the overall responsibility to ensure, within the limits of its authority, the full
and effective implementation of the system which is created by the Key Recommendations for
the Revised Plan and therefore the achievement of its objectives.

1%$ 5%lma I

I

19.

3.1

j+iMIII I

1

In view of the Port Mann landfill closure in 1997, the GVRD would immediately
is
request for proposals of bids for very specific waste transport and disposal services
the residual waste from Sur.ey.

Roles and Resound'hiljltus

ii'ijiiil
I

18.

iIS d dill j
I

dii

~

dl IRi iil d i'
I

lgd

jl llllill
111i'
I

Cont'd..../6

llurtI I
I

JUN p p

~ I Sl
I

I

i I1
jii iaiii
ilÃldd I ]"
X '=-''-

,

j

I

~

mti Fdt tu1'

P% I

~

,I

m

)Pl 111it IL—
I I

~d

H

I

I I I

~

e&l

I

m,

AL
—

— '

a

la IMIII

te industry would continue to pick up garbage, recyclables and compost from IC&I and
generators and some residential waste under arrangements with certain municipalities.
IC&I and DLC generators would be required to respond to financial incentives and
al bans by reducing their garbage through the development and implementation of source
ion and recycling plans.

er of the public would create less waste as a result of programs which provide incentives
rce reduction, reuse and recycling. They would now pay for waste mostly in accordance
e amount which they, as individuals, purchase and put out for pickup, instead of through
unicipal taxes or municipal utility charges.

mendations would result in a Revised Solid Waste Management Plan macle up and/or
wing programs and initiatives (See Attachment I).
rs

y rewards those who generate less waste, and therefore provides an incentive for them to
payment recommended for the strategy would change significantly in that:
amount of billed on municipal tax notices as taxes or set utility charges would drop
ically to about $ 14.8 million or some 10.7 percent of the total cost of managing the
s residential and IC&l waste.
idential and IC&I generators would be on the same footing in that they would pay for the

n proportion to the amounts they put out for collection.

cturers would contribute toward the $ 249 million doflar cost of managing the residential
&I waste generate in the Region. The amount contributed would be negotiated by the
e. Residential and IC&I generators would pay the balance of the $ 249 million.
lion dollars of the strategy costs would be paid internally by manufacturers for source
on initiatives which would be reflected in the costs of their products.

I MMES

I

Rill

II

H

~

tw

I
I

The manufacturers will pay all or a portion of the cost of managing waste from the products they produce. The
resulting funds would be provided to municipalities to support their programs, and therefore reduce the amount
which residents would pay under the proposed user pay program

N~lili

iIi'l~

IIh'I'8 8

',IlbIQI
Ial ua~s

Francis K.K. Cheung, P. En
Project Engineer

I

sl a ill

h

II%I
~ IS

The residents, one way or another, directly or indirectly pay the costs of managing the solid waste produced in
the Plan area. Instead of paying through their taxes or utility charges, they now would only pay a small
percentage in this way. They would, for the balance, pay as generators under user pay programs in proportion
to the amount of waste they produce and as consumers in proportion to the mnount oF products they purchase
which become waste.

i'INIISIiI I

Ii S III
FKKC/
coachmen!

SSII

1I lg
RI Si

i

'll jii

iili''

m ealpu u

Il

ua ut

! ~ I

~ asl ul

I

IN+ II

i!a a

!L IRK I

S IISII

I ~

I!

a!I I

m m

~:

al Ill
I

~:= ==;

I

~l

'Wl I ~ ~ I

Sll ~

I

m 1! I

m 1! 1~1 I

ala
I

ll!'
IIII
us ~ ma a

~

a

I

I

I

I

~~SI~!
~ ISIS!

l

~ 1

~

~

la

II

I

~

I

I a la
I

gill I!I

.a Ii!I l,g!

~

II

I,I ~ I Iu ~
!am

I

''' 'iu '1st

all la ~
~I

%"

I

~

Iilaa

I

a
'

'

—

4iIS5S

niiggu! I'

Isla lal M'

ea !IIII
~

Ilail,l

jjijill'jII
II'l T J jjjjj

il

jjia
lais

I& I ~

sag

—
=mi W~ saris
~siamsamg ~
+OI' ll ~em-.=

aiis iN aa ~ sis aaaasaNIa,
a .

~ aa

'

J]~ gI

—

—

TII

t I
!

~jj

[y,iaa rosa i',I J

I

I$ 5115184+,
&

J, ~ .
"'

sisal s

$~

jill'

IJ lI 14I I

=-= II

~
~

&&~l+j+

Ii

~ as w

la

I

jjtjJ

JUg 0 8 SQ
I aaaaaama ~ Ias II I
I I ws & a I I 't
f

&

~

jggI+

:. ~ aas I sass

$

~ ~, a siijiI'l
jj le

IRK a

illy p
jj
g fg

g

/

"-

j

El

[ 4g

)

$

j

II

--~,e1
~~ hj

~ ~IW Rh& Ill

would be promoted. Overall program success would be planned, tracked and reported

The reduction in disposal and the cost in 1993 dollars of source reduction and reuse
initiatives are shown in Table 3 for the year 2000 potential residential waste stream of
898,600 tonnes.

l)ililh
I

(&I illl)iH

~g~ g~gfgl S&IWR~:: 'pieaalllf/~ ~leHIRg hlBBBg+ $ %N'~:y j
m ~ 'I RR I SS

» &ri& gg g

jjasale

~

i~gg

"= '=-

—

—

—

-

—

",

--

- —

gg(/gl'RlR ~-

I

'''+

=
~

Ahem

&

''7a,

„', '~z~zhMII4m,i —:: ~==—;

'i P::.:
ehlg

=

.".

".'ill IB O':-.

SIN RR@Sl~as ssmiiKimisas "

—..

s Isae

.

Ill

Page 31
and municipal education
grams would be supported by Distdict waste
plans to track the
bans and the use of municipal solid
programs.
effectiveness of these
dollars, of collection and processing, and the are shown on Table
disposal
s and supporting initiatives in reducing
residential waste stream of 898,600 tonnes.
TABLE 4
DISPOSAL
OSTS AND REDUCTION IN GARBAGE
- YEAR 2000
RECYCLING
UE TO RESIDENTIAL

Residential Sector
Potential Generation = 898 600 tonnes
$ /Tonne
$ 000
Tonnes
es.

es.

ables
Recycling

205,125

22.8

37,167

42,180

4.7

',726

5,389

0.6

878

252,694
108,282

28.1

12.0

44,771
17,497

14,951

1.7

1,265

2,806
126,039

0.3
14.0

217
18,980

151

13

42-1

1,240
3,681
4,921
68,672

378,733

g

378,733

378,733,

TOTAL

177

181,

I

Totals may not add due to rounding.

,I

Ill 115ll

l~ el
g«!e«al
4

ii, I IL

Ij'I II
Ims'tniag
2II ~ Iae
II 2 M2 I
I
I

I::2.

The costs would be distributed as follows:

negotiated contribution from
$ 60,209,000 minus the
Residential Generators:
manufacturers.
Municipal taxes: $ 8,463,000
would continue to be undertaken by the
private
The processing and marketing of recyclables
organizations. Existing municipality and
for
private industry and non-profit
expansion, provide the needed capacity
composting facilities would, with some
organics.

.."-

ii
eet«talp !III.
I

I

Bl

I I

I

I

I

N I
I

—
= = =
I I =: " —
L
I
I

0

=

—

'"

=

I

I

I

I

1I

elel

Stage 2 Report

Page 32

5.2.3 Garbage Collection
Collection of garbage from residences in the urban area would continue to be done by
municipal forces, private industry under contract to the municipality or, as often is the
case, by private industry from multi-family residences. The year 2000 collection for
garbage and transport to transfer or disposal facilities and management of disposal
facilities would amount to 395,672 tonnes at an average estimated cost in 1993 dollars
of $ 140/tonne.

5.3

Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (IC&I) Programs
5.3.1

Source Reduction and Reuse

The major initiatives would be the mandatory development of waste reduction and
recycling plans by large generators and supporting incentives in the form of bans and
tipping fee surcharges on the disposal of specific recyclables and compostables.
Significant education and training programs would be provided to support these plans.
Procurement policies by all local governments, support for reuse/repair centres and the
planning, tracking and reporting on overall program success would also be important
initiatives.

The reduction in disposal and the cost, in 1993 dollars, of source reduction and reuse
initiatives are shown in Table 5 for the year 2000 waste stream of 1,065,400 tonnes.
TABLE 5

COSTS AND IC81 SOURCE REDUCTION IN GARBAGE DISPOSAL
- YEAR 2000
IC&l Sector

Potential Generators =
1,065,400 tonnes
Activity
Gov't. Procurement
Training of Generators
Reuse/Repair Centres
Annual Reporting

Tonnes
3,548
10,417
2,092
424
16,380
32,861

Bans/Surcharges
TOTALS

I

0.3

$ '000
800

1.0

120

0.2

500

0
1.5

81

3.0

1,587

86

The costs would be distributed as follows:
IC8l Generators
Municipal Taxes

NnasmW
'll!
iX

IR
WFI'

45,000
$ 1,542,000

5.3.2 Recycling

I:
kl
,lit ill,,

Recycling programs would include:

IIII

5!!

JuN II e f994
t

'M

mtmMIIF1flglIR@- ~--- =-=..~

I

sP'

——

-Pe gi lliil /

$

//am~/1m'tmlgg~l~~as& jQ)

Stage 2 Report

Page 33

~

Expansion of existing recyc(ing activities, such that 90 percent of potentially
recyclable materials, 90 percent of yard waste and 50 percent of food waste would
be delivered to processing and composting facilities.

~

All generators, would be required to separate certain recyclables from their

garbage.

Large generators would be mandated to develop and implement source reduction
and recycling plans which would be approved, monitored and enforced by the
District. The size of generator would be dictated by the above targets of 90 percent
coverage for recyclables and yard waste and 50 percent for food wastes. The
information for designating which large generators are to be includecl in the program
would be provided through a simple waste audit that all IC81 generators would be

required to complete.

~

Regional District support for large generators and others in the development of
source reduction and reuse plans through the provision of kits, training and advice.

~

Allowing recyclables which have been separated from compostables and garbage to
be put out for collection in several source separated streams, or as a commingled
load.

Providing incentives for recycling through the establishment of disposal bans,
tipping fee surcharges and increased tipping fees.

Requiring generators under their waste reduction and recycling plans, to compost
their own yard waste or have it, as well as their food wastes, delivered to Regional
composting facilities.

Services for collection, transport, processing and marketing of recyclables would
continue to be provided predominantly by private industry. Existing facilities would
provide adequate capacity to process the quantity of materials which would result from
achievement of the disposal reduction objective of the Revised Plan. The residuals
from the processing of materials which are commingled would be regulated to ensure
the percentages of recyclables recovered is high enough to achieve this objective.

The processing of the organic food and yard wastes would be done at composting
facilities owned and operated by municipalities and private industry. Currently, the
private sector operates all food waste facilities and would be expected to expa td these
as required. In the absence of such expansion, the District would coordinate with
municipalities to provide additional in-vessel composting capacity.
The cost in 1993 dollars, of collection and processing 1,065,400 tonnes of ID&I
recyclables and compostables generated in the year 2000 and the effectiveness of
these recycling initiatives in the reduction of garbage disposal are shown in Table 6.

Stage 2 Report

Page 34
TABLE 6

COSTS AND REDUCTION IN GARBAGE DISPOSAL
DUE TO IC&l RECYCI ING - YEAR 2000

Program/Initiative
Recvcling

,

IC8 I Sector
Potential Generation = 1,065,400 tonnes
Tonnes
$ '000
$/Tonne
386,105
36.2
66,068
171

Composting
Subtotal
Administration
Source Reduction &
Recvcling Plans
Administration -. Bans
&
Fee
Tipping

87,643
473,748

Surcharges
Subtotals

473,748

TOTALS

'473,748,

8.2

44.4

1

146
166

2,789

78,857
3,260
189

44.4

3,449
82,306

8

174

The costs would be distributed as follows:
IC&l Generators:

$ 81,140,000 minus negotiated manufacturer's contribution.

Municipal Taxes. $ 1,166,000

5.3.3 Garbage Collection
Collection and transport to disposal and disposal of some 319,000 tonnes of waste
from IC&I generators in the year 2000 would continue to be almost totally done by
private industry at an estimated cost in 1993 dollars of $ 136/tonne.

5.4

Impact of all 3R Programs

The combined impact of all recommended source reduction, reuse and recyciing
and the cost in 1993 dollars of initiatives and programs is summarized in Table 7

Page 35

Stage 2 Report
TABLE 7

COSTS AND REDUCTION IN GARBAGE DISPOSAL FOR YEAR 2000
WASTE STREAM DUE TO ALL SOURCE REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING
PROGRAMS'esidential

Waste Steam = 898,600

IC& I Waste Stream = 1,065,400

Tonnes

tonnes

Cost

sr
Tonne

Tonnes

219

106,613

10.1

$ '000
19,899

$/

Tonne

46,503

5.2

$ '000
10,207

65,179

7.3

3,472

53

32,861

3.0',587

252,694
126,039

28.1
14.0

44,771
18.980
4,921

177

36.2
8.2

66.068
12,789
3,449

171

151

386,105
87,643

490,415
TOTALS AND
AVERAGES
Totals may not add due to rounding.

54.6

82,351

168

613,222

57.6

103,792

169

Initiatives
Senior Gouts
Manufacturers

&

Reduction & Reuse
&
GVRD
Municipalities
Reduction & Reuse
Recyclino

Co moo stino
Recycling
l

Cost

Tonnes

Programs &

&

Compostino Admln.

'n

187

48

146

additional 860,400 tonnes of garbage would remain to be disposed of and paid for.

This table does not include DLC waste.

Therefore, the total impact of all 3R activities under the proposed strategy would be the
avoidance of municipal type garbage disposal amounting to about 1,104,000 tonnes.
The cost of about $ 186 million, except for $ 14.8 million which would be funded from the
municipal tax base, would be paid by the manufacturers of products and the generators
of the waste. The proportions paid by manufacturers would be negotiated with the
manufacturers, leaving the balance to be paid by the generators.

5.5

Market Development

Plan.
The development of improved markets is essential to the success of the revised
existence
the
recognize
would
Market development under the recommended strategy
of two market places for selling recyclables for secondary processing and incorporation
into products. These are the international market and the local market. Under the
markets
strategy, the Province has the responsibility for ensuring the development of
undertaken.
so necessary to support the recycling programs are successfully

this market
The international market is changing and expanding rapidly. Products inborders.
The
are bought and sold as commodities and flow freely across international
continued development of these markets would of necessity continue to be left to

creat

would
private industry. However, the manufacturer responsibility program
is because
This
and
quicker.
further
incentives for industry to develop these markets
This would
of
cost
recycling.
the
of
manufacturers would be required to pay all or a part
prices and
would
improve
which
provide an incentive for them to develop markets

I!

O'S

IKiisI

te nationally. These mclude compost and DLC wastes, such as asphalt, concrete,
drywall and some wood products. Development and improvement of these markets
would be supported by the Province through financial and technical assistance for
facilities and for research and development.
Government procurement programs and the removal of subsidies on virgin materials
would also support the development of markets.

5.6

a reduction of some 1,104,000 tonnes in disposal through reduction, reuse and
recycling, about ff60,000 tonnes of residential and IC&l waste would remain to be
landfilled or incinerated by the year 2000. This could grow to 1,039,000 tonnes by the
year 2010. The closure of the Port Mann landfill scheduled for 1997 would result in a
short fall of available disposal capacity.

llfiSif St
II'I II II

I

Transfer and Disposal of Waste from Residential and IC&f Sectors

The program recommended for transfer and disposal of residual waste takes into
account both costs and environmental impacts. An acceptable site for an additional
landfill in the Region could not be identified.

IHlN
III ~ Illsn

ll'espite

lfllillllll
!

8%1jll

II IIILIIIII

ll ill

i

Therefore, additional capacity will have to be provided by either more incineration
capacity or a controlled out-of-region landfill. Incineration has an advantage over
landfilling in that with proper care of the ash, there is less adverse impact on water
resources than with landfilling. Also, land use related impacts are less. However, this
difference is minimized for a out of Region landfill in a dry climate area, such as Cache
Creek. On the other. hand, incineration is moie expensive than either out-of-region
landfilling andlor landfilling af Burns Bog. The air impact studies performed for this
pioiect have suggested that the incinerator has a greater adverse impact than landfills
on the air environment even when the impacts of long haul transport are taken into
account. This is particularly so for the low level Regional contaminants, such as the
nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxides and particulate which are of significant concern in the
Region's air shed. Therefore, out-of-region landfilling is recommended as the most
acceptable means of providing additional capacity to handle wastes which would have
gone to the Port Mann landfill had it remained open. Also, out-of-region landfilling
would be preferable in the event it becomes necessary in the future to reduce or stop
the landfilling at Burns Bog.

iIii

The program to provide adequate transfer and disposal capacity to the year 2010 would
include:
JUN 0 8 1091!

ill I % I II
1I W I im

N/5
SIR 44

I liti'Nil

Illl NI
IIII

till

::U

tali irllli
I

I

I'i

i

4

"I

Illa'll
%IIIII

I'he
„

IIII'Ijjbj

I NIJ
fi 8

y,

'

Bog to receive
Continued operation of the City of Vancouver landfill at Burns and
particularly
garbage from the area it currently serves. Future operation
with the
expansion to new cells within the existing permit would be in accordance
is subject to the
June 1993 Provincial Landfill Criteria. This continued operation
that the June,
confirm
to
the
City
outcome of a technical review commissioned by
cost.
would
this
what
Landfill Criteria can be met, and to determine

III im
ills %
RSlfg
%lmili

1993

m'N

Illj
Il

9
P
P
conti,iued operation of the Burnaby in
necessary
as
be
upgraded
would
standards
240,000 tonnes per year. its operating
annually produces
to meet new environmental Criteria of the Ministry. This facilityof
tonnes
7,000
about
fly ash which is
about 45,000 tonnes of bottom ash and
The bottom ash
Act.
Management
classified as a special waste under the Waste
at landfills until
material
cover
would continue to be used as road construction and
'The fly
District.
of
the
efforts
such time as other markets are developed through the
or
develops
the'District
ash would continue to be placed in secure landfill cells until
of
Ministry
the
proposes recyciing or other disposal methods which are approved by
Environment, Lands and Parks.

Creek landfill to affect
The modification of the existing operating plan for the Cacheavailable the additional
compliance with the 1993 Landfill Criteria and to make
achievement of the
2,000,000 tonnes of capacity provided under the permit, Withsatisfy the District's
disposal reduction objective, this permitted capacity would
landfill is not successful in
disposal needs to the year 2010 providing Cache Creek Landfill. However, if it is
the selection process for replacement of the Port Mann
that available under
successful, there would be a need to provide capacity beyondthe District through a
by
the Cache Creek permit, This would be accomplishedundertaken
simultaneously
be
would
request for proposals or competitive bids which
terms for
develop
to
landfill
Creek
with negotiations with the operators of the Cache
District.
for
the
expanding the landfill and extending the disposal se vices

1II

iiaml
II1@lhl

'l

IIII jll mi I

capacities for the Coquitlam
This would
Recovery Plant and the Maple Ridge Transfer Station,

I

I

~

I

Ilii ''

'l

S
~

I

I

~

II

Monitoding of the adequacy of the waste transfer

Resource

'Nn

!

I

II

I

I

S

i

i

I

t fi

~

I

~

Ilii

I

I44 ~ ~

I

I
'

~

4II

I

i

I

U

5.7

Demolition Landclearing and Construction (DLC) Programs:

Source Reduction, Reuse and Recycling programs and related activities include:
~

~

11~8

~I

hI

II~

itIR"-III'I'i jt
I

~

If '
I

'l

'R 44 44

jI
I ti

I

lii

llII

RI Rim I

@II

p'

irRIt

Imposing tipping fee surcharges and bans on materials for which there are markets.
This would require weigh scales to be operated at all but very small facilities. These
would also provide additional information necessary to plan and support disposal
reduction measures. Surcharges and bans would be supported by. education and
enforcement programs to minimize illegal dumping.

Supporting market development through the provision of funds by the provincial
government for research. Also, a recycled product task force would be formed to
review current standards and remove barriers to the use of recycled asphalt and
concrete where it is reasonable to do so.

—

&

JUN OB 1994

t ~ II

IIII%4iii I

Mandating that all large DLC waste generators must develop and implement waste
audits and waste reduction and recycling plans.

I R
I

Page 39

Stage 2 Report

Establishing a waste exchange database to facilitate matching the needs of
generators and waste reusers.

waste

attitudes and

Initiation of education and training programs to modify traditional
promotion
practices. These programs would be developed through a stakeholder

and education organization.

transfer 'and disposal
The ownership and operation of DLC transport, processing,
these would be
However,
equipment and facilities would remain with private industry.
regulated to ensure:
residual to
Processing facilities remove reouired recyclabies and transfer the
approved disposal facilities.
~

~

The direct h"ul or tiansfer of DLC waste tc only approved disposal facilities.
the 1993
Facilities are operated to acceptable environmental standards, such as
Provincial Landfill Cditeria.
DLC materials flows, however,

A lack of reliable information precludes an estimate of
and the
Table 9 provides at least an indication of the waste generation in the year 2000
to which disposal might be reduced by the above 3 R initiatives.

degree

TABLE 9

PROJECTED DLC MATERIAL FLOWS
YEAR 2000

Material

Concrete/Asphalt
I Gypsum
Wood
Other
Total
I

Potential
Generation
(tonnes)

Reduction
Reuse
Recycling
(tonnes)

564,000
62,000
170,000
320,000
1 116 000

508,0 00
56,00 0
85,00 0
80,00 0
729,00 0

Disposal
(tonnes)
I

56,000
6,000
85,000
240,000
387,000

3Rs Percent
of Potential
Generation
90 I

90
50

Per capita disposal as a%

of 1990 per capita

generation

'ssumes 1990 per capita generation is the same as in 1991,
5.8

Household Hazardous Waste

waste program under which the
The Province is initiating a household hazardous
recycling and
manufacturers of hazardous products become responsible for receiving,
is a recent
This
products.
disposing of the household hazardous waste from these the technical consultants.
initiative by the Province and therefore was not addressed by
implement landfill disposal bans
However, the Region would, under the revised Plan, generators to return household
and education programs to provide incentives for
.

Stage 2 Report

Page 40

hazardous wastes to the manufacturers so that they do not end up in the facilities
serving the District.
It is important that the Ministry provide alternatives to disposal of household hazardous
wastes until such time as the manufacturer responsibility programs are established. In
this interim peiiod there will, as a result of the closing of Ministry depots, be nc option
but for residents to dispose of household hazardous wastes in the Regional solid waste
facilities or through the sewer system.

'Rs I.rue
IAR
s

I

i,

I i

I

Q g II%& HIS
W ~ rl rr ~ 1I
I

s

fmk ~ ~ ~ Rg
I

Is ~ .

le lli
Steal'!.',$ 5IIII
.„
dill
I

L

I

l ill

It I II

gl'tls

1',:"-„.''..-".

i

Ir

I

'i k
.

~)
iB
1

I

JUN 08

I

15

m mflrrr

i,r,

rl'.':,

I

r~

--.'s

,

I S

f$
e

199'J

'i~

OF PFJI'.T COQUI~TLAlvf

FI'GINEERING DEPT.
.

JUE

...6633 &N&

SOLID WASTE MANACEMENT PLAN REVIEW

I
I

for the Greater Vancouver Regional District

7 l7
C~G.

To:

Municipal Waste Reduction Coordinato rs

CC:

From:

LMS, LHH, ADM
P.M. Brady, Plan Review Project Manager.

Re:

Solid Waste Management Plan Review

et!!re 1101 -4330 Kingsvrey
Burnaty, B.C. VSH4GB
Li I TELEPHONE; 451-6040
FAX 436 681 1

~

7/ g!J
e
20.03 r
t3.

File.

SD @5 01

I

tr

Date: June 1, 1994

The Stage 2 Report was approved by the GVRD Board at its meeting of May 27,
1994. The Report has now been submitted to the Minister of Environment,
Lands and Parks for his approval.

The GVRD has attempted to make Municipal Councils aware of the solid waste
strategy in the Stage 2 Report by the following means:
~

I
IBSRIHS

presentations on the Solid Waste Management Plan Review were made at
the March 12 Council of Councils meeting. A copy of the Overview of the
proposed solid waste management strategy was provided to all elected
municipal officials in advance of that'meeting.

II

Il

all GVRD municipalities have members on the TSWAC who represent their
municipalities and therefore can keep their councils informed of the process.
In addition, some municipalities also have members on the LSWAC.

iiIIILIIIg
!

%III%'Ig'
II= ",=:,6
Iljj I fg
IRI s'
Il ol
..—.
810&
I

~

ms'11

III

lilt ll III

'

III

well in advance of the May 27, 1994 Board meeting, every Mayor arid
Councilor in the GVRD received a copy of the Stage 2 Report with ihe
attached cover letter. Each municipality also received one complete set of
the appendices (the CH2M Hill and Boutilier and Associates reports).

lllII II I
II

av 1'5

pig !imam !Ill jj

I6

NBBBI 5

'l
IIltg IIHlo ~ I

i'ii"::=*"
t,l ~

l

~l

I I! g

I

flu
'l
II

A

I

I

P.M. Brady,

Plan Review Project Manager
160 em.doo

I'

i 1631

I''Fl!

I
I

I

I

11

BI

I I

I

1

II
I

I,

'II

'a

I }w

I

I

I

I

I

111

I!

'I

I I

I

I

1

1

I,II

'~

II

's o ss

e
1'1

)I[

I

I

IIIF

l

Buss I I ~
I

'\ K

u

SIS e ~

I I

I

I''P

1 B

I

1

1

Irs lo

I

i

I

1

U'iome
I

PB
l I

s

5.

I

l
'

.

ill 0

J~ 1
~o

''os'l

I

Iu

~

~

J~

~
'

I
~

—

'—

oi

g Committee, I am providing the enclosed May. 1994 Stage 2
view. This Report was accepted by the Steering Cofnmittee
or approval at their May 27 meeting.

esented in some detail at the Council of Councils meeting on
ndations were described in the March "Overview" document
eting.

The recommended strategy and Draft Stage 2 Report were the subject of public and advisory committee
meetings during the last week in April. The response from these meetings waa very positive. However, a
few issues were raised which warranted further consideration. As a result of Steering Committee
consideration of this response, the following significant changes were made when finalizing lhe recommended
'strategy in the enclosed Report:
o

The addition of a recommendation intended to enable people to stop the unwanted delivery of junk mail.
.See Recommendation 14 on page 17.

Illllll

~

The provision for competitive bids/proposals (as well as negotiations) to obtain more disposal capacity
when the existing permitted capacity at Cache Creek is used up around the middle of the next decade.
See Recommendation 22 on page 25.

~

~

The addition of 3 recommendations intended to enable the District to stop the uncontrolled flow (export)
of waste from the Plan Area. See Recommendations 12 and 13 on pages 16 and 17, and
Recommendation 23 on page 26.

WII%

The uncontrolled flow of waste is of immediate and significant concern. If early measures are not taken to
prevent it, the present situation could quickly deteriorate to the point where the strategy would not work and
indeed, existing recycling programs would be undermined.

'jl
-"-pp

PI"

I

p IIr

Prior to discussing the strategy with Board member(s) from your Council, you may wish to get more
information on the Recomniended Strategy from the staff member of your Engineering Department who is a
member of the Technical Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Also, a copy ol the April, 1994 report
"Comprehensive Waste Management Strategy" by CH2M Hill Engineering Ltd. and the May "Final Public
Consultation Report - Stage 2" by Boutilier and Associates are being provided to your Municipal Clerk. These
provide detailed background information which might be of interest to you,

~ ~

I

1

irrtj

p )ij

~ &8 I&&&&

9 IIiiiiai

sir iisi
I

i

i

rw&

i

III

j

All I
pj im),

Yours truly

s

I'I

['IMBjii

Peter Brady
Project Manager
cc: With Attachment TSWAC Members

J

I l I

il i i i

i

'='p
II

r 5&

jlI'i

JUN 08 %I

Itsy&

~

~ 'I a

ajar ~'~
-.I
..—

el r

stiff a 6 xr ~"
~ I

rl wl wr

; germ88 II i ts'gi

i' '

:I

p

jl
in

I ~

li

I

Ii
Lj

''IIPr=-—

~ ~

n~'""

I &

I

~r

ltli j

i

'I R

jl
~

'„~ I i
4&

I

'II/@

,

r

i

ill I P e

.:
i

I

I

ii&

i

rri&rl
II

Ir

"

ii il !,:;

i

Sl

~SI iailnisll s

I

I

»balf
&1& &

i

(,'.
~

M ~ ~ 'I

&M&

I

II%

I