Committee of the Whole - 25 Jul 2023


1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
2: ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3: STAFF REPORTS
3.i: Mamquam Blind Channel Maintenance and Funding Strategy Update
3.ii: Public Works Facility Update Memo
4: MOTION TO CLOSE
5: TERMINATION
1. Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
0:02:28 (0:01:02)


Chris Pettingill
0:02:42 (0:01:16)

so not a great start it is Tuesday July 25th 2023 at 2 p.m for the committee of the whole I'm Council Chris Pettingill as acting mayor for July I am chairing this meeting starts off with Helen Squall and quiz welcome to the Squamish Nation traditional territory Mike please be advised at this council meeting is being live streamed recorded and will be available to the public to view on the District of Squamish website following the meeting if you if you have concerns please notify the corporate officer present at the meeting we're having some sound difficulties I think those are taken care of now so can I have a motion to adopt the agenda Council French second by counselor Stoner all those in favor motion anyone opposed motion carries and I will turn it over before I make more mistakes to Ms MC Janet to talk about the mancon blind Channel

2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
0:03:30 (0:00:13)


Mamquam Blind Channel Maintenance and Funding Strategy Update S. McJannet, Planner and D. Roulston, Manager of Municipal Infrastructure Staff Recommendation: THAT District of Squamish receive the Mamq...
0:03:43 (1:17:59)

The Squamish Council meeting discussed the Mamquam Blind Channel Maintenance Strategy, which is currently in its fourth stage. The strategy aims to balance navigation safety, accessibility, habitat and coastal protection, and restoration, as well as community, cultural, and regional economic vitality of the marine gateway. The project focuses on the area extending from the southern tip of the ocean front lands up to the CN rail Bridge, which is the northern extent of the scheduled navigable waterway under the Canadian Navigable Waters Protection Act. The channel maintenance study area is on the doorstep of Stawamus village and community, where the Stawamus River Estuary drains into the Mamquam Blind Channel. The Squamish Nation has a strategic plan that includes goals for protecting and managing their lands and waters, including protecting against loss of reserve land from erosion and supporting environmental restoration.

The project team, including Sarah McJanet, a community planner, David Rolston, manager of Municipal Infrastructure, and Daniel Leonard, vice president of Westmar Advisors, presented an early draft of the Mamquam Blind Channel Maintenance Strategy. The draft strategy includes guiding principles, a review of channel maintenance options, and funding tools. The team also discussed the preferred options emerging from discussions with the community working group and cost estimates for maintenance work. The team plans to engage with the broader community and develop final recommendations to bring back to the council in the fall.

The team evaluated various dredge depths to determine what percent of the time vessels can safely navigate the channel. Based on the review, a dredge depth of -2. 6 meters chart datum would allow the largest vessel that uses the channel to safely navigate about 85% of the time. The team also evaluated a range of options for channel maintenance, including doing nothing, a stop-gap focusing on dredging at the mouth of the Stawamus River, a focused dredge which would dredge the southern portion of the channel, dredging the entire channel to -2. 6, and dredging the entire channel to -3. 2. The preferred options by the working group were the stop-gap and the focused dredge. The team also discussed potential funding options, including a local service area tax, user fees and charges, voluntary contributions, federal and provincial grants, and an annual budget allocation.

SPEAKER_06
0:03:59 (0:10:02)

thank you so much Council just one moment getting this PowerPoint up Russell I need your help thank you hello Squamish Council and Community tuning in my name is Sarah mcjanet a community planner with me I have David Rolston manager of Municipal infrastructure and co-lead on the project and also Daniel Leonard who's vice president of the westmar advisors it's a firm specializing in Coastal Engineering and Marine infrastructure projects who's been engaged on this project so today our purpose is to present an early draft of the man blind Channel maintenance strategy to solicit comment from Council on our work to date prior to seeking Council or prior to seeking broader Community input and so we'll situate this the strategy speak briefly to the work plan and our engagement activities since we introduced the project to you last April and we'd like to summarize the draft strategy formation including guiding principles review of Channel maintenance options and funding tools and then talk to the preferred options that are emerging from our discussions with our community working group as well as cost estimates for maintenance work so as noted in the staff report we are next we're aiming to engage with the broader community and we've shared some next steps for additional activities before developing final recommendations and bringing the count part of the strategy back to council in the fall so in 2016 the ocp update identified several policies and guidelines for channel maintenance dredging and restoration you can see policy 20.24 e which set intention to address navigate navigability for transportation access Recreation and commerce while minimizing impacts and then further to that leading scoping and collaboration around a channel maintenance strategy was also identified and prioritized in our marine action strategy in 2018. in terms of the project Focus again it's to support navigation safety accessibility habitat and Coastal protection and restoration as well as Community cultural and Regional economic Vitality of our marine Gateway you can see the Divine study area here which extends from the southern tip of the ocean front lands up to the CN rail Bridge which is the northern extent of the scheduled navigation navigable Waterway under the Canadian navigable Waters protection act and this is also the area in which we established a designated navigation channel in 2017. I also just wanted to highlight um that the channel maintenance study area is on the doorstep of stopmus village and Community Where the stormers River Estuary drains into the mamco and blank channel so the updated area in blue shows the Squamish Nations expanded lands at stomas that were legally transferred to the nation in 2021 through the addition to reserve process and in the draft strategy we have highlighted the cultural significance and importance of the channel to the Squamish people where many known seasonal Village sites were located and many Marine Resources were abundant the Squamish nation has a strategic plan that includes goals for protecting and managing their lands and Waters including protecting against loss of Reserve Land from erosion and supporting environmental restoration and sustaining the community and the nation is also as we presented in the marine action strategy sorry not the reaction said the Marine access review last month there's significant comprehensive land to Marine and capital planning that the nation is getting underway for stopmus and site B to the South which is also owned by the nation and so we've been engaging Squamish Nation staff to staff through this project and we look forward to continued collaborative work and we hope that this work will also help connect with and support the nation's future planning and potential for partnership in future as well and that's just an image of Thomas and sight bead from the nation's website okay so in terms of project stages and key tasks we're in stage four of our original Project work plan that we presented initial stage one as you know involved the scoping procuring Technical Services of westmar and engagement planning stage two is all about data Gathering and preliminary technical review of the bathymetric information sediment quality data the navigation Channel design vessel considerations Etc in stage three through the end of 2022 and early or this year we engage Squamish Nation other governments and our community working group in technical review of data and approaches and potential dredging opportunities and as part of this stage we also talked about benefits and impacts of dredging as well as what happens if we do nothing in stage four we've assembled this draft report with maintenance and long-term funding strategies for your initial review to talk about initial directions and then forthcoming input from Council today and from Community will help inform how to address dredging and channel enhancement options going forward and then stage five we're going to summarize all the final recommendations and bring that back in the fall so a big shout out to our working group which was formed last summer many of them are here with us today in the in the audience and so we have a total of 17 members so a larger group than we had initially um in set out to include but it was fantastic to have all of the participation and you can see the um the members of the working group here in terms of their affiliation and the groups from the terms of reference we held three hybrid in-person and virtual meetings to review the strategy scope all the Baseline technical information and to hear their perspectives and priorities for channel maintenance so in the first session that was October of 2022 we reviewed a lot of that Baseline Foundation information in the second session we walked through and evaluated preliminary options and costing and then in the third session we reviewed and discussed funding approaches case studies for disposal of dredged material and beneficial reuse of sediments as well as our financial context for the municipality so in the in the discussion draft this shows the content and how it's been brought together and so are the strategy is outlining our Channel maintenance needs the context for the channel objectives guarding principles as well as inputs on the maintenance options and funding tools and approaches we're just going to quickly touch on some of those just key points and components of the strategy in the remaining slides before opening up to council for questions and comments and so I just wanted to really highlight with these images that the strategy is attempting to highlight a very Dynamic history and context for Mount kwembling channel on the ecological the cultural the community importance of the channel as the as a Gateway it's a natural asset and it holds a lot of community value and it remains relevant as a working Waterfront and provides Tidewater access to many important uses and as well as multi-modal connections for broader economic activities there have been a lot of fast dredging campaigns that are detailed in the strategy and Community advocacy by the chamber that requesting provincial and federal and Municipal action and support for channel maintenance activity and that advocacy was really important and there's a continued opportunity for advocacy which we've highlighted in the council report and I'll speak to you later in terms of draft guiding principles with the working group based on perspectives we did put together nine draft guiding principles that we'd love to hear from Council whether those hit the mark and so they're listed here essentially it's really highlighting and acknowledging the cultural and ecological importance of the lands and Waters in the channel respect for Squamish away I'm working on that writes in title advancing reconciliation progressively restoring Channel Health preserving safe access prioritizing Waterway safety and finding a program that's sustainable practical and financially viable designing for future needs especially in light of climate shifts and new Marine opportunities and then also the principle around ensuring benefits and costs are shared amongst the broadest group of beneficiaries in the community so that's The Guiding principles in a nutshell and I'll just turn it over to David just to walk through a couple of other Salient points as well

SPEAKER_10
0:14:01 (0:06:15)

thanks Sarah so this figure shows the existing Channel depths with darker blue indicating areas with deeper water and of note is the significant pinch point at the mouth of the swamis River due to the limited depths the navigation Channel depth and width does not meet the center for two ways small boat traffic within a protected Waterway and this is a picture of that pinch point and with a note that the bar is extending into the channel and there has apparently been some recent movement within that area so in order to determine an appropriate design depth of the channel lesmar reviewed vessels that use the channel along with their under Keel clearance which is the clearance between the deepest portion of the boat and the channel bed various dredge steps were evaluated to determine what percent of the time those vessels can safely navigate the channel and based on that review is determined that a dredge depth of -2.6 meters chart datum would allow the largest vessel that uses the channel to safely navigate about 85 percent of the time and to achieve that depth through the whole Mountain blind channel would require a total dredge volume of 68 000 cubic meters so we have collated sediment data from past data collection exercises including the 2013 dredging program that the district undertook as well as testing from some private water lot owners and the findings of that review indicate that some areas have mercury and hydrocarbons based on past industrial use and all areas have elevated copper which is a result of Britannia Beach mining activities over the past Century the areas with Mercury and hydrocarbons will require sediment to be disposed at a certified landfill and Disposal at Sea may be possible for areas that are free of mercury and hydrocarbons but engagement with Federal Regulators is required to confirm that disposal on land is also considered viable particularly for near shore sites where sodium and chloride are not expected to have any adverse effects and so disposal on land could take place in the form of land raising land creation or potential habitat compensation work within intertidal areas foreign t Team evaluated a full range of options to assist with decision making and this included doing nothing just status quo a stop gap which is a focusing judging at the mouth of the storms River a focused dredge which would dredge the southern portion of the channel so that's south of the proposed pedestrian bridge to a depth of -2.6 and then north of the pedestrian bridge to minus 1.6 option D is to dredge the entire channel to minus 2.6 and then the highest service level is to dredge the entire channel to -3.2 which would allow all vessels to navigate during all tidal conditions so option b and c were identified as the preferred options by the working group and I can go into further detail on those two options so option b the stop Gap is shown here and again it's focusing work at the mouth of the stormers which is currently the key hinge Point the order of magnitude cost estimate for that is 650 000 and that's based on a number of assumptions that will need to be confirmed at the detailed design stage for items like how we dispose of the judge material and what's required from a habitat compensation perspective so this option would address the biggest pinch point in the channel right now with an aim to improving navigation at low tides this slide just provides some further details on option b the Keynotes are that the estimated volume is 5000 cubic meters at an estimated cost of six hundred fifty thousand dollars this would benefit all users of the channel given its location fairly far south in the channel it is considered a shorter term benefit due to the limited dredge volume and also because of its location at the mouth of the stalamus river which is continually producing sediment at about 2500 cubic meters per year so it's notable that this is not a full service option and there are opportunity costs and risks with not proceeding with a more comprehensive option which includes reduced Marine access that will limit economic potential and there will also remain risk for marine accidents due to the reduced width of the channel that would be achieved with this limited option C is the focus dredge and that's shown in hatching on this slide so this is slightly or a significantly expanded option beyond the stop Gap most of the dredging area is in the southern portion of the Channel with a limited portion towards the North End of the channel near the CN rail Bridge so some highlights of option C or it includes a total volume of about 55 000 cubic meters at an estimated cost of three and a half million dollars this option would benefit existing and future marinas within the channel recreational users and Marine Industrial users this option doesn't also doesn't provide a full level of service for all users so there would be some opportunity costs associated with reduced Marine access and again including reduced economic potential with that I'll hand it back to serif to discuss Squamish Nation feedback

SPEAKER_06
0:20:16 (0:02:03)

thanks David so as mentioned we've engaged staff to staff Luke Squamish Nation through the formal referrals process and we've held staff to staff meetings and then in addition to that Squamish Nation staff actually joined an in-person working group meeting with the larger working group which was which was great um there the in terms of the review of the auctions option C has been highlighted for us by the nation as being seen as the option that viewed as the middle ground and the best option to balance kind of environmental needs with the consideration for costing and also for the actual cost benefit they're very interested in seeing beneficial Re-Use of uncontaminated material rather than disposal at Sea and I have highlighted a focus on the stuamus area for and the s area for restoration they liked the idea of keeping materials close and also the Gen that highlighted there's a fill potential for various sites to be evaluated also the nation highlighted the importance of archaeological assessment prior to any Works along the shorelines and the interest in seeing mitigations to reduce impacts on the Eco ecology sorry the Ecology of the area so using measures such as silk curtains and things to avoid impacts to Fisheries they also have a ace monitoring program so that's our Squamish Nation archeology culture and environment team that they employ and so they often highlight the opportunities there to engage in Project work so we're going to go back to some of the costing assumptions and I'll just turn it over to Daniel to highlight those for us

SPEAKER_01
0:22:19 (0:02:50)

so there's several variables and uncertainty related to the costs which we've done our best to assess at this point with a prop appropriate contingencies one is how much of the material is actually contaminated and can't be disposed of at Sea and can't be disposed of for beneficial reuse and has to be taken to a landfill so we have the historic data that's been taken from various projects along the channel and we've tried to assess appropriate levels of contamination and uncontaminated materials but again until you actually go and do a drilling program you won't know the exact amount of contamination as was mentioned their the requirements to achieve approval for disposal at Sea are getting harder and the likelihood of getting approval is going down so we can't really say at this point whether we would get approval for a disposal at sea for this project and if we don't then all of them material would have to go on land either for beneficial reuse either contaminated or uncontaminated landfill we feel very more certain about the actual cost of doing the dredging you know we've worked with industry Partners we have several projects on the go right now so our level of certainty with respect to actually doing the dredge against much higher than these other issues that I mentioned and there actually may be some benefits from an approval standpoint to creating habitat areas with the dredgeate to create more of a win-win with the project rather than just dredging having beneficial reuse and habitat offsetting there will be some level of habitat offsetting which again we won't know until we know the value of the Marine habitat that's there because the channel hasn't been dredged in over 10 years that means that you do have to offset this is not considered maintenance dredging from a permitting perspective this is a new dredging project because it's been more than 10 years since the last time judging occurred and then we this is an example of how dreja can be used to create new habitat this is in North Vancouver the picture on the right is in North Vancouver the picture on the left is in Victoria and the cross section of the bottom is related to the picture in North Vancouver where you create habitat benches and you take the dredge 8 and you create benches and you do planting to promote Marine habitat and also spaces for fish and other invertebrates to live

SPEAKER_10
0:25:10 (0:02:02)

okay so the project team in consultation with the finance department has reviewed available funding options there is a notable absence of dedicated Federal and provincial funding for navigational maintenance outside of major harbors and ports and judging hasn't historically been the requirements of local governments so that leaves a gap in funding which is a primary reason why work hasn't been completed in recent years and later on to that are the significant financial pressures facing the district as discussed this morning based on funding shortfalls identified in the asset management plan which challenges the district to make some significant investments in dredging based on the review that the project team has completed funding approaches that are recommended for further examination include a local service area tax for specific properties that would benefit user fees and charges voluntary contributions from users of the channel we would of course pursue any available Federal and provincial grants however those are uncertain and the final is an annual budget allocation which would likely only be suitable for smaller amounts such as the stop gap or for maintenance dredging for each of the preferred options the project team intends to complete further analysis prior to completion of this strategy based on Council sentiment and so that would include grant funding if available a local service area which could range in funding anywhere from zero to a hundred percent of costs the same with General taxation which could be a component of funding at ranging anywhere from zero to 100 percent of costs and then there are other potential funding sources that I mentioned like user fees and voluntary contributions from different users foreign

SPEAKER_06
0:27:12 (0:03:34)

so in terms of next steps with this project as mentioned we're in the stage four of five following this Council touch point today and soliciting input from Council at this stage we'd like to move forward with some additional public engagement Beyond just the member not just but beyond the members of our working group broader Community engagement activities would help us raise awareness and inform the wider Community about the considerations and the technical aspects of Channel maintenance works and then also would allow us to consult on the options and the impacts involved including environmental and fiscal impacts and then also to discuss some of those financial contribution scenarios we envision some fun engagement activities as mentioned in tandem with the Marine access review that we presented last month we'd like to do several Community in-person pop-ups in August and September an online survey and more direct Outreach efforts and again that key Focus will be to collect Community perspectives on funding as also to get perspectives on the value the costs and the benefits of Channel maintenance and expectations from the community around accessibility and enhanced service on that front also in the report we highlighted an example I know that council is often asking about you know if there's any opportunity for advocacy or discussion which is highly appreciated additional engagement and advocacy was highlighted for senior government to discuss the prospect of Greater collaboration on long-term local channel maintenance program planning and funding so we brought an example from the city of Delta and there's a link in this staff report Delta has called on in tandem with the Richmond but Delta is really seeming to take the lead calling to the federal and provincial governments to work with local stakeholders to develop a framework and funding model for long-term sustainable local channel maintenance so we wanted to highlight that for Council and certainly if there are opportunities that might be a good place to go and subject to council support for public engagement in terms of next steps we would be posting the draft the discussion draft to the project page and also creating let's talk Squamish small engagement hub for this engagement and also facilitate continued intergovernmental engagement and Outreach with the with the working group prior to summarizing that engagement and recommendations to come back to council so the recommendation and the Motions in the council report today are that the District of Squamish received the man Quan blind Channel maintenance and funding strategy discussion draft document and provide feedback on the draft principles options and funding considerations as presented in the July 25 stuff 25th staff report and secondly that the district direct staff to solicit comment from the community on the discussion draft prior to bringing back the strategy to counsel for further discussion so we'll pause there for your questions and then open up for some discussion thank you so much

Chris Pettingill
0:30:47 (0:00:03)

mayor Hereford

Armand Hurford
0:30:50 (0:00:30)

thank you for all the work that's gone into this so far the I was wondering sorry there was many images that had the depths over overall but what's the state of the upper the portion that we in under option C we wouldn't be touching like and where does that sit in relation to the goal that we have for that sort of swinging for the fences option that does ever that does everything

SPEAKER_06
0:31:20 (0:00:36)

I'll just go back to the image on this slide that's one more one more there we go two more there we go and so the just for context this shows not the entire this doesn't show the entire Channel all the way up to the rail bridge and just for clarity through the chair are you referencing the area north of the Victoria Street right of way north of the future Bridge

Armand Hurford
0:31:57 (0:00:07)

yes north of the future bridge and the future bridge is essentially the boundary of option C right is that correct

SPEAKER_06
0:32:05 (0:00:40)

option C is inclusive of areas to the north of the bridge as well as south the of the bridge so I'll just go back to option C just that's probably the better image there and there's option C so you can see the south channel the base and then this is the north Channel all the way up to past Newport Marina so the area in the area this would include the focus dredge at the pinch point near the stuamus and then also areas in the north that are above one negative 1.6 meters I'll let David speak to that a little bit more

SPEAKER_10
0:32:45 (0:00:20)

yeah through the chair you can see north of the pedestrian bridge that the area that would be higher than -1.6 is pretty limited so generally there are better depths in the northern portion of the channel than there are in the southern portion

Armand Hurford
0:33:05 (0:00:16)

yeah thank you I think under this the piece I was missing was the hash marked bits in the North in the north Channel just sort of the problem the problem pieces so okay that was declared I was looking for thank you

Chris Pettingill
0:33:21 (0:00:03)

councilor Anderson

Eric Andersen
0:33:25 (0:01:17)

thank you Mr Speaker John that I really did appreciate the references to the Fraser River activities and I'm gonna quote from the Delta report to see what could be done to reduce the amount of sediment being deposited in the local channels unquote well there are situation is somewhat different but if we translate that to the American blind channel the issue is the stormers the statmus river we used to call it the stamish and to quote your report upwards of two and a half thousand cubic meters of sediment per year coming down that River I can remember as far back as Chuck Billy and Randall Lewis more recently being very interested in the prospects of harvesting that as a means of controlling that amount of sediment and there was always there's been various schemes to do that my question is has that been considered I don't see attention to that scheme of or strategy that the Delta folks have explored in this present report has it been considered it can it be considered within the ballpark work of well longer term strategy

SPEAKER_06
0:34:42 (0:01:11)

thank you so much for the question and so through the chair the sort of the idea of analyzing um uh opportunities to mitigate the amount of sediment that's coming down into the channel is something that has been looked at discussed more high level it's on the radar but essentially the Delta the example on the Fraser what they did was they undertook some hydraulic like some more modeling to basically assess what are the measures that they could put in place to reduce the amount of sediment and so they had a bunch of different kind of structures and Facilities to reduce that sediment from getting down into the navigational Channel areas with our strategy we've highlighted that as an example but we haven't done or have not assigned any budget towards any major modeling and on that front at this time I'm just going to ask Daniel Leonard if there's any additional insights that he'd like to provide on that just based on the Fraser example foreign

SPEAKER_01
0:35:53 (0:00:36)

through the chair I guess you're looking at many years of modeling and permitting because it is so much more difficult to get approval for those types of structures you look at the Fraser River there's what's called training walls the big walls that are trying to increase the current speed in the main part of the river to transfer more sediment through the middle of the river so well it's all possible but the amount of time to do the modeling and the several years of Permitting could be a challenge for this project if you're looking to complete something in the next five years

Eric Andersen
0:36:30 (0:01:26)

thank you my second question concerns the design parameters that come up in section 5.3 of the report and there is a mention of a report called Thai plan from 2018 and perhaps when you deliver the final report you'll have an appendix with all of those but that looks to be an interesting set of data and I would like to know more about that but at any rate 2018 is significant for me because it's since 2018 we've had Fairly substantial discussion of the potential of a ferry use shallow draft fairies in the Malcolm blind Channel and we had a ferry terminal at the mouth of the main street for over 20 years my question is should there be consideration of shell address fairy uses and I do emphasize shallow Draft when we consider design parameters and when we evaluate also your options d and e which extend further up the channel and to different well depths if you like so that's my question um hows and should we have we should we be considering shallow draft ferries in a channel and might that be a part of our design parameters thank you

SPEAKER_06
0:37:57 (0:02:01)

thank you so much for the question and the consideration so the Thai plan report that you're referencing was work that was done in 2017 2018 at the time that the pedestrian bridge design was underway so as part of the Transport Canada approval for that project a full kind of navigation Channel assessment had to be done it was also at the time when we were dealing with a lot of the derelict vessels within the channel so it was an opportunity um in in working with Transport Canada and a number of the local Waterfront owners to basically delineate that navigation channel so that's where that's at the time where the markers came and the buoys were placed as well that navigational assessment was really interesting so we'd like to bring that into the into this strategy in a little bit more depth the there's a classification for the Waterway and then ideal kind of widths for the transiting vessels and size so essentially what we learned through that navigation assessment it's a Class A Channel two-way channel that David was referencing and certainly when it comes to the design vessels and shallow draft fairies certainly that commercial and recreational boat traffic needs to be kind of considered navigation the navigational assessment identifies kind of current uses and use of the Waterway but we need to also be looking to the Future so we will definitely bring more specificity around those details for future uses in alignment also with the Marine zoning that was established that does allow for that those types of Passenger fairy type uses David is there anything you'd like to add to that or you can go

Eric Andersen
0:39:58 (0:01:42)

thank you and of course the Marine zoning discussion we did consider that for that particular District waterlog finally there's reference to special project funds of fifty thousand dollars to complete further sediment testing for contaminants to support a future Channel maintenance application now there's a number of acronyms in the report one is pcocs another one is CSR standards pcocs being a potential contaminants of concern my question is in the list that you showed in one of your slides these are mainly heavy metals and copper and mercury and ions different categories but not contaminants that are concern to for example Fisheries is well in front of the Sawmill that was there for 40 years and two log dumps that were there for a lot longer was a mountain of bark underwater that was all dredged up in 1986 and moved up the channel dumped in the Basin above the highway bridge and on land and the slurry came back down into the Basin in the upper channel so that area still is contaminated by dredgepole with a heavily Laden with organic material my question when we look for determine which contaminants or what we're going to test for and we examine this sediments should we consider this of obvious importance to Fisheries is the biological oxygen demand that's created with this organic material that's very evident in the upper blank Channel today

SPEAKER_01
0:41:41 (0:00:36)

right now right now the list of contaminants that we would test for is highly Guided by the disposal at Sea requirements that's basically what we're looking for we could we could expand it but I guess that that's currently what the list of contaminants were going for is to see whether we could meet a disposal at Sea standard and as I mentioned there that standard is evolving right now there's other municipalities that have been able to dispose of see in the past and I've just been rejected so the window of opportunity for that is closing rapidly thank you thank

Chris Pettingill
0:42:17 (0:00:38)

you I have a couple questions myself and just trying to wrap my head around we do options say b c d Beyond I gather in any case the amount of new sediment is relatively constant so am I out of line thinking that say we proceed with one option and then after that biannual maintenance might be roughly equivalent to option b sort of every two years is that an unreasonable assumption in terms of order of magnitude

SPEAKER_01
0:42:56 (0:00:30)

and we don't have a baseline for the last time that the channel was fully dredged but it is going to be somewhere around five to ten thousand cubic meters every couple of years that you'd have to do maintenance dredging and by doing dredging more regularly then you cut down on the permitting requirements because if you dredge within 10 years then you're not you're doing maintenance dredging you're not doing Capital dredging so the overall cost goes down if you're not having to get new permits every time

Chris Pettingill
0:43:27 (0:00:19)

okay thank you and then I feel like this was maybe asked an answer the last time we spoke about this but I don't remember it does dredging the channel at any of the depths we're talking about have any impact on things like storm surge or our flood Hazard management protection needs

SPEAKER_10
0:43:46 (0:00:13)

through the chair no it would have no impact the removal of sediment is basically insignificant in comparison with it wouldn't have any impact on the ocean levels yeah

Chris Pettingill
0:44:00 (0:00:03)

okay thank you counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
0:44:03 (0:01:01)

thank you through the chair just a few questions especially as we go into public engagement Miss mcgannick I heard you say one of the things that we're looking for engagement on is to better understand the expectation of levels of service I just want to be really cautious about our language there as you mentioned dredging is not typically a function that municipalities provide I understand that there are some values in doing so but there are a lot of cost pressures at the moment and I appreciate the in the report the varying options for financial tools review and there's no expectation at least in this table at this point that there's general property taxation used for the capital but it has been identified potentially as a source of revenue for maintenance I'm just wondering if staff can speak to why they think General taxation is a good or a potential Revenue source for ongoing maintenance of trick Channel dredging

SPEAKER_10
0:45:05 (0:01:12)

can start and Miss boxer please interrupt or correct me if I'm wrong on anything but generally speaking it's considered a general property taxation has been considered as a possible source of funding for maintenance because the cost of a maintenance program are typically lower I think we're looking at expenditures exceeding 1 million then that's typically where we get into a situation of borrowing which is probably not an attractive option really for the district to be paying off a dredging with a limited time period for a much longer time period than you actually gain the benefit from it so general property taxation could potentially be a source of funding for a lower option like the stop Gap because the cost of that option is 650 000 is less than a million dollars so I think what we're trying to say is general property taxation is a possible funding source for a smaller expenditures but if we're looking at a major Capital program that it's probably not a suitable option yeah

Jenna Stoner
0:46:18 (0:00:14)

and this might be a question through to miss box food but can somebody explain how a local service area or a specified area might apply here and how we would determine that

SPEAKER_05
0:46:32 (0:00:27)

yes thank you for the question through the chair typically a local service area tax is only to be charged against those Parcels that benefit so you would have to go out the processes you would have to go out with a request for a local service area tax and there would be a petition of sorts and yeah the folks would have to agree to that it isn't something that the district can impose on those parcels

Jenna Stoner
0:47:00 (0:00:04)

and is that similar to a specified area so the one-time parcel tax

SPEAKER_05
0:47:05 (0:00:02)

similarious

Chris Pettingill
0:47:08 (0:00:28)

just before I go to Mayor Hereford a piece of clarification on these area taxes are they limited to contiguous Parcels or could we sort of say you know the proposed service area is anything Zone commercial within 600 meters of the channel and excluding residential is that sort of definition possible or it's got to be in this you know in this polygon that's where it is

SPEAKER_05
0:47:36 (0:00:24)

they don't have to be contiguous however it has to have an alignment with the a benefit so that's the one critical piece that parcel tax does have to have an alignment now if we get into the Nuance of whether or not some have that benefit and some do not and whether we can pick and choose we'd have to look into that further my guess is probably not but yeah we'd absolutely look into it further

Chris Pettingill
0:48:00 (0:00:03)

thanks mayor Herford

Armand Hurford
0:48:04 (0:01:09)

thank you the image that showed the under sort of underwater Contours that can be can be achieved I think is interesting for portions of the channel but the portion right at the mouth of the of the squamous we know that a lot of materials coming out we know the channel we'd like to maintain how far back can we push to sort of add to the shelf life of this of this project or how current it stands I know that there's been discussion of gravel mining there essentially and thinking that might be an area where there's where the sediment is more recent and potentially less contaminated and how is that considered in has that been or how has that been considered so far and my other question was around frequency to keep the status of Maintenance but I think that's been answered but how far back do you push to allow it to come in so that we're we get our frequencies right and we don't have a discomfort with a exceedingly narrower Channel until we do the work again just

SPEAKER_06
0:49:13 (0:01:43)

I'll make a couple comments and then invite Nathan and Danielle to jump in as well in terms of the area if you think about the navigation channel the defined navigational Channel area in that area it's pretty much 30 meters across as you go down the tra channel from north to south but in that area it bumps out a little bit more it's wider but in terms of the dredge area it's highlight The Dredge works and the debt the design depths are within that area of travel that navigation Channel and then you get into the water Lots on the edges where there's activity and uses and leases and things like that so um just south of stuwamis on that side you've got the site B and the on water log storage activity Etc that exists there and then just beyond that you also have kind of the outflow of the river which is essentially a small Estuary and so um I think it's it will continue to be a very delicate Balancing Act in terms of how can we serve or like create accessibility and safety for the navigation area without sort of like and there is a little bit of overdrudge which is a technical term that I learned through this process that Daniel can speak to but I think just on the edges it's definitely about that Balancing Act in terms of those the Estuary habitat in that area Beyond and again that's Reserve area as well and there is concern about continued erosion and then impacts to the Estuary as well I'll just turn to Daniel if you want to add anything about the actual dredge area and the over dredge in the sides how that works

SPEAKER_01
0:50:57 (0:00:36)

I guess a lot of it is benefit for cost because in many cases doing detailed modeling would cost over two hundred thousand dollars and we're only talking about 650 000 for the Stop cap so it's a case of you know how much how much modeling do you want to do to assess what's the exact right amount whereas we have we have a good feel for if we dredge this area it's going to clear it out and at low tide the current is going to move quicker through there and it's going to actually kind of keep it clear over time

Armand Hurford
0:51:33 (0:00:33)

starting to follow up so if the channel we just use 30 meters as an example then um and then the taper happens from there so we'll go out at whatever that slope is essentially what we end up with and then the sediment will come in over time or hopefully not with the higher Pace but that's the understanding so we can't we're not going 30 meters plus 30 meters in a slope just to buy us some space that's not viable with the environmental concerns and just how this all works is that

SPEAKER_01
0:52:07 (0:00:23)

I mean they're actually I mean we have the expert right here there actually is a narrow channel that is staying open right now and a lot of times it's not possible because there's log booms or something that'll float in it over top of the one little area that's open right now so by just spreading that out a little bit wider it would have a lot of benefit to the users

Chris Pettingill
0:52:30 (0:00:24)

so I have two more questions and we are aiming to be done this discussion by three I think we're going to go a little bit long but maybe we'll after the two questions go around clockwise and I'm just wondering unless someone asked for a different slide Mrs mcjan if you can put the principles up because that's one of the things you're looking for commentary on and in the meantime I will go to counselor Hamilton

Andrew Hamilton
0:52:55 (0:00:06)

thanks very much through the chair do we have any local service area taxation agreements in

SPEAKER_05
0:53:01 (0:00:08)

Squamish and we just have the downtown Bia currently

Andrew Hamilton
0:53:10 (0:00:39)

and second question user fees and charges clearly boat owners are very interested in having the Channel dredged people who don't own boats or don't use boats are not as interested what is this sort about but obviously there are side benefits of having a boating community sort of the trying to get a grasp of the order of magnitude of user fees that would need to be applied are we talking about a thousand dollars to put your boat in the water or are we talking about 10 bucks to put your boat in the water

SPEAKER_06
0:53:49 (0:00:58)

through the chair that's a great question we don't have a sense of what the magnitude of user fees would be we have spoken to um Steveston Harbor Authority where they do levia user fee and that goes to a reserve for maintenance dredging and I believe it's about two to three percent of their like mortgage fees essentially it's levied if I'm not mistaken but in terms of their dredging program I think they're only um building up a reserve of you know like a hundred thousand dollars if that like it's it takes a long time to build up a major reserve and I just don't have the user fee pieces is probably a small portion of the total cost and the ability to generate Revenue I guess I've Got The Guiding principles back if there was a question about those or you wanted to see

Chris Pettingill
0:54:47 (0:00:03)

thanks I'll go to counselor French thanks

John French
0:54:51 (0:00:28)

chair I have a memory it's not a reliable one of um the developers of the oceanfront lands Matthews West possibly planning to do some dredging or maybe being obligated to do some dredging as part of their work how reliable is my memory on that

SPEAKER_06
0:55:19 (0:01:07)

thank you for the question I'm not aware of any obligation around dredging but certainly in terms of the area along the west side of the channel from that image that you could see where you can see the channel elevations it's quite shallow in those areas and so because those are outside of the navigation Channel we didn't include those in these estimates but we do have sort of an estimate of how much like that's a lot of material to dredge out there in some of those water Lots so we would consider that and that's what we call the secondary dredging and there's opportunity that with future dredging Works in some of these side Channel areas and the water Lots in terms of the opportunity to combine works or share like mobilization costs in terms of partnership in future that's something that has been identified as an opportunity both with the industrial and as well as the Marine commercial uses that we will see in the future foreign

John French
0:56:26 (0:00:08)

okay so is Staff aware of plans by Matthews West to do some dredging at some point in the future

SPEAKER_06
0:56:34 (0:00:06)

we're not aware of any current plans or in the in the near future around dredging no

Chris Pettingill
0:56:41 (0:00:05)

matter Fred I saw a hand you're cutting into councilor Anderson's comment time so bye

Armand Hurford
0:56:47 (0:00:41)

I'll be I'll be brief I think so the more fulsome option that we have is that what we'd pursue from a permitting perspective so that maintenance can serve slowly over time chip away at that to avoid needing to do a capital dredge program or application for the pieces that we don't capture at this point so we're ready to do that work or how has that been approached or how can we consider that so that we position ourselves strategically to achieve all those goals in the in the long term

SPEAKER_01
0:57:28 (0:00:26)

the um The Regulators only care about area they don't care about depth so yes it probably would make sense to do a larger area for permitting approval provided that you're not triggering a higher level of regulatory review by increasing the area you have to find that balance of what is the right area to go with permittings

Armand Hurford
0:57:54 (0:00:02)

thank you that helps

Chris Pettingill
0:57:56 (0:00:10)

yeah we'll go around if we can try and keep our comments to three minutes each and if council's amenable and we need to come around again then maybe we can but if we can stay focused that'd be great so I'll start with you Council Anderson

Eric Andersen
0:58:07 (0:03:07)

thank you thank you chair I'd like to First address the engagement to activities plan there's in August and early September according to the report is the plan and an online survey for the Marine access review survey I think it was only up for three weeks and I kind of felt that it might have been there might have been benefit to leaving it up a little longer I'm not sure to catch some Target sectors or actors but this isn't not possibly not a great time August early September for Community engagement I'll leave that to staff to consider and it there may be various considerations to make but it's not optimal time it would seem to me site B is of course and that includes the potential future extension to the south of the built up land area is exempt from habitat compensation requirements under the squamous history management plan which I know Miss McKennitt you have had that introduced into the ocp in the review of the OPC ocp included that detail the habitat compensation CC makes a very important consideration if we can identify a strategy for utilizing that perhaps we should give some another look at options d and e and what I have in mind is the upper Malcolm blind Channel and these slews all the way out to the CN rail track over the last couple of days I've been taking pictures of the Buckley Avenue Culvert it's a mess we're weeks away days away from pink salmon coming up there and they won't get through there's a lot of work to be done in the old east branch of the river Wilson Crescent SLU Carson Place Slough upper mapquon blind Channel and no money obvious to deal with it so maybe there's a bigger picture factoring in a habitat compensation opportunity to do some restoration work in those upper waterways the final suggestion I would make the Squamish chamber Commerce delegation to a BC chamber convention five years ago brought dredging to the provincial venue and we tried to get Fraser River to collaborate with us and they wouldn't especially Surrey Board of Trade what we discovered is that the jealously guarded their Turf and they would not be very happy to see Squamish participate in a pitch to The FEDS for money more money for dredging because they want that money to put it crudely so we found in at Kamloops at that convention that Nanaimo stepped forward as being very interested to work with Squamish on advocacy on dredging and so I might suggest maybe it might be of interest to look abroad from the Fraser River to the island perhaps in Nanaimo perhaps couch and bay where Squamish terminals has an affiliate to inquire about their experience and potential better sympathy for Squamish than we found with the big actors on the Fraser River thank you

Chris Pettingill
1:01:15 (0:00:03)

Council Greenlaw

Lauren Greenlaw
1:01:18 (0:00:55)

thanks I just have a couple comments to kind of build on some of the other comments that were made I would be interested in getting an estimate of the volume of users you know that are going through the channel so that we could get a sense of what kind of financing we could reason reasonably ask from users that are currently using it similar to cancer French's comments I thought that there were some dredging requirements from either sea and sky and or Red Bridge and I'm not sure I could be mistaken but it'd be interesting to see if there's any commitments existing there and to councilor Anderson's comment about this not being a great time for public engagement it might be a good time for at least monitoring users to determine how many people are going through because it's you know Peak boating season yeah thanks

Armand Hurford
1:02:13 (0:02:13)

Mayor Ford yes thank you the thank you for all the work I learned Lots through the reading of the documents in our conversation here today I do think that the engagement period is actually could be pretty good for this group this is when folks are out doing their using the channel doing the Boating and that's although it might be maybe they want to be going doing that and not necessarily engaging but at the same time I think it's could be I could see the other option of waiting till winter on engagement to be really challenging to engage that group at that time so I think this is I'm optimistic that will that will work I do think that pursuing the largest practical the largest area that we can from a permitting perspective is could be an important piece strategically to ensure that as maintenance dredging happens over time we can tackle those other those stand other areas or at least a chance to be able to get to get there and I really appreciate the um the highlighting the need for advocacy for funding support on these types of I'm of projects and happy to sort of take that on and the for users as a funding mechanism I think it's I think that's absolutely something that should be explored but I think the I appreciate the even when questioned here today was like well let's have some realistic expectations of what that can be and I think about um user fees and some of our Rec other recreational areas and even the fare box on the bus doesn't necessarily represent the hugest piece of the of the puzzle so I think that I do think that some element of that is totally appropriate but it needs to be needs to be we need to have reasonable expectations but what could be achieved through that mechanism yeah I'll leave it there thank you

John French
1:04:27 (0:01:49)

thanks chair a couple quick thoughts in my past news coverage of any dredging or maintenance activities in the Mac on blind Channel I think that there's one consistent um theme to that and its Partnerships nobody ever gets anything done or rarely gets anything done on their own in the Malcolm blind Channel it takes cooperation and collaboration amongst the many that have a connection to the channel and I've heard a few times the idea of some kind of catchment area to trap sediment coming down the stomach and I think there's some Merit to that anything that is prevented from entering the channel in such a catchment area I think has potential Revenue opportunities the material has value um I'm a supporter of future user fees um whether that be in the form of some kind of feed use future improved boat launch or any other way to collect user fees out of the channel and option C is we've seen it presented in the report I think um lands us exactly where we need to be at this point and I'm seeing that as someone who wishes we could be doing more to remove the organic material out of the upper reaches of the medical blind Channel but I think that is a nice to have and option C really puts us in the need to have

Chris Pettingill
1:06:16 (0:00:03)

councilor Hamilton

Andrew Hamilton
1:06:19 (0:01:29)

thanks very much so first regarding principles I think both staff and the consultant have done an excellent job on defining the objectives the principles and clearly putting forward a comprehensive view of all of the things we need to think about for me what would I like to see in the my man plan blind Channel option e absolutely the core draft guiding principle that in this seat I feel very responsible for and particularly after this morning's meeting is adopting long-term Channel maintenance program that is sustainable practical and financially viable and I think that I hope that when we go to user engagement public engagement we have we spend some time asking public to reflect not just on what they want but on how they would like it to be paid for because whether things come out of General taxation or out of user fees or other mechanisms is a big part of the picture and it's on that Financial viability that right now I would look at supporting option b until I understand a clearer picture on how the more extensive options can be funded thanks

Chris Pettingill
1:07:49 (0:00:01)

counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
1:07:51 (0:02:06)

yeah thank you through the chair just in terms of the points that you're looking for feedback on I think the draft principles are good we've seen these before and I think that they continue to reflect the priorities within which I like to see this work move forward there is one like small Nuance in the last bullet point where it says explore Partnerships and cost sharing opportunities wherever possible and I think that needs to be identify Partnerships and cost sharing opportunities because we're not going to go at this alone and so that goes to my other comment in terms of bringing this forward for further Community engagement and I think it's just really important that we are clear on what those trade-offs are and I know in the staff report it does say that my key Focus will be to collect Community perspectives on funding approaches assessing the value the cost benefits of Channel maintenance um I think I will go out on a limit and say am I very hesitant to put any taxation dollars towards this definitely not on the capital and maybe a small amount on the maintenance when we see the economic development report come forward in 2024 on the Marine sector but to me this is not somewhere where General taxation dollars should be going and so it is a question to the user groups how they want to be funding that whether it's through user fees whether through it's a parcel tax and I will following our comments testimotion on ensuring we have increased advocacy on this matter to Upper levels of government but this is not somewhere where I think we can put our stretched tax dollars at this point so I will make that clear from my perspective early on in this process and there was another line in the report that jumped out at me that there's been increased user increased uses of the manquamly channels particularly through wlng and so that's another one where I think there's an opportunity for more Partners to come to the table in terms of we know there's ongoing discussions there and they're increasing their activities so they should be coming to the table with some dollars to reflect that thank you

Chris Pettingill
1:09:57 (0:03:58)

thanks some of my own thoughts on the on the principles you know I'm happy to see the environmental Focus there to my mind though we need to look Beyond just the environmental impacts in the mamcon blind channel the more we do there it is the access point to the rest of the sound and so the more that can happen there the more that happens in the rest of the sound and so I think we have to be from us really mindful of what we're enabling in the whole sound and for me there are some maybe reasonable or important constraints to keep in the sound or in the channel for that reason somewhere along the same lines I am hesitant to get too excited about disposal at Sea and some of the disposal options for contaminated waste even on land I think I would like us to be mindful of the impacts of that waste and no matter where it goes and not just assume well if you get out of our jurisdiction it's not our problem I think we do need to take responsibility for that waste or assume some level of responsibility and what that looks like exactly I'm not sure what that means but you know I don't want to create a contaminant waste problem for someone else really I think you know and maybe it's a misinterpretation but the sense I get is that so far some of the environmental groups have been a little less involved in some of the engagement and in my mind it might be useful to more proactively engage them now just to because it seems like if you know if we fail to do that and then we get to the last minute and then they sort of all the sprays in their Consciousness it may become a big deal and so people are on board earlier maybe it's a an easier process for everyone and maybe I'm just misunderstanding their level of Engagement so far so I don't want to assume too much there I have a bit of a different perspective on the wood fiber I am hesitant to do anything that facilitates fossil projects in this we're in a climate crisis and so on and so for me yeah that's not a reason why I would like to be putting worker effort or resources to facilitate that sort of development even if it's not in the channel directly costing or sorry the options right now I'm sort of leaning towards C but probably be I guess I have some affinity for C but realistically C and or B and what's I guess what's got me on the fence is one the cost of c and the rest of our pressures but also thinking about what sorts of activities to my earlier comment C versus B enables and you know to the degree we are facilitating you know sailboats and in Environmental Research and low impact tourism and education all those things sorts of like those are really big wins for the community and Community Access but if it's like Mega party yachts and big weight race boats and so on which I don't think is what we're talking about here really but you know that's sort of those sorts of uses actually really shift where my preference goes and so I think you know being thoughtful about those things and then finally the one thing that I think it's worth exploring all the funding options I did wonder you know is it useful for us to make a funding commitment of we will commit to x million or x hundred thousand dollars and we'll just leave it up to the private sector to figure out the rest and when you hit that number then we'll go and so we commit our piece and you know is that a way to move forward and so at least the rest of the folks have a commitment from us and can build around that so that's my comments I'm someone want to make them or actually I should ask so Steph is there Clarity there is there more you would like or

SPEAKER_06
1:13:56 (0:00:48)

thank you so much to all of council for your comments everything was really clear and I just wanted to highlight to one point just for clarification around the environmental folks that have been stewardship groups that have been involved in the project to date so on our working group we do have a Squamish environment society and Squamish River Watershed Society invitation went out to all three including Squamish dream Keepers but we couldn't pull anyone in and there is opportunity to do direct Outreach and like go to a board meeting or go to a session and then send information out so beyond the representative from those groups that have been engaged with us we can definitely do more there other than that you guys can carry on for sure just around the recommendation if you like

Chris Pettingill
1:14:44 (0:00:03)

okay so seeing mayor Herford are you wanting to move

Armand Hurford
1:14:48 (0:00:14)

that yeah thank you I was gonna move to staff recommendation but as at the end where it says at follows I'll say as discussed to capture the comments that we that we made earlier and I'll move both sections of the motion okay

Chris Pettingill
1:15:03 (0:00:07)

councilor star and I see a second or okay councilor Anderson second okay we'll speak once

Armand Hurford
1:15:10 (0:01:03)

briefly if I could yeah I won't go through go through my comments again but as the conversation went around in that last round of comments I'm thinking about public engagement and the need to understand our the context of this work and the broader work that we're doing we during the time of Engagement is also time to we'll be looking to engage on budget and I think some coordination there will be important to build to build that context as nothing we do happens in a in a silo and I think there's an opportunity there when we're engaging the public as I'm sure you've found my experiences has been that you go on one engagement Mission and the conversation tends to wander to the other areas of Interest I think there's it's important that we tie the but the our budget process in there and um as well to help with that context and trade-off building but I'm happy to see this and I'm curious to see what the broader Community has to say about this work going forward so thank you

Eric Andersen
1:16:14 (0:00:48)

Council Anderson I think one of the more valuable aspects of the report for us is the description of the collaboration example in the fridge river between federal agencies Port Metro Vancouver Fraser I they always change their name don't they every decade and Delta enrichment for us as elected counselors I think we should be keeping an ongoing active lookout for advocacy opportunities especially vis-a-vis the federal government and when we have this Marine impact study that might be completed over the next year this will give us more information and also give us more clarity as to what's at stake not only today but in the future so that's a separate assignment for us in addition to what staff are doing and pointing out this very valuable collaboration example from the river thank you

John French
1:17:02 (0:00:55)

Council French thanks chair it just speaking in support of the motion this particular issue gets a lot of talk a lot a lot a lot of talk and not a lot of action and when action was taking place it was primarily courtesy of interfor and the various Sawmill operators before them and the chemical plant operators which really focused early dredging efforts on the southern end of the channel and we all know all of those industry operators have been gone for a long time so it's great that we're putting more talk at this thing and where I see this talk actually taking us though is some action hopefully in the near future

Chris Pettingill
1:17:58 (0:00:52)

thanks just adding my own comments and taking the opportunity to finish off a point I forgot for me putting some tax dollars towards ongoing funding isn't necessarily out of the question I think the split there is you know like other Recreation how accessible is it to the broad Community as opposed to a very small subset and so putting in that sort of perspective of the other things in terms of recreation and outdoor access and all that um finding some balance there makes it a little more palatable to put tax dollars towards it and so that maybe also speaks to what sorts of uses are we trying to facilitate with how we go forward but with that I will call the question all those in favor and you want to post motion carries unanimously and counselor stoner

Jenna Stoner
1:18:51 (0:00:15)

thank you I'd also like to propose the following motion that the mayor write a letter to MP Weiler DFO Transport Canada and the BC Ministry of waterlands and resource stewardship on the challenges of local dredging and the need for dedicated funding for secondary Channel maintenance but seconded I'll speak to it

Chris Pettingill
1:19:07 (0:00:04)

great mayor Hereford I'm seeing a second please go ahead councilor Stone

Jenna Stoner
1:19:11 (0:00:44)

yeah thanks I want to thank staff for preempting my question about how we actually Advance advocacy on this file given my earlier comments that I really don't think that this is something that Municipal governments should actually be dealing with Our Best Way Forward is to take on our advocacy hats and move this forward and I think thanks to your recommendations focusing that with our MP and the federal government is a good starting point I've also added the BC Ministry of for no longer Forest lands naturally says walrus water lands resource stewardship because they currently have an intentions paper out on a Coastal Marine strategy for BC and so I think that there is potentially some synergies there with Minister Cullen and yeah look forward to supporting the mayor with any of that if need be

Armand Hurford
1:19:55 (0:00:26)

thanks I'm just happy to take to take this on earlier in my comments I I've spoke to appreciating staff and highlighting this Gap and I'm absolutely happy to take up take up the torch on that and see what we can what we can accomplish and what Partnerships we can we can realize through this work so happy to do that thank you

Chris Pettingill
1:20:22 (0:00:00)

and councilor

Eric Andersen
1:20:22 (0:00:48)

Anderson did I see a hand go ahead yes so speaking in support of the motion and I do welcome the inclusion of counselor stoner's inclusion of the province for the reason that its provincial 10 years water lots that are involved here and back when the Squamish nation was trying to address Estuary a strong ance Estuary issues a few years ago they were told by multiple levels of Flynn Roar that it would take over well over a year to get a permitting application process going so it's in the Coastal Marine strategy unfortunately has very little to say about things like navigation channels it's on other themes but the fact of their of their tenures and their permitting process very relevant to us is very important thank you

Chris Pettingill
1:21:11 (0:00:39)

okay not seeing any other hands so with that I'll call a question all those in favor anyone opposed motion carries unanimously thank you so do we need a couple minutes to oh no I see Mr brag is here so just give people 30 seconds to exit okay so it looks like we're ready to go to Mr Bragg for the public works facility update men memo

Public Works Facility Update Memo K. Bragg, Director of Facilities Planning and Construction Staff Recommendation: THAT Council receive the July 25, 2023 Public Works Facility Update Memo for informat...
1:21:42 (0:25:58)

In the District of Squamish council meeting, Cal Bragg, the director of facilities planning and construction, presented an update on the Public Works facility project. The project, which is one of three priority projects identified in the real estate facilities master plan, is currently moving at a fast pace. The Public Works facility is considered a critical project as it provides essential services to the community. The design for the project started in 2021, but due to COVID-19, there have been significant increases in construction and overall project costs. The project's budget currently stands at $37 million, which was approved in the first quarter of this year.

Bragg explained that the project team is working to reduce costs through a value engineering process, which involves examining the square footage and design to identify areas where costs can be reduced. The team is also considering raising the entire site above the flood construction level. The current focus is to bring the budget down below $37 million. The project is currently paused to allow for design review. Bragg also noted that construction costs have stabilized, although there is still some escalation.

The Public Works facility project comprises four areas: office space, supporting infrastructure (including change rooms, washrooms, dry rooms, and staff areas), the maintenance base, and the yard space. The project team is currently redesigning the building with a focus on retaining function while reducing costs. This is being achieved by reducing office square footage, changing exterior finishes, creating a prefabricated frame, reducing sustainability levels, and not building the future expansion now but allowing for it as an option in the future. The maintenance bays and supporting infrastructure remain similar to the initial design. The project team is working towards a new target cost estimate of $32 million, a reduction from $37 million.

Bragg also mentioned that the staff had looked at alternative sites for the project, but concluded that there was not much district land available to suit the size and location required. Purchasing new land would cost the district around $6 million. The next steps for the project include completing the current plan update, reviewing the unknowns to meet the floodplain management bylaw, issuing a tender plan set by the end of the year, and starting construction in the first quarter of next year.

SPEAKER_09
1:21:51 (0:00:25)

good afternoon mayor and Council can you hear me perfect I'll share my screen one moment here all right is that working okay one second

Chris Pettingill
1:22:17 (0:00:01)

that's got it

SPEAKER_09
1:22:19 (0:06:33)

perfect thank you for your time this afternoon my name is Cal Bragg I'm the director of facilities planning and construction this is a memo to Council on the Public Works facility project and it's an overview update