Landslide/Flood Hazard Areas B & C October 13, 2016 Page 2 of 3

Transcription

1

2 Landslide/Flood Hazard Areas B & C October 13, 2016 Page 2 of 3 explained that she has shared this study with Island Timberlands, Western Forest Products and BC Timber Sales and made it clear that their upland land uses could impact lower properties and this is a concern to the Regional District and local property owners. What was the response of the timber companies? L. Roddan said that BC Timber Sales have said that they would be considering the information as well in their harvest planning. Would the companies be able to log anyway? L. Roddan explained that the Regional District has no authority over Private Forest Land or Crown Land. There are provincial legislation and regulations they must follow. I understand that Island Timberlands has plans to log above Roberts Road. In your study the area they re going to log is right in the middle of a proposed DPA. Unless your report can be applied to their actions, it s useless. J. Pellett indicated that they have their own regulations and legislation that they must follow. First, I want to thank you for bringing us into the 21 st Century. However, I found the report weak on hydrology. The roads, ditches and culverts are the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. That hasn t been properly addressed. Drainage issues are the elephant in the room. J. Pellett replied that one of the recommendations from the report was to develop a plan around stormwater management. What is the responsibility of the Regional District regarding the recommendations from the plan? Most of us are concerned about water. L. Roddan indicated that the report recommended that a stormwater management plan be developed. Requests had been put forward to Todd Stone, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure that this be addressed, and correspondence has been received indicating interest in working collaboratively on this subject. She also put forward that she was in Ottawa in the spring for a conference, and brought away that the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure is actually cutting edge on climate change adaptation planning issues compared to the rest of the country. It s really important that the public knows what comes out of that meeting. There should be work done with the Ministry to show what the landowners have already done. It has to be more of a coordinated effort in regards to communication. Do they ever commit to action? L. Roddan noted that everyone has a role to play in the drainage issue, but that isn t the main focus of tonight s meeting. Wrong. That s what we re all here for. I have a written contract with the Ministry to keep my culvert clear and it s still a struggle to get it done. Which of the options has support? What has been the results in other areas who have expanded DPAs? L. Roddan replied that it was difficult to answer because DPAs are new in this Regional District and we don t issue building permits or do inspections so we have not been able to track results on the ground. Neighbouring jurisdictions such as Sunshine Coast Regional District, Comox alley Regional District and Regional District of Nanaimo all have DPAs and zooming and building regulations.

3 Landslide/Flood Hazard Areas B & C October 13, 2016 Page 3 of 3 Will it do any good? L. Roddan answered that it is raising awareness. It is good to talk about the risk and it will inspire people to act. Island Timberlands can still do whatever they want and it s a waste of time. Island Timberlands just logged a high risk area and they have flagged another. This negates the whole process. L. Roddan replied that there is not just one tool that will solve the whole problem. This is just one. The commitment for the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to do a study on drainage is important. The need to collaborate with forest licensees and private managed forest land owners is also important. The onus is on the land owner. Are there any preventative measures? R. Brewer, City Council and Ministry of Forests, Lands & Natural Resource Operations, replied that local government have no jurisdiction over Private Managed Forest Lands. He encourages people to get their local government to advocate for them. Is there anything we can do to keep them from logging now? R. Brewer encouraged people to go to the Managed Forest Council website and check the legislation. He would be happy to talk with anyone after that point. How many people own buildings on properties already? L. Roddan explained that even if you own a home already, there are other improvements you might want to make that would require application for a Development Permit and a geotechnical assessment, such as trails to the waterfront or a boat house above the beach, or a retaining wall for erosion control. Not sure I want this regulation. J. Dykstra answered that when we talk about development, it involves everything including removing trees and vegetation, retaining walls, etc. Any of these could increase vulnerability to erosion on sloped properties. 5. BREAK OUT EXERCISE J. Dykstra presented the interactive storyboards posted for people to read and comment on. She encouraged people to read the information and to rate their support for the various options by placing a dot on the poster and placing comments on posters for new ideas. 6. WRAP UP L. Roddan closed the meeting by stating she hoped that the information shared this evening would provide increased understanding of options for protecting development from hazardous conditions and also some of the collaborative work that is starting to move forward with different levels of government and stakeholders. This is important work to enhance resilience in natural hazard areas such as on slopes and in flood areas. The meeting concluded at 8:28 p.m.

4 Powell River Regional District Landslide and Fluvial Hazards Study Electoral Areas B and C October 13, 2016 Jason Pellett, M.Eng., P.Eng./P.Geo. Tetra Tech EBA, ancouver, BC

5 Outline Study Background Study Objectives Landslide Hazard Assessment Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Q & A

6 Study Background December 2014 Storm Week of December 8, 2014 Over 200 mm of rainfall between Dec. 5 and 12 Normal rainfall for the entire month of December is 140 mm! Areas Impacted: 2977 / 2981 Stevenson Road Highway 101 near Deighton Creek 9441 / 9449 Stittle Road Pine Tree Road (ROW) 9661 Random Road ictory Road (ROW) Stittle Road (photo c/o PRRD) Random Road (photo c/o PRRD)

7 Study Objectives Identify areas within the coastal portion of Electoral Areas B and C which may be vulnerable to landslide hazards and/or fluvial (creek) hazards Assess the adequacy of existing Development Permit Areas (DPAs) and the potential need to integrate these hazard areas into new DPAs

8 Landslide Hazard Assessment Steps Involved: 1. Desktop Study 2. Site Reconnaissance Fieldwork 3. Geotechnical Analysis 4. Create Maps of Landslide Hazard Areas

9 Slope Development Policies in Nearby Jurisdictions Study Area SCRD: Broad DPA Criteria; varies by Electoral Area Comox alley Regional District: Slopes 30% or greater; minimum 3 m high; plus additional 7.5 m buffer Regional District of Nanaimo: Broad DPA Criteria; Slopes 30% or greater City of Nanaimo: Slopes 20% or greater for minimum horizontal distance of 10 m

10 Site Reconnaissance Fieldwork June 3 to 5, 2015 (three days) Landslide Hazard Assessment Foot traverses at various stopping points isual assessment of general topography, slope gradients, landforms, soil and bedrock exposures, drainage and vegetation Discussions with local residents

11 Landslide Hazard Assessment Slope Creep Brochure published by District of North ancouver (

12 Site Reconnaissance Fieldwork Landslide Hazard Assessment Debris (Soil) Slides and Slumps Stevenson Road Fleury Road Stittle Road

13 Site Reconnaissance Fieldwork Landslide Hazard Assessment Bent or Tilted Trees (Slope Creep) Myrtle Creek McCausland Road

14 Site Reconnaissance Fieldwork Landslide Hazard Assessment Rock Falls / Rock Slides Frolander Bay Area Highway 101 near Malaspina iewpoint

15 Landslide Hazard Assessment Landslide Hazard Areas Slopes 35% and at least 3 m high Recommended additional buffer (setback)

16 Landslide Hazard Assessment Landslide Hazard Areas Electoral Area B

17 Landslide Hazard Assessment Landslide Hazard Areas Electoral Area C

18 Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Steps Involved: 1. Process Mapping 2. Regional Hydrological Analysis 3. Flood Inundation Modelling (200-year event) 4. Create Maps of Fluvial Hazard Areas

19 Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Process Mapping Watershed Drainage Area (km 2 ) Melton Ratio (R) Fluvial Hazard(s) Bishop Creek Floods, Debris Floods Dei ghton Creek Fl oods Jefferd Creek Fl oods Kelly Creek Floods La ng Creek Fl oods Lois River Myrtle Creek 17 Not Analyzed (Dam Controlled) 0.1 Fl oods Park Creek Floods, Debris Floods Whittall Creek Floods Unnamed Creek Floods, Debris Floods Unnamed Creek Floods, Debris Floods Melton Ratio: [Max Elevation Min. Elevation] [ Area] Coastal BC: 0.0 to 0.3 = Floods 0.3 to 0.6 = Debris Floods

20 Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Debris Floods Examples Canmore, Alberta (2013) Britannia Creek, BC (1991)

21 Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Fluvial Hazard Areas (200-year event)

22 Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Fluvial Hazard Areas (200-year event) Electoral Area B Flood Flood Floods Floods and Debris Floods

23 Fluvial (Creek) Hazard Assessment Fluvial Hazard Areas (200-year event) Electoral Area C Flood Flood Debris Flood Debris Flood Debris Flood Flood Floods Flood Floods and Debris Floods

24 Thank You!

25 ndon t e e p o C \ \ under nt vendon oint \ Hazard Areas Community Meeting Area B & C OPTIONS FOR MOING FORWARD... OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN STATUS QUO OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ZONING BYLAW BUILDING BYLAW Maintain OCP and existing Natural Hazard DPAs. Promote awareness of appropriate and sustainable development. Promote compliance with existing Natural Hazard DPAs to protect development from hazardous conditions and requirenan geotechnical assessments prior to all new development. Promote findings from 2015 Landslide and Fluvial Hazards Study and encourage geotechnical assessments to inform future development within landslide and fluvial hazard areas. Dependent on voluntary compliance. Lack of clarity and transparency, existing DPAs do not align with findings from 2015 Hazards Study. Inconsistent policy framework for natural hazard areas. Covered under existing Planning Service. Amend OCP to expand Natural Hazard DPAs to include all landslide and fluvial hazard areas identified in the 2015 Study. Promote awareness of appropriate and sustainable development. Promote compliance with expanded Natural Hazard DPAs to protect development from hazardous. conditions and require geotechnical assessments prior to all new development. Dependent on voluntary compliance. Improved clarity and transparency, DPAs align with Hazards Study. Consistent policy framework for natural hazard areas. Covered under existing Planning Service. Consult with the community to develop a new local bylaw to zone and regulate land use. Regulate appropriate and sustainable development. Strengthen OCP and support Natural Hazard DPAs. Ensure that new development occurs in areas not subject to hazardous conditions. Promote compliance with land use zoning regulations. Ability to enforce land use zoning regulations. Would require increase in capacity for bylaw enforcement. Would require increase in taxation to cover increased costs to Planning Service. Consult with the community to develop a new local bylaw to support the BC Building Code (BCBC).* Regulate appropriate and sustainable development. Ensure that new development meets minimum standards for building and development. Promote basic health and safety. Would require increase in capacity for building inspection and bylaw enforcement. Would require increase in taxation to cover increased costs to Planning and Development Service. * The BCBC is regulated by the Province and homeowners are protected by the Homeowner Protection Office if they comply with BCBC. DPAs = Development Permit Areas OCP = Official Community Plan SOFT Hwy 10 J e r d v i Legend Development Permit Areas DPA I - Riparian Areas [30 metre buffer on rivers (TRIM) and wetlands (SEI)] DPA II - Hazard Areas [Steep Slopes] Map created by the Powell RiverRegional District Data Sources: TRIM Rivers Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory (SEI) Southern Regional District OCP (1989) Schedule C Existing Area C Development Permit Areas (OCP Bylaw) J r H a P a v i Legend Existing DPA Electoral Areas B & C r II [Slope Hazard Area] Slope Hazard Study Area Boundary Proposed DPA Proposed DPA II [Slope Hazard Area] II [Flood Hazard Area] Off icial Community Plan Boundary Foreshore Map created by the Powell River Regional District Data Sources: TRIM Rivers Landslide & Fluvial Hazards Study Proposed Area C Development Permit Areas (OCP Bylaw) LEEL OF REGULATION Zoning Bylaw Setback Requirements (P/L) Street Building Bylaw Regulations (P/L) Lane Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Garage Property Line (P/L) HARD Hazard Area B & C Community Meeting October 13, 2016