Committee of the Whole/Documents/Attachment 7 Application Review: Natural Watercourse and Shoreline Areas Development Permit Area
Appendix
Attachment 7 Application Review: Natural Watercourse and Shoreline Areas Development Permit Area
November 9, 2021Pages 122–1262 sections
A formal evaluation document reviewing the development application against the Town's General and Specific Ocean Shoreline guidelines.
October 16, 2021Jeff Chow, Senior Planner
Application Review: Natural Watercourse and Shoreline Areas Development Permit Area
| Application Number: | 3060-20-2021/16 | |
| Address and Legal Description | 1 Midwood Road | Lot A, Section 29, Esquimalt District, Plan 41166 |
| Reviewer: | Jeff Chow, Senior Planner | Date: October 16, 2021 |
| Plans |
GUIDELINES – GENERAL
| Guideline | Proposal |
|---|---|
| i. Development in freshwater riparian areas – e.g. adjacent to streams, lakes, wetlands and other freshwater watercourses – must comply with the requirements of the Riparian Area Regulations. | Not applicable |
| ii. Development of riparian and shoreline areas should be limited and not negatively impact the ecological health of the immediate area or impede public access. | Development with the DPA is limited to two small lawn areas of 95m2 on each proposed lot, with a storm drain crossing the lots to Midwood Road. They would not affect the ecological health of the immediate area and would not impede public access. |
| iii. Retention of existing healthy riparian and shoreline vegetation should be maximized with any paths, structures or other constructed areas sited to minimize impact on trees and sensitive areas. | Not applicable. The development permit area is heavily disturbed with lawn and non-native vegetation. |
| iv. Restoration of riparian and shoreline vegetation and habitat, including removal of invasive species, is encouraged for all properties within this Development Permit Area. Development should result in a net increase in native vegetation in almost all circumstances including trees, shrubs and grasses. | Extensive restoration of shoreline vegetation is proposed. |
| v. For shoreline areas heavily impacted by previous development, target the restoration of ecologically appropriate vegetation for an average 15m wide (minimum 5 m) shoreline zone over 50% of the shore length. | Over 50% of the area within the development permit would be restore with ecologically appropriate vegetation. |
| vi. Riparian and shoreline area development should sensitively manage storm water, focusing on infiltration and release of storm water in ways and quantities that mimics natural patterns, avoids scouring and erosion and results in storm water free from pollutants. | Stormwater will flow into existing municipal storm system |
| vii. Shoreline protection measures should be limited to those necessary to prevent damage to existing structures or established uses on adjacent upland. | Geotech report indicates this is a low energy environment |
viii. In the design of new developments or re-development, the use of soft engineered and innovative alternatives to stabilizing shorelines and preventing erosion, such as bioengineering rather than traditional hard engineered measures should be used. In general, the harder the construction measure, the greater the impact on shoreline process, including sediment transport, geomorphology and biological functions. Hard" measures refer to those with solid, hard surfaces, such as concrete bulkheads, while "soft" structural measures rely on less rigid materials, such as biotechnical vegetation measures or beach enhancement. There is a range of measures varying from soft to hard that include:
|
Existing riprap along the shore with an existing mortared rock wall upland is inhibiting erosion |
| v. Where hard measures can conclusively be shown to be the only means of effectively preventing erosion, they should be designed in consultation with a registered professional biologist, qualified environmental professionals and professional engineers, as appropriate. | Existing riprap along the shorew with an existing mortared rock wall upland is inhibiting erosion |
| vi. The preservation and enhancement of native trees and shrub clusters that overhang the waters edge is strongly encouraged as these provide shade, protection and feeding habitat for fish and wildlife. | Not applicable, however the landscape restoration would enhance habitat. |
| vii. Any new public pathways or public access should be designed and constructed in consultation with a registered professional biologist or qualified environmental professional, as appropriate, and the Town of View Royal Parks Department. | Not applicable. |
GUIDELINES - SPECIFIC OCEAN SHORELINE TYPES
Marsh Shores include both mudflat and delta areas, and are generally highly sensitive and productive natural areas. The intertidal (foreshore) zone in this area is typically dynamic, changing in response to large stream flows and storm events. Though dynamic, the shore zone in these areas is generally accreting rather than eroding. It is important to allow sufficient space to allow these natural sediment processes to occur. With this type of shoreline, the following guidelines apply:
| Guideline | Proposal |
|---|---|
| i. Provide a property-specific assessment with respect to building setbacks and shore protection designs, as stream sediment processes are important and will vary from site to site. | Existing riprap along the shorew with an existing mortared rock wall upland is inhibiting erosion. |
| ii. Dredging or filling of marsh shore should not be permitted. | No dredging or fllig |
| iii. Use of marsh shore areas should be limited to park or conservation uses that do not require structural intrusions. | Complies |
| iv. Where shore protection measures are necessary, make use of “beach nourishment” designs, which add appropriately sized material to the upper beach, creating a natural beach slope and beach armour. | |
| v. Sea walls and rip rap embankments should not be used to protect these shoreline areas. | Existing rip rap to remain |
GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Page 122–126
| Guideline | Proposal |
|---|---|
| i. Development applications shall include an impact assessment report, following recognized best-management practices, prepared by a registered professional biologist with the following information: | Provided |
| • Detailed identification of all environmentally sensitive areas within the site; | None – see Biologist’s Report |
| • Criteria used to define the boundaries of ESAs; | No rare or uncommon wildlife or plant species were observed on the site. |
| • Inventory of significant fish species, red and blue list species, sensitive ecosystems wildlife trees and related habitat classification within the site; | Provided – see Biologist’s Report |
| • Impact statement describing effects of the proposed development on natural conditions; | Provided – see Biologist’s Report |
| • Recommendations for mitigating habitat degradation, including management of sedimentation and erosion, stabilization and re-vegetation of degraded or impacted areas, identification of areas that should remain free of development or be subject to special conditions, and recommendations as to any rearrangement of proposed development activities on the site that would be beneficial to the protection of ESAs Guidelines for mitigating habitat degradation, including limits of proposed leave strips and buffer zones. | Provided – see Biologist’s Report |
| • Recommended development permit conditions under s. 920(7) [sic] of the Local Government Act, to be considered by the Town in issuing a development permit, including any recommendations regarding the timing and sequence of development activities and the monitoring of those activities by the professional biologist | Provided – see Biologist’s Report |
| ii. Where development is within this Development Permit Area, design details of proposed mitigating measures are to be provided in an environmental management plan prepared by qualified project consultants with the assistance of a registered professional biologist. Minimizing sedimentation and erosion, stabilizing and re-vegetating impacted areas, and monitoring requirements must also be addressed in the management plan. | Provided – see Biologist’s Report |
| iii. Where development is within this Development Permit Area, a storm water management plan must be prepared by a qualified engineer in consultation with a registered professional biologist. | Provided – see Biologist’s Report |
| iv. Where steep or unstable slopes exist or there is risk of flooding, a report from a geotechnical engineer must be provided. | Provided |
| v. Design details for all shoreline works must be submitted by qualified engineer. | Provided – see Biologist’s Report Addressed in subdivision process |
Page 122–126
Extracted from: 2021 11 09 Committee of the Whole Agenda - Agenda - Pdf