Working Paper #2 - Natural Environment

Fulford Village Study Group
Meeting of March 6th, 2008

Additions to: Understanding the Historical Geography

In discussion the following points were raised:

• Although there is provision for a Heritage Commission for Ganges in the 1998 OCP none has been formed to date.
• There is a need for some form of Historic Assets list for the village as a whole.
• There is provision under the Heritage Act to call for a temporary freeze (6 months to a year) on all development permits, while information is gathered in order to consider the implications of a Heritage Designation. James Bay was put forward as a good example of a local community where individual buildings had been designated as Heritage, rather than a whole district.
  

Concerns expressed:

• The need for Fulford to retain ownership of the concept of the “whole village”.
• The Heritage designation, if too particular (specific?) or bureaucratic, might stifle the
  village.
• That any decision re: Heritage should be enabling first and foremost.

Question to be answered:

1. Is there already provision in place to protect items/places of archeological importance
   within the Fulford village area?

Understanding the Natural Environment

General Agreement:

In terms of the environment, anything that affects Fulford should be within the purview
of the Study Group. Of particular concern were the effect of any development in Weston and Stowell Lake areas on the water supply of the village, and the health of Fulford Creek and Harbour. Also, it was recognized that any water supply development must be sustainable and nothave negative impacts on the watersheds.

All of the above underlined the need for baseline ecological studies of the Fulford area
watersheds and harbour before any decisions about further development could sensibly
be made.

The meeting shared the Focus Group’s concern over the problems of waste disposal by
live-aboards in the harbour. [NB: Johan Gerritsen offered to contact a friend who has been working on this problem elsewhere and report back]

Climate Change:
There was general agreement that, with the exception of the area in front of the Fulford
Inn, a worst-case scenario of a 2-metre sea level rise in 100 years would not adversely
affect any part of the Fulford area under discussion.

Water Supply:
John Rowlandson, speaking as Chair of the Fulford Water Board, said that the commitment to a proposed 20 housing units for seniors would leave the present supply in deficit, there being only an additional 10 units currently available. Forty percent of the water supply is currently believed to be lost due to leakage in the old system. In other districts where metering had been put in place consumption had gone down dramatically. Surface systems like Weston Lake are particularly vulnerable to contamination.

Energy:
Given the south facing, steeply sloping nature of Fulford solar potential should be considered.

Topography:
Planning, especially with regard to any proposed density transfers, should take into consideration vegetation and topography of the village. Voiced from the floor that density transfers should not be on the table for Fulford, given information already received. The focus in Fulford should shift to preserving what we have.

Viewscapes:
Voiced from the floor that there was a need to protect not just the view of Fulford Harbour but the also the view out from the village.

Zoning:
The group does not yet have all the information it needs regarding zoning.

Overall conclusion:
Discussion again underlined the need to identify what our natural assets are as a community and accept that they are finite.

Margaret Day, John Moore, Ron Bain
13 March 2008