Environment & Sustainability Experts Panel Minutes

Friday, April 16, 2021

1:30 P.m. - 3:00 P.m.

Virtual

Present:

• Kieran Hanley, MBA - Sustainable Economic Growth, Chair
• Joel Finnis, PhD - Climate Science & Resilience
• Krista Langthorne, BA, SEBT - Resilience & Natural Resources
• Joseph Daraio, PhD, PEng - Sustainable Urban Planning & Resilience
• Michel Wawrzkow, PEng, PGeo - Natural Environment & Resilience
• Brian Head, Manager - Parks & Open Spaces
• Edmundo Fausto, Sustainability Coordinator
• Karen Chafe
• Jennifer Squires, Legislative Assistant

Regrets:

• Dennis Knight, MSc, MCIP - Sustainable Urban Planning & Economic Growth
• Pablo Navarro - Socio-cultural & Quality of Life

​​

---

1.

CALL TO ORDER

2.

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

2.1

Agenda of April 16, 2021

• Moved By Kieran Hanley
  Seconded By Krista Langthorne

  That the agenda be adopted as presented

  MOTION CARRIED

3.

ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

3.1

Minutes of February 26, 2021

• Moved By Michel Wawrzkow
  Seconded By Kieran Hanley

  That the minutes be adopted as presented

  MOTION CARRIED

4.

DELEGATIONS

4.1

NAACAP-DFO Presentation on Littatrap pilot project in downtown St. John’s

Emily Cumming, Project Coordinator, NAACAP gave a presentation on the Littatrap Pilot Project in downtown St. John's. The Littatrap is a catch basin basket used to divert waste from storm drain systems. There are currently 38 traps located in the downtown area and removable baskets will be deployed to these traps in the upcoming months. NAACAP will collect and sort through the debris to conduct audits of the waste and collect data. The audits would take place every 4-6 weeks and the information will be collected on a data sheet provided by Littatrap. The pilot project will be active in the upcoming months and would continue until December 2021. Further information about Littatrap can be found on the Enviropod website. The Panel invited the team to return in the future when the project was concluded to share their results.

5.

BUSINESS ARISING

5.1

Driveways in Floodplains (Referred for comment from April 5, 2021 Regular Meeting of Council)

• Decision Note referred by Council to the ESEP for comment on this proposed amendment.

The City has received an application to develop a Single Detached Dwelling at 42-44 Fourth Pond Road. The property contains a house and would be subdivided to create a second lot for the new house. Much of the new lot is in the floodplain and the floodplain buffer of Fourth Pond. While the new house would be located outside the floodplain and buffer, the driveway would have to cross the floodplain and floodplain buffer to reach the new house.

It was asked that Council consider an amendment to the St. John’s Development Regulations that would allow the development of driveways in a floodplain under certain conditions, where the grade of the land would not be changed. Ken O'Brien, Municipal Planner is bringing this forward to the ESEP for comment. It was noted that the City is not trying to encourage driveways or development in floodplains but trying to accommodate a particular applicant. After some discussion the Panel agreed that the amendment could be allowed as long as a discretionary aspect was included. The Chair and Sustainability Coordinator will prepare a statement for the Panel to review before sending to City staff. 

5.2

185 Waterford Bridge Road Development Application with Sump to in Floodplain

• Development application includes a sump that would be in the floodplain, brought to ESEP for comment on this aspect of the application.

The Municipal Planner presented an application for a new home at 185 Waterford Bridge Road. The developer would like to install a weeping tile with a connection in the floodplain buffer. All developments located in a flood zone are referred to the ESEP for comment. The Panel voted to approve the plan as suggested.

5.3

Drive-through Regulation Draft Information Note Requested by Council

• Information Note being drafted by staff for City Council. Draft brought to ESEP for comment and suggestions in additional information that may be necessary.

An Information Note is being prepared for Council concerning drive-through regulations. Staff brought a draft of the Note to the Panel for commentary. During the discussion the following points were raised:

• There are many factors to consider when implementing these regulations, including the Healthy Cities initiative, green house gasses, lifestyle factors, mobility issues, etc. These pros and cons will inform the next steps the City takes concerning drive-thru regulations
• Electric Vehicles - would charging stations in drive-throughs be a possibility to offset emissions?
• Drive-throughs are a multi-pronged issue and implicit major cause of the current climate crisis. People are addicted to convenience and drive-throughs are a symptom of that. Regulations may give an underlying message of giving up conveniences and consumerist patterns.
• Drive-throughs are linked to transportation. St. John's is a city of cars, until that changes drive-throughs are going to be an attractive option. This may relate to the current limitations of Public Transportation.
• Pedestrian friendly areas may be a solution.

The Panel was given one week to further review the proposed regulations and provide feedback.

5.4

Draft St. John’s Corporate Energy and GHG Reduction Framework

• Draft Brought to ESEP for comment.

The Sustainability Coordinator presented an overview of the St. John's Corporate Energy and GHG Reduction Framework for comment with the intention to bring the information to Council before the Summer. This document outlines how the City can reduce corporate GHG emissions to help meet proposed reduction targets. It is important to note that the City plays two roles when it comes to emissions, a corporate role and a community role. These roles, although separate, are intrinsically linked. A reduction in community emissions may mean an increase in corporate emissions but would ideally reduce emissions overall. The Corporate aspects must be in place before looking at the Community aspects. When asked for comments and questions the following were provided:

• Why do the targets seem out of line with other standards? There needs to be a balance between reducing emissions and maintaining a level of service, and the municipal forecast must be considered as well. Goals need to be achievable and tied to reality. The current goals of 50% by 2030 and Net Zero by 2050 are in line with Fair Share. The Science Based Targets website is a good reference for the targets used in the Plan.
• The City of St. John's has a role to play and should try to set the example to others when it comes to environment and sustainability initiatives. For example, when the City uses electric vehicles it should be made clear that they are electric to show that there are vehicles on the road that are not run by fossil fuels. The City needs to give strong messaging when these positive changes are made.
• There is an opportunity to merge Arts & Culture with Environment & Sustainability. This could help to increase awareness around sustainability initiatives.  

The Panel was given a deadline of one week to review the document and provide additional feedback. 

6.

NEW BUSINESS

7.

OTHER BUSINESS

8.

DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING

9.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:16 p.m.