Land­use Decision Support:
Reducing Risk from Hazards
Creating a guide for considering land-use
options to build disaster resilience
Joseph & Rosalie Segal Room
Simon Fraser University
Harbour Centre Campus
Vancouver, British Columbia
September 17 2010
Centre for Natural Hazards Research
Purpose
At the September 28 2009 Risk
Mitigation Workshop, participants
identified a need for better support
for land-use decision makers.
Following up on this request, this oneday workshop will assess practices in
supporting land-use decisions that
reduce the risk of disaster-related
damage to communities.
(www.sfu.ca/cnhr/workshops.html).
Workshop participants will contribute
to the design of a Land-Use Guide to
building resilient communities and
discuss improvements to existing
guidelines for land zoning and
development that would reduce
injuries, damage and disruption from
disasters.
Participants
Land-use planners, city managers,
critical-infrastructure owners and
managers, insurers, researchers and
practitioners of land-use policy, and
emergency managers.
Outcomes and outputs
reducing the risk of hazards through
land-use decisions. This guide, along
with the record of the workshop
proceedings, discussion and
presentations will be distributed
through the SFU Centre for Natural
Hazard Research (CNHR) website
(www.sfu.ca/cnhr) and other venues.
The workshop will identify and
document best practices to support
land-use decisions that increase
disaster resiliency thereby
strengthening the disaster prevention
network in Canada and creating a
modular workshop template for
communities to develop resilience
through land-use choices.
Workshop findings
Workshop findings will be promoted
with agencies and institutions that
reduce risk from hazards through
research, policy and application. It is
anticipated that these organizations
will host further discussions at the
community level. Those workshops
would provide communities an
opportunity to create their own
guides, thereby increasing the scope
and effectiveness of a land-use guide
for building disaster resilience.
The workshop intends to increase
disaster resilience with a hazards risk
reduction-focused guide for land-use
decision-makers. It is hoped the
promotion and implementation of this
Canadian risk mitigation
guide and its further development
network
will promote risk mitigation and
disaster resilience.
These workshops, and the
communications surrounding them,
are a contribution to building a
Guide to support land-use
multidisciplinary risk mitigation
decisions
network in Canada.
Based on the workshop proceedings,
the organizing committee will
produce a best-practices guide to
2
Workshop process
Workshop follow-up
Introductions to the workshop will set
the stage and guide the day’s
process. Following the opening
remarks and introduction the
workshop will begin with the keynote
address by Ken Topping, Topping
Associates International, “Building
disaster resilience through land-use
choices.”
The knowledge amassed at this
workshop will form the basis for a
guide to support land-use planning
and decisions that will increase
disaster resilience. This guide will be
collated over the course of the
coming year through a process of
further deliberative dialogue with
land-use experts at various
conference venues and an expert
review. We anticipate it will be
published as a first-order guide and
we hope it will initiate and foster a
process of iterative improvements to
the guide.
Following the keynote, the day will
consist of three integrated breakout
sessions and the findings based on
the Simulation Exercise held on
September 13th 2010. The exercise,
conducted at the Justice Institute of
British Columbia Simulation
Laboratory, brought together experts
in the analysis of municipal
development applications and
emergency managers. These experts
analyzed development applications
based on a real situation in Metro
Vancouver, British Columbia. The
process they used was analyzed and
compared to a standard risk
management decision process.
The proceedings from the three
round-table breakout sessions will
document best-practices to build
disaster resilience through land-use
decisions and will be supported by
the findings from the exercise,
municipal land development decision
processes, and the keynote address
on the impact of land-use decisions
on disaster resilience.
Results of the breakout working
tables, plenary reports, the keynote
address and other discussions will be
recorded graphically throughout the
workshop.
In addition to creating the guide
itself, the knowledge gathered at this
meeting will be presented at various
conferences and meetings. The
graphic records, summary of the
presentations, flip charts, and
workshop summary will be published
for viewing and download on the
Centre for Natural Hazards Research
Website.
We anticipate a summary of the
records from the workshop will be
presented at the Canadian Risk and
Hazards Network (CRHNet) Annual
Symposium in Fredericton, New
Brunswick, October 25 – 27, 2010 and
the Emergency Preparedness
Conference in Vancouver, BC,
November 23 – 25, 2009. A workshop
summary will be published in the
CRHNet Newsletter, “HazNet” and
presented to policy analysts in
various government departments.
Combined with various concurrent
initiatives, connections established at
this workshop will be fostered to
maintain a network of natural hazard
mitigation stakeholders.
3
Background and
acknowledgments
and the Integrated Partnership for
Emergency Management.
We are grateful for the generous
contributions of time and materials
This workshop was conceived through made by each of the agencies
the workshop committee as
supporting the organizing committee
supported by the Centre for Natural
members, by various volunteers from
Hazards Research at Simon Fraser
the supporting agencies, and
University. It is funded by the Centre, particularly the participants at the
and Natural Resources Canada, and
workshop and the agencies who
through in-kind contributions of the
supported their participation.
Justice Institute of British Columbia,
Pearces2 Consulting, Public Safety
Canada, District of North Vancouver,
Organizational Committee
John Clague, Simon Fraser University
Bert Struik, Natural Resources Canada
Murray Day, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Larry Pearce, Pearces 2 Consulting
Laurie Pearce, Pearces 2 Consulting
Wayne Hirlehey, Public Safety Canada
Doug Allan, Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management, Metro Vancouver
Cindy Jeromin, Public Safety Canada
4
Schedule
Murray Day, Justice Institute of British Columbia; Workshop Facilitator
07:45
Reception and Continental Breakfast
08:30
Bert Struik for John Clague, Director, Centre for Natural Hazards Research, SFU
Heather Lyle, Director, Integrated Public Safety, Emergency Management British Columbia, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General
Welcoming remarks
08:55
Bert Struik, NRCan, SFU
Introduction
09:05
Ken Topping, California Polytechnic State University, Los Angeles
Resilience building through land­use choices
10:05
Refreshment break
10:30
Laurie Pearce, Pearces2 Consulting, Breakouts and Breakout #1
Breakout #1
Breakout #1 Reports
12:00
Working Lunch, and Breakout #2
Bert Struik
Questions and potential solutions derived from September 13, 2010 risk­based planning land­use decision simulation
Refreshment break and review of graphic records for simulation and workshop breakouts #1 and #2.
Breakout #3
Breakout #3 Reports Bert Struik, Review of Key points
Review of graphic records for simulation and workshop breakout #3
16:45
Murray Day Closing Remarks
5
Breakout structure
The workshop will use three
breakouts to gather ideas and collate
them into a land-use guide structure.
Teams in breakouts I and II will each
consider four themes, and the teams
are assigned by colour code as
marked on your registration badge.
Teams in the first breakout will
consider the themes discipline
centric, and in the second breakout
multidisciplinary. The third breakout
mixes the multidisciplinary teams
and has them consider how to
implement the best practices
identified during the previous
sessions, and how to present that
implementation as a guide.
Themes for breakouts I and
II
The following breakout themes of
disaster reduction through land-use
will be considered and will assist in
shaping breakout discussions.
1. Knowledge:
How does a community access
existing knowledge and create new
knowledge needed to establish
hazard and their potential risk, and
to make decision to mitigate and
cope with that risk?
For instance how should
communities:
1. Identify necessary information
about the hazard potential, and
the impact of those hazards
could have upon the community
lives and infrastructure?
2. Acquire the necessary
knowledge mitigation and
coping strategies, their social,
environmental and economic
constraints?
3. Utilize an information
management structure to
facilitate hazard risk analysis?
4. Circulate and understand riskbased knowledge?
5. Enable key decision makers to
understand, interpret and
implement disaster resilient
land-use options?
2. Defining risk
How does a community establish its
risk and risk tolerance?
For instance how should
communities:
1. Implement a practical process
that will best define the risk and
future risk of hazards to lives
and infrastructure.
2. Identify the tools they need?
3. Establish its risk tolerance level?
4. Disseminate information to
citizens to create an
understanding of community
risk tolerance and implement it
at the personal level?
3. Governance
What governance structure
effectively supports land-use zoning
decisions that minimize the number
and severity of disasters?For
instance how should communities:
1. Develop internal structures to
ensure land-use proposals give
due consideration to disaster
reduction?
6
2. Identify the required governance
tools
(e.g. area classifications, plans,
guidelines, bylaws, regulations)
that are useful for assessing the
hazard risk of land-use
proposals?
3. What are the most effective
roles for citizens, the zoning
body, and other government
bodies?
4. Decision Making
How does the land-zoning body most
effectively use the governance
structure and knowledge to ensure a
land-use proposal will minimize the
number and severity of disasters?
For instance how should
communities:
1. develop a list of events to
trigger the evaluation of a
land-use proposal's potential
for creating a disaster or
building disaster resilience?
2. Determine the land-use
proposal's hazard risk
potential?
3. Determine who should be
involved in creating the hazard
risk potential and its potential
mitigation?
4. Evaluate the land-use
proposal's potential for disaster
reduction, knowing that the
amount of knowledge is never
enough?
5. Identify three key steps to the
evaluation of land-use
proposals? And what are the
three key steps under each of
those?
Theme for breakout III
Each breakout group will layout the
sequence of the best practices as
determined at this workshop. Their
sequence will be compiled on the fly
by the graphic recorder and editors,
and be available for review and
critique at the final plenary.
Pathways Charting
Panel 1 - Establish PreDevelopment Proposal Tools and
Mechanisms
Prior to Considering Development
What needs to be in place for
informed risk-based planning
decisions?
Examples:
1. Development Permit Areas
2. Community-Based Risk
Tolerance Criteria
3. GIS Data Set
Panel 2 - Receive the
Development Proposal
Establish the Development Context
Define and Develop the Risk-Based
Planning Objectives
What is the purpose of the
development? What should the
decision criteria be?
Examples:
1. Understanding the Proposed
Land Use
2. Understanding Your Hazard
Environment
Panel 3 - Evaluate Development
Proposal and Make Decision
Establish Alternatives
Evaluate Alternatives
Implement the Decision
7
What mitigation strategies are
available?
What are the potential consequences
and trade-offs?
Who is at greatest risk – who and
what are most vulnerable?
Who makes the decision?
Examples:
1. Warning and Alert Systems
2. Structural and Non-Structural
Mitigation
3. Costs and Benefits
4. Equity
Panel 4 – Monitor and Evaluate
the Decision
Once it’s Built Now Evaluate the
Decision and Monitor for Change
Monitor the Impacts of the Decision
Evaluate Effectiveness of Tools That
Were Used
Evaluate the Effectiveness of the
Decision-Making Process
Monitor the Context Changes
Between having the decision made
and the development concluded
what factors need to be taken into
account?
How do you assess whether there
have been any negative/positive
consequences as a result of the
development being put in place?
When should the assessment take
place?
Things change; what elements or
factors should be considered when
monitoring for increased/decreased
risk to the site?
Examples:
1. Building Inspections
2. Climate Change
3. Changes in Population (i.e.
growth)
8
Land-Use Planning
Exercise
Prior to the workshop, the organizing
committee ran an exercise to
simulate municipal land-use decision
processes. The exercise was
conducted on Monday September 13,
2010 at the simulation laboratory of
the JIBC in New Westminster, British
Columbia – created in support of
training programs and as a
community service.
Based on real proposals under
consideration by The District of North
Vancouver, municipal experts
evaluated and made
recommendations on land-use
development proposals which
incorporated risk management and
disaster resiliency concepts. The land
in question, for the purposes of the
exercise, as well as in real life, is
threatened by various natural and
human-induced hazards.
Land-use Proposal Scenario
The land-use development proposal
scenario is based on an area that
includes a mountain creek that
traverses an urban centre and drains
into the ocean. This mountain creek
is susceptible to both floods and
debris floods. Its headwaters are in a
steep walled drainage high altitude
area where landslides of glacial and
recent bedrock decay material are
known to have occurred and can be
triggered in the future. The
catchment area has high rainfall,
road systems that create slope
instability, and is susceptible to
earthquakes.
The creek generally has steep walled
reaches that feed a few low-gradient
reaches with wider shallower valleys.
Its flow varies substantially through
the seasons; highest in late fall and
lowest in late summer. The
catchment area lies outside the city
boundaries and is thickly forested on
its south facing slope.
The urban centre has permitted
single-family housing up to parts of
the creek below the upper catchment
bowl. The city has contained the
creek flow in a large culvert in one
section, traversed the creek with
bridges, and has a park and
recreation facility in the lower reach.
Municipal services in the area include
the recreation facility and a fire hall.
The creek is within 2 kilometres of a
neighbouring municipality and
traverses another muncipality
downstream. The urban centre has a
debris flow warning system for the
creek that is triggered when a certain
volume of rainfall per hour is
exceeded.
Simulation process
The simulation was conducted in a
simulation laboratory where the
initial scenario and operational
inputs could be controlled, and the
actions of participants recorded and
assessed. Participants were invited
from a target audience of municipal
personnel dealing with land-use
proposals, strategic planning and
emergency management,
academics, and private sector
professionals relied on by
municipalities for expert advice.
9
The simulation laboratory has four
pods that can be operated
simultaneously, and each pod can
host six participants. A control room
has access to each of the pods to
feed information to set the scenario
and its intended goals, and to
respond to decisions and questions
made by the pod participants. The
control room has facilities to record
the action in each pod, and permits
observers to assess and learn from
the problem solving approaches
taken by each group.
exercise included an evaluation of
the hazard on various development
proposals for areas downstream from
the fire hall.
Pod participants learned in general
about the process of the simulation
before entering their pods, and each
were told that the exercise was about
the process and not focused on the
final outcomes. Each pod learned
about the development proposals
they were to evaluate, the scenario
information, and by the end of the
exercise they were required to make
a recommendation on how the
development proposal would be
accepted.
The process each group took to
achieve its recommendation was
observed for a) comparison with a
standard risk assessment decision
frameworks, and b) events or
decisions that changed the course of
the process. Each was video-taped
for reference during documentation.
Pod participants were shown video
vignettes to set the scene and
provide concrete information. They
had access to a written request for
their input, maps, reports and a
budget. They were told they had
access to other reports on file and to
contractors that could conduct new
studies for a fee.
The exercise had two parts, each of
which was to lead to
recommendations on implementation
of development proposals. The first
part of the exercise included an
evaluation of a proposal to rebuild a
fire hall along the upper reach of the
creek. The second part of the
Simulation evaluation
Four methods were used to evaluate
the processes taken by each of the
pods to arrive at development and
planning recommendations:
1. Control room observations of
the decision process.
2. Documents prepared by pod
participants during their
deliberation.
Each pod prepared a work plan,
comment sheet and
recommendations report during their
deliberations. These were used to
understand the guiding principles
used by the group, and the
influences that steered their
evaluation process.
3. Plenary open discussions of
the process by all pod
participants.
After the completion of the morning
and afternoon simulations,
participants had an opportunity to
discuss in a plenary session how they
felt about the experience and the key
10
factors that influenced that
experience.
publicly registered upon completion of the voting.
4. Individual pod participant
evaluation of the process and
their involvement.
Participants answered questions
about the deliberation process
following the exercise.
Each participant used an electronic voting button, and the resultant graph of choices was Simulation Organizing Committee
Malaika Ulmi, Natural Resources Canada
Murray Day, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Bert Struik, Natural Resources Canada
Murray Journeay, Natural Resources Canada
Fiona Dercole, District of North Vancouver
Nicky Hastings, Natural Resources Canada
CREDITS
Risk evaluations
William Chow, Natural Resources Canada
Carol Wagner, Natural Resources Canada
Nicky Hastings, Natural Resources Canada
Murray Journeay, Natural Resources Canada
Scenario source material
District of North Vancouver
Natural Resources Canada
Scripting
Malaika Ulmi, Natural Resources Canada
Bert Struik, Natural Resources Canada
Fiona Dercole, District of North Vancouver
Logistics
Malaika Ulmi, Natural Resources Canada
Bert Struik, Natural Resources Canada
Murray Day, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Ximena Webb, Justice Institute of British Columbia
11
Video injects
Bob Walker, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Viktor Simon, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Matthias Jacob, BGC Engineering
Actors
Mayor of the District of North Vancouver Lionel Jackson
Permitting Office Malaika Ulmi
Chief Cairns Chief Cairns
Jozsef, Head of Engineering Nathan Haywood
Fiona Dercole Fiona Dercole
John, Planner Bert Struik
City Councilor 3 Marianne Quat
City Councilor 1 Murray Day
City Councilor 2 Melanie Kelman
City Councilor Darren Blackburn
City Concilor Sarah Wareing
Council chamber extra Nathan Hayward
Matthias Jacob Matthias Jacob
Dorit Mason Dorit Mason
Casey Peters Casey Peters
Simulation operation
Simon Chau, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Bob Walker, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Shonee Mendoza, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Anita Miles, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Mary Dal Santo, Justice Institute of British Columbia
Jessica Shoubridge, UBC School of Community and Regional Planning
Murray Journeay, Natural Resources Canada
Laurie Pearce, Pearces 2 Consulting
Malaika Ulmi, Natural Resources Canada
Fiona Dercole, District of North Vancouver
Bert Struik, Natural Resources Canada
Nicky Hastings, Natural Resources Canada
Murray Day, Justice Institute of British Columbia
12
Simulation participants
Darren Braun
Senior Planner / Deputy Approving Officer
City of Abbotsford
dbraun@abbotsford.ca
Susan Cormie
Greg Mitchell
Planner
City of Surrey
gdmitchell@surrey.ca
Senior Planner
Regional District of Nanaimo and Lantzville
scormie@rdn.bc.ca
Doreen Myers
Jani Drew
Dave Reid
Emergency Coordinator
Regional District of Nanaimo and Lantzville
jdrew@rdn.bc.ca
Mike Ellerbeck
Program Management
Natural Resources Canada, Vancouver
mike.ellerbeck@nrcan.gc.ca
Heather Evans
Community Planner, MCIP
District of Squamish
heatherevans@telus.net
Pierre Friele
Geologist
Cordilleran Geoscience
Emergency Manager
BC Provincial Health Services
dmyers@phsa.ca
Emergency Management Coordinator HSDA
Vancouver - Acute Services
Vancouver Coastal Health
david.reid@vch.ca
Robert Renger
Senior Planner
City of Burnaby
robert.renger@burnaby.ca
Kerry Roberts
MA Student
Royal Roads University
Kerry.1roberts@RoyalRoads.ca
Ginger Sherlock
pfriele@gmail.com
Emergency Coordinator
City of Langley
gsherlock@langleycity.ca
Roberto Gonzalez
Bob Turner
Emergency Management Planner
Gonzalez Consulting
Peter Kushnir
Assistant Chief Building Inspector
City of Burnaby
peter.kushnir@burnaby.ca
Beth Lacomb
Mayor
Bowen Island
bob.turner@nrcan.gc.ca
Rosanna von Sacken
Emergency Manager
Advanced Consulting
advancedconsulting@shaw.ca
Emergency Management Planner
Royal Roads University
beth.l@shaw.ca
13
National and international standards for landuse decision-making: hazards based.
Existing Strategies for Improving Mitigation
(examples)
Canada
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
Building Code and its companions (plumbing, fire, electrical) (Provincial with Federal support) •
Dam Safety Committee (Private­
national) •
InfraGuide (Municipal with Federal support) •
National Energy Board Act and various regulations including the Onshore Pipeline Regulations 1999 (Federal) Legislation •
Emergency Management Acts (Federal, Provincial) •
Land­use Acts (Federal, Provincial) •
Municipal Governance Acts (Provincial) Consortia (Government) •
3.
•
Metro Vancouver Integrated Partnership for Regional Emergency Management (IPREM) 7.
Consortia (Private ­ Government) •
Fraser Basin Council Joint Committee on Flooding •
Dam Safety Committee (Private­
national) •
Canada Safety Council
•
8.
Private
•
Business Continuity Planning (e.g., YVR, Port, Railway)
•
Insurance Early Warning Systems
•
East Gate landslide (public in park)
•
Turtle Mountain (public),
•
Railway closure due to earthquake (private) Structural Land­use Legislation (Provincial) 9.
Zones for controlled development in areas affected by flood, landslide, earthquake, tsunami, volcanic
Land­use Works (National, Provincial, Municipal, Private) •
Dykes around flood zones e.g., Richmond; Pitt canals •
Diversion ditches e.g., Red River Spillway; Field debris flow diversion •
Retaining walls and other wall stability works (bolts, nets, shotcrete) •
Sheds and Tunnels
Emergency Management (Federal, Provincial) •
Biological, Radiation 14
•
10.
11.
Standards for risk mitigation
Research erence_services/USInternationalCodes.a
sp) •
Federal agencies
7. Land­use •
Provincial agencies
•
•
Industry Wildland­Urban Interface Code™ (USA) •
Zoning Code® (USA) •
Property Maintenance Code® (USA) •
Land­use codes (USA) Consortia •
POLARIS
International
1. United Nations •
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction •
Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Geohazards theme.
8. Guides to natural hazard mitigation (Ad­
hoc, many countries) •
Natural Hazard mitigation planning, community guide, Massachusetts http://www.mass.gov/dcr/stewardship/m
itigate/hazguide.pdf •
Organization of American States, Caribbean http://www.oas.org/cdmp/publist.htm •
Oregon, USA; Homeowner's Guide to Landslides http://www.oregongeology.org/sub/Land
slide/homeowners­landslide­guide.pdf 2. NGOs
•
COGSS (Coalition for Global School Safety) http://www.interragate.info/cogss •
ProVention http://www.proventionconsortium.org/ 3. Educational
9. Mitigation Campaigns •
National Mitigation Package (Australian 5 year campaign) •
Trusted Information Sharing Network for Critical Infrastructure Protection (Australia) 5. Interagency Volcanic Event Notification Plan (USA­Canada) •
Owner and Operator forum for sharing security information.
6. Structural 10. National and International Institutes •
Existing Building Code® (USA) 11. Consortia •
Mechanical Code® (USA) •
LESSLOSS www.lessloss.org •
Residential Code® (USA) •
•
Seismic (http://mceer.buffalo.edu/infoservice/ref
Academic/Industry Seismic and Landslide Mitigation Project supported by the European Union's FP6 initiative.
•
RiskRED •
COGSS
4. Pacific and Indian Ocean tsunami warning
15
Participants
Doug Allan
Alison Bird
Chair
Integrated Partnership for Regional
Emergency Management
Seismologist
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
Director of Environment, Parks
and Engineering Services
District of North Vancouver
Carol-Ann Amaratunga
Erica Crawford Boettcher
Don Dobson
jdallan@telus.net
Landscape Architecture Intern
Ron Rule Landscape Architecture
Consultants
carolannamaratunga07@gmail.c
om
Dr. Carol Amaratunga
Dean of Research
Justice Institute of British Columbia
camaratunga@jibc.ca
Lisa Arora
Graphic Recorder
Get The Picture
lisa@getthepicture.ca
Karen Basi
Manager Emergency Program
City of Coquitlam
kbasi@coquitlam.ca
Gillian Berger
Parks, Planning and Inspection
Services
Fraser Valley Regional District
alison.bird@nrcan.gc.ca
MA Candidate, University of British
Columbia, School of Community and
Regional Planning,
erica88@interchange.ubc.ca
Steven Brasier
Executive Director
Canadian Institute of Planners
sbrasier@cip-icu.ca
Chris Bunce
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
Canadian Pacific Railway
chris_bunce@cpr.ca
Susan Cormie
Senior Planner
Regional District of Nanaimo and
Lantzville
scormie@rdn.bc.ca
Dr. Robin Cox
Professor
Royal Roads University
Robin.cox@royalroads.ca
Jozsef Dioszeghy
dioszegj@dnv.org
Senior Water Engineer
Urban Systems Ltd, Kelowna
ddobson@urban-systems.com
Jani Drew
Emergency Coordinator
Regional District of Nanaimo and
Lantzville
jdrew@rdn.bc.ca
Valery Dubenko
Research Manager, Applied
Research
Justice Institute of British Columbia
vdubenko@jibc.ca
Mike Ellerbeck
Project Leader
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
mike.ellerbeck@nrcan.gc.ca
Bill Elsner
Emergency Program Coordinator
Sunshine Coast Regional District
bill.elsner@scrd.ca
gberger@fvrd.bc.ca
Graham Daneluz
Lisa Bhopalsingh
Senior Planner
Regional District of Nanaimo
Manager Forward Plans
Fraser Valley Regional District
gdaneluz@fvrd.bc.ca
lbhopalsingh@rdn.bc.ca
Murray Day
Steven Bibby
Manager, Safety and Security
British Columbia Housing
sbibby@bchousing.org
Don Bindon
Emergency Manager
Consultant
don_bindon@telus.net
Director
Justice Institute of British Columbia
Erin Embley
Regional Planner, Regional
Development, Policy and
Planning Department
Metro Vancouver
erin.embley@metrovancouver.or
g
msday@jibc.ca
Hugh Fraser
Annie Dempster
Planning Technician
Fraser Valley Regional District
Deputy Director of Engineering
Corporation of Delta
hfraser@corp.delta.bc.ca
adempster@fvrd.bc.ca
Darryl George
Fiona Dercole
Section Manager, Public Safety
District of North Vancouver
Student, MADEM
Royal Roads University
darryl.1george@royalroads.ca
fdercole@dnv.org
16
Sandra Good
Monica Jaramillo
Kenneth Law
Health Director and Emergency
Coordinator
Snuneymuxw First Nation
Dam Safety Engineer, –
Engineering
Healthy Environments and
Consumer Safety
Health Canada
sgood@snuneymuxw.ca
Wayne Gordon
Senior Planner (Special
Projects) / Approving Officer
City of Abbotsford
wgordon@abbotsford.ca
British Columbia Hydro
monica.jaramillo@bchydro.com
Cindy Jeromin
Emergency Coordinator
Public Safety Canada
kenneth.law@hc-sc.gc.ca
Dr. Martin Lawrence
Specialist Engineering Geologist
British Columbia Hydro - Engineering
cindy.jeromin@ps-sp.gc.ca
martin.lawrence@bchydro.com
Murray Journeay
Wilma Leung
Research Scientist
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
Western Canada Representative
Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE)
Lisa Grant
Planner
Fraser Valley Regional District
lgrant@fvrd.bc.ca
Dr. Wayne Greene
murray.journeay@nrcan.gc.ca
Adjunct Professor
University of British Columbia,
Disaster Preparedness Research
Centre
wgreene39@gmail.com
Rick Guthrie
Regional Geomorphologist
British Columbia Ministry of
Environment
richard.guthrie@gov.bc.ca
Caitlan Harrison
Emergency Preparedness and
Response Officer
Health Canada
caitlin.harrison@phac-aspc.gc.ca
Brad Hawkes
Fire researcher
Natural Resources Canada, Canadian
Forest Service, Victoria
brad.hawkes@nrcan.gc.ca
Wayne Hirlehey
Director, Pacific
Public Safety Canada
wayne.hirlehey@ps-sp.gc.ca
Rob Innes
Manager of Community Services
City of Coquitlam
Shashi Kapoor
Outreach Coordinator
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
shashi.kapoor@nrcan.gc.ca
Bruce Kerr
Project Manager, Underground
Utilities, Engineering
City of Victoria
bkerr@victoria
Peter Kushnir
Assistant Chief Building Inspector
City of Burnaby
peter.kushnir@burnaby.ca
Beth Lacomb
Emergency Management Planner
beth.l@shaw.ca
Jim Lang
Emergency Program Coordinator
District of Squamish
jlang@squamish.ca
Emergency Manager
Retired
clarochelle@shaw.ca
Michel Latendresse
Chris Jackson
Acting Emergency Program
Manager, Fire and Emergency
Services
Corporation of Delta
cjackson@islandstrust.bc.ca
Steve Litke
Program Manager
Faser Basin Council
slitke@fraserbasin.bc.ca
Jennifer Little
Manager of Planning,
Development Services
City of Port Coquitlam
littlej@portcoquitlam.ca
Carmel Lowe
Director, Pacific Division
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
carmel.lowe@nrcan.gc.ca
Heather Lyle
Manager, Integrated Safety Unit
Emergency Management British
Columbia
heather.Lyle@gov.bc.ca
Dorit Mason
Director
Casey Larochelle
rinnes@coquitlam.ca
Regional Planning Manager
Islands Trust North
ICE-Rep@wcgce.org
wilma@wisa.ca
North Shore Emergency
Management Office
dmason@cnv.org
Rick McDermid
Manager of Development
Approvals
Fraser Valley Regional District
mcdermid@fvrd.bc.ca
mlatendresse@corp.delta.bc.ca
17
Dwayne Meredith
Charmaigne Pflugrath
Manager, Strategic Mitigation
Program
Emergency Management British
Columbia
Emergency Program Coordinator
City of Burnaby
dwayne.meredith@gov.bc.ca
Greg Mitchell
Planner
City of Surrey
gdmitchell@surrey.ca
Doreen Myers
Emergency Manager
British Columbia Provincial Health
Services
dmyers@phsa.ca
Deputy Director of Corporate
Planning and Development
charmaigne.pflugrath@burnaby.c Corporation of Delta
a
msangret@corp.delta.bc.ca
Marianne Quat
Jesal Shah
Database Specialist
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
Flood Safety Engineer
British Columbia Ministry of the
Environment
marianne.quat@nrcan.gc.ca
jesal.shah@gov.bc.ca
Scott Raesler
Ginger Sherlock
scott.raesler@vpd.ca
Jessica Shoubridge
Dave Reid
University of British Columbia, School
of Community and Regional Planning
Emergency Coordinator
Manager, Emergency Planning
Unit, Emergency and Operational City of Langley
gsherlock@langleycity.ca
Planning Section, Vancouver
Police Department
City of Vancouver
Miranda Myles
Research & Project Coordinator,
Integrated Public Safety
Emergency Management British
Columbia
miranda.myles@gov.bc.ca
Emergency Management
Coordinator HSDA Vancouver Acute Services
Vancouver Coastal Health
david.reid@vch.ca
Kathrin Naegli
Swiss internship student at PGC /
Robert Renger
Uvic
Senior Current Planner, Planning
Natural Resources Canada,
and Building Department
Geological Survey Canada
City of Burnaby
Kathrin.Naegeli@stud.unibas.ch
John Oakley
Director, Integrated Planning
Emergency Management British
Columbia
John.Oakley@gov.bc.ca
Larry Pearce
Emergency Management
Consultant
Pearce2 Consulting
larrypearce@shaw.ca
Laurie Pearce
Emergency Management
Professional
Pearce2 Consulting
lauriepearce@shaw.ca
Neil Peters
Head, Flood Safety Section and
Inspector of Dykes
British Columbia Ministry of the
Environment
Marcie Sangret
robert.renger@burnaby.ca
Nick Roberts
Graduate Student
Simon Fraser University, Earth
Sciences
MA Student
jessica.shoubridge@nrcan.gc.ca
Jim Stanton
President
Stanton Associates (Media
Consultant)
stanton.jim1@gmail.com
Dr. Mark Stevens
Professor
SCARP, University of British
Columbia, School of Community and
Regional Planning
xstevens@interchange.ubc.ca
nickr@sfu.ca
Bert Struik
Amy Romanas
Research Scientist
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
Emergency Program Coordinator
City of Richmond
aromanas@richmond.ca
Michael Rosen
Planning consultant
Rosen Consulting
bert.struik@nrcan.gc.ca
John Tam
Manager, Infrastructure
Development
Coast Mountain Bus Company
mrosen@telus.net
john.tam@coastmountainbus.co
m
Samien Safaei
Ken Topping
Lands Solicitor
Corporation of Delta
SSafaei@corp.delta.bc.ca
President
Topping Associates International
kentopping@aol.com
neil.peters@gov.bc.ca
18
Robert Tremblay
Malaika Ulmi
Research Director
Insurance Bureau of Canada
Project Leader, Public Safety
Geoscience Program
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
rtremblay@ibc.ca
Wendy Tse
MA Student
malaika.ulmi@nrcan.gc.ca
cvaughn@jibc.ca
Bob Turner
bob.turner@nrcan.gc.ca
British Columbia Housing
wwhite@bchousing.org
Allison Williams
Colleen Vaughan
University of British Columbia, School
Program manager, EMD
of Community and Regional Planning
Programs
wendytse7@gmail.com
Justice Institute of British Columbia
Research Scientist
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
Bill White
Rosanna Von Sacken
Emergency Manager, Advanced
Consulting
advancedconsulting@shaw.ca
Planner
Sunshine Coast Regional District
allison.williams@scrd.ca
Andrew Young
Community Planner
City of Coquitlam
ayoung@coquitlam.ca
Lily Yumagalova
PhD Student
Carol Wagner
GIS Specialist
Natural Resources Canada,
Geological Survey Canada
University of British Columbia, School
of Community and Regional Planning
lilyufa@yahoo.com
carol.wagner@nrcan.gc.ca
Notes
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
19
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
20