M I N U T E S

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WORKSHOP

2006-09-26

 

Attendance   Deputy Mayor F. Scarpitti (1:00p.m.) Regional Councillor J. Heath Regional Councillor J. Jones Councillor S. Daurio Councillor E. Shapero (12:40 p.m.) Councillor G. McKelvey Councillor J. Webster Councillor D. Horchik Councillor K. Usman Councillor A. Chiu

J. Sales, Commissioner of Community & Fire Services A. Taylor, Commissioner of Corporate Services P. Loukes, Director, Operations P. Ingham, General Manager, Operations M. Ingwersen, District Manager (West), Operations D. Taylor, Manager, Executive Operations S. Matunin, Supervisor, Operations M. Urquhart, Manager, Environmental Leadership A. Pugh, Supervisor, Administration J. Kee, Committee Clerk

 

 

The Committee of the Whole workshop convened at the hour of 12:10 p.m. with Regional Councillor Jack Heath in the Chair.

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

None declared.

 

 

 

1.         PARKS STANDARDS REVIEW WORKSHOP (6.3 & 5.7)

 

The purpose of this Workshop was to provide information to Members of Council on the Parks Standard Review, and to present maintenance and turf rehabilitation options with associated costs.

 

Mr. Paul Ingham, General Manager, Operations, gave a brief overview of the Phase 1 report, which included a review of turf in parks, sports fields, boulevards and medians, and a comparison with three other municipalities; and also an overview of the Phase 2 report, which provided a review of cultural practices and thresholds for field restoration.

 

 

 

Mr. Mark Ingwersen, District Manager (West), Operations, provided a review of “current practices”, which detailed current maintenance standards for sports fields, parks, boulevards and median islands, turf management cultural practices, and the 2001 Ward 2 pesticide free pilot project.

 

Mr. Mark Inglis, Consultant, Marshall Macklin Monaghan, was in attendance and gave a presentation reviewing the recommendations from the panel of experts that participated in the preparation of the Phase 2 report.  He noted that the goal is to determine appropriate standards and to make recommendations regarding turf maintenance practices that reduce the use of pesticides on publicly owned properties.

 

Staff described options for maintenance practices, as follows:

       Option A – current practices without pesticides

       Option B – actual approved pesticide program

       Option C – partial cultural practices

       Option D – system wide cultural practices program

 

Committee was advised that upon determining that a field has greater than 50% weeds, three rehabilitation options could be considered by staff:

       Option 1 – regrade, resod

       Option 2 – regrade, seed

       Option 3 – spray for weeds, increase cultural practices

 

In addition, staff presented information on potential “negative spin-offs” if and when a field was closed because of the large percentage of weeds. 

 

Handouts were distributed at this time, as follows:

       Phase 2 Panel Recommendations – Proposed Weed Population Thresholds

       Maintenance Options, anticipated turn condition and financial considerations

       Additional operating budget requirements for turf maintenance options per year

 

Committee discussed the various options and their respective financial impacts for both annual maintenance programs and sports field rehabilitation, and queried the following matters:

 

·        amount of fuel consumed during maintenance operations

·        cost comparisons between different methods of weed control

·        importance of irrigation, especially during drought periods

·        liability issues; aesthetic issues

·        importance of weed removal on hard surface medians and boulevards

·        the status/definition of clover

·        City of Vaughan practices

·        soil amendments

·        differences between parks and sport fields - (turf )

·        short term and long term strategies

·        financial implications relating to all options

·        staffing requirements to provide various programs

·        details re cost of capital equipment involved

·        ranking - levels of parks vs levels of sports fields

·        feasibility of spraying boiling water on weeds; use of alternative plant material on boulevards and medians; options relating to use of sealants

·        identify locations of medians; road right-of-ways; intersections; cul de sacs

·        feasibility of outsourcing

·        planning and design of new parks

·        correlation with public consultation and pesticide use

 

Staff was requested to provide copies of the presentation to Members of Council so that the information could be thoroughly reviewed rather than giving staff direction at this time. However, due to 2007 Budget planning concerns, Committee suggested that staff report back to a second Workshop with a short term and a long term strategy, including details of options available and financial implications, but not in a formal report format at this time. 

 

Moved by Councillor E. Shapero

Seconded by Councillor S. Daurio

 

That the Parks Standards Review Workshop presentation be received;

 

And that a second Parks Standards Review Workshop be scheduled in October;

 

And that staff be requested to provide both a short term strategy for the 2007 Budget year, and a long term strategy relating to sports fields, parks, boulevards and median islands;

 

And that such strategies include detailed options relating to maintenance and turf rehabilitation, including: spraying, re-sodding, re-seeding, irrigation, and cultural practices, new sports fields and parks, and all related operating and capital financial implications.

 

                                                                                                                                    CARRIED

 

 

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

The Committee of the Whole workshop adjourned at 2:20 p.m.