Category Archives: Admin

STRATEGIES FOR A SUSTAINABLE MARINE FUTURE

Posted on by

1.0 Introduction:

The key message of this resource is on global marine issues, and the integral role of all humans in maintaining environmentally sustainable marine ecosystems. Examples from the British Columbia marine environment are used to illustrate the principles which can also apply on a global scale. The over-arching concept of this resource is what marine environmental sustainability means locally and how people can be encouraged to commit to contribute to the process. We believe that people of all ages can use the tools to actively participate in making our marine environment sustainable.

 

logoWe thank the Shaw Ocean Discovery Centre, formerly the New Marine Centre in Sidney on Vancouver Island in British Columbia for supporting the development of the document that provides the basis for this curriculum resource. I encourage you to visit this centre opened in the spring of 2009.

Garry Fletcher
Marine Education Consulting
Victoria, BC.

Proceed to 2.0 Marine Environmental Sustainability :

Index

Race Rocks Lighthouse Great Race Island, British Columbia DFRP # 17447 Condition Assessment Including Indicative Cost Estimate: 2007

Posted on by

This document was prepared two years before  DFO actually did the upgrading of the light tower. The following quotes on the historic significance is worth noting.

 

The Race Rocks tower is located on Great Race Island, a small and barren rock outcrop in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, about fifteen kilometres south of Victoria, British Columbia. Erected in 1860, simultaneously as Fisgard light, with which it was designed to function, the Race Rocks light tower is British Columbia’s second oldest operating lighthouse and a forerunner of the extensive system of navigational aids built during the following century along Canada’s West Coast.

Construction of both the Fisgard and Race Rocks towers was undertaken in 1859, at the initiative of colonial officials and with partial financial and technical support of the Imperial Government. The latter provided its expertise, the lighting apparatus, which according to the local legend, would have travelled from England with Fisgard’s first light keeper, and 7000 pounds in funding, half as a grant, half as a loan. The colonial government oversaw the selection of the site and the construction following a plan of combined tower and dwelling, attributed to both JohnWright of London and to the Surveyor General of British Columbia, Joseph Pemberton.1

  “Race Rocks light tower is “the only known example of tall, pre-Confederation, unsheathed stone masonry tower, built outside of Ontario”.2 Along with towers of a similar design on the Great Lakes, it shares the classification of “Imperial” tower, a reference to its typology as a tall, tapered, circular, pitched-faced stone structure, rather than to the British involvement in its construction. Unlike the Imperial towers of Ontario, however, the interior configuration of the Race Rocks lighthouse was based on its being attached to the keeper’s residence, and consists of a continuous stone spiral staircase rather than of superposed wooden floors linked by ladders.

The light at Race Rocks was lit on December 26, 1860, a month after that of the Fisgard tower. Until the construction of the landfall light at Carmanah Point in 1891, it was considered the most important lighthouse in British Columbia. It was attended to by a long succession of light keepers and their families, who lived in the attached stone residence until the construction of new dwellings in 1964, closely followed by the demolition of the original house in 1967.”

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background

race-rocks-towerThe Heritage Conservation Network (HCN) project team has completed the condition assessment and report for the Race Rocks Lighthouse located on Great Race Island in the Juan de Fuca Strait, south of Victoria, British Columbia, as part of the project for eighteen lighthouses for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). The report contains structural and building envelope conditions, analysis of these conditions, recommendations and indicative cost estimates for mandatory and cyclical conservation work both in the short and the long term.

See the Full PDF at :Condition Assessment

Conservation Approach

This condition assessment, report and related recommendations, follow the conservation approach of minimal intervention and least harm to preserve/protect heritage character. This approach will help provide DFO with information required to properly manage the Race Rocks lighthouse while ensuring that the building is safe in terms of both public and staff and that the existing heritage fabric will be protected and maintained.

Description

The Race Rocks Lighthouse is a pitched-face stone structure with a round, tapered shaft, painted with a series of horizontal black and white painted stripes. The tower corbels at the top forming a gallery around the cast iron lantern, which rises approximately 32 meters (105′-0″) tall from grade, and tapers from a diameter of approximately 5.8 meters at its base to 3.8 meters at its narrowest point below the gallery. The tower is accessible through a curved metalic stair and arched door opening, located 3.20 meters (10’6″) above grade. It is pierced with 4 window openings, the two lowest of which are arched and the top two, rectangular. The cast iron octagonal lantern, which sits atop the concrete parapet, can be reached by a continuous stone spiral staircase, which terminates just below it.

Heritage Value

The Race Rocks Lighthouse is a Recognized federal heritage building (FHBRO log number 90-85). It obtained a total score of 62, based on a score of 14 for historical associations, 23 for architecture, and 25 for environment. A review of the related Heritage Character Statement is provided in the report to help the lighthouse custodians identify and protect heritage fabric and aid in guiding future maintenance and repair interventions so as to maintain the lighthouse’s heritage value. This section identifies all of the elements of the lighthouse that are important in defining the overall heritage values that require protection. Its character-defining elements reside in its robust stonework construction consisting of large rusticated blocks with limited decorative detailing, typical of “Imperial” lighthouse design, in its black and white day marking and in the interior spiral stone stairway. Other buildings on the islands are considered to contribute to the heritage character of the tower’s environment, but were not investigated for this report.

PWGSC, P&TSM, Heritage Conservation Network 1

Race Rocks Lighthouse Condition Assessment Reports Victoria, British Columbia Including Indicative Cost Estimate

Methodology

Background and historical documentation were consulted both before and after the on-site investigation. This included a review of documents related to environmental site assessments in the preparation of the Site Specific Safety Plan prior to the site visit. The on-site investigation consisted of a preliminary site orientation by the team members to gain a general understanding of the building and its surroundings. Detailed visual and tactile investigations were then carried out on both the exterior and interior of the lighthouse. All investigations were non-destructive by nature and any samples were gathered from loose or fallen materials.

Assessment

Building Structure:
Overall, the stone walls from the foundations to the top of the tower were found to be in fair to poor condition. Although there are no signs of displacements or structural instability, extensive damage was observed. Two large vertical cracks extend vertically from the base of the tower to a height of approximately 10 meters and will require mapping and monitoring. Deterioration of the stone also included delamination and salt formation, mostly visible on the interior walls, at the top of the tower, corresponding to exterior areas that were covered in “gunite” several decades ago. Water appears to be trapped in the walls at that level and the stone masonry will require rapid treatment in the affected area to limit further decay. Extensive cleaning, repointing and renewal of the impervious coating will also be required throughout.

Lantern and Gallery:
Deferred maintenance of the lantern and gallery has lead to deterioration of surfaces, with paint chipping and corrosion of the cast iron lantern and paint failure and concrete spalling of the underlying parapet. The gallery also shows traces of surface deterioration, with decayed paint and a failing membrane.

Building Envelope:
With the exception of an opening obstructed with fog-detection equipment, windows and the access door were found to be in good condition overall. The main recommendation with regards to the building envelope concerns the improvement of ventilation and heating levels to help resolve the stone deterioration on the interior face of the walls. Ventilation may for instance be provided through the windows and door openings.

Other Building Elements:
The exterior stair is a recent addition to the structure and is in good condition overall. It may warrant replacement in the future for reasons of code compliance and enhancement of the structure’s heritage character.

2 PWGSC, P&TSM, Heritage Conservation Network

Race Rocks Lighthouse Condition Assessment Reports Victoria, British Columbia Including Indicative Cost Estimate

Recommendations

The principal recommendations for this condition assessment would include:

  • Examine and monitor the two vertical cracks at the base of the tower for a minimum of 1-2 years to verify if they are still active and identify their cause(s).
  • Remove the “gunite” coating from the top of the exterior walls using an appropriate method.
  • Clean, repair and repoint the stone on both interior and exterior faces of the tower.
  • Remove all paint on the interior of the tower, using an appropriate non-abrasive method.
  • Replace the existing impervious coating with a coating that allows circulation of water vapour and repaint the existing daymarking.
  • Remove and repair the cast iron lantern (workshop conservation).
  • Repair of the top of the parapet, at the base of the lantern.
  • Provision of additional ventilation and heating inside the tower.
  • Implement regular maintenance activities. A detailed list of recommendations, identifying the recommended short- or long-term time frame is provided by building element in Section 4.0 and by type (mandatory, cyclical, investigation). Further investigation into building elements that were not accessible, research, and monitoring of conditions will also be an important future activity.

    Cost Estimates

    The estimated cost for all recommended mandatory and cyclical work for the next twenty-five (25) years is $3,503,600. The corresponding Net Present Value (NPV) is $1,782,000.

    This amount corresponds to the sum (in NPV) of the mandatory generally short-term work $598,000, the cyclical generally long-term work $653,000 while also providing an allowance of $76,000 for further essential investigation, monitoring, and research, and $455,000 for overall fees, administration, etc.

    The cost estimates for a Five Year Operating and Maintenance Plan, as provided by DFO, are included in Appendix J.

Race Rocks Lighthouse Victoria, British Columbia

Condition Assessment Reports Including Indicative Cost Estimate

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……………………………………………………………………………………………..1

1.0 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………………..5

  1. 1.1  Background……………………………………………………………………………………………….5
  2. 1.2  Historic Context …………………………………………………………………………………………5
  3. 1.3  Conservation Approach ………………………………………………………………………………9
  4. 1.4  Project Team ……………………………………………………………………………………………11

2.0 LIGHTHOUSE DESCRIPTION…………………………………………………………………………12

  1. 2.1  Construction of the Lighthouse……………………………………………………………………12
  2. 2.2  Evolution of the Lighthouse ……………………………………………………………………….13

3.0 HERITAGE VALUE ………………………………………………………………………………………….17

4.0 CONDITION OBSERVATIONS, ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS …18

  1. 4.1  Methodology …………………………………………………………………………………………….18
  2. 4.2  Building Structure ……………………………………………………………………………………..19
    1. 4.2.1  Foundation …………………………………………………………………………………….19
    2. 4.2.2  Wall Structure ………………………………………………………………………………..24
    3. 4.2.3  Floor Structure and Interior Stair ………………………………………………………34
  3. 4.3  Lantern and Gallery ………………………………………………………………………………….38
  4. 4.4  Building Envelope …………………………………………………………………………………….46
    1. 4.4.1  Exterior Walls and Roof ………………………………………………………………….46
    2. 4.4.2  Windows……………………………………………………………………………………….49
    3. 4.4.3  Doors…………………………………………………………………………………………….52
  5. 4.5  Other Building Elements ……………………………………………………………………………54

5.0 ISSUES ANALYSIS …………………………………………………………………………………………..56

  1. 5.1  Health and Safety ………………………………………………………………………………………56
  2. 5.2  Protection of Heritage Character …………………………………………………………………56
  3. 5.3  Site-Specific Challenges to Future Planning Work ………………………………………..56
  4. 5.4  Materials Conservation Specialists Required ………………………………………………..57
  5. 5.5  Need for a Regular Maintenance Program ……………………………………………………58

6.0 URGENT WORK TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC AND STAFF …………………………..59

PWGSC, P&TSM, Heritage Conservation Network i

Race Rocks Lighthouse Condition Assessment Reports Victoria, British Columbia Including Indicative Cost Estimate

7.0 LONG-TERM CONSERVATION PROJECT PLAN AND
OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ……………………………………………………..60

  1. 7.1  Urgent Work to Protect Heritage Character ………………………………………………….60
  2. 7.2  Recommendations for Further Investigation, Including Testing and Recording…60
  3. 7.3  Twenty-five Year Mandatory and Cyclical Long-term Repairs/Replacements ….61
  4. 7.4  Five Y ear Operating and Maintenance Plan ………………………………………………….63
  5. 7.5  Schedule…………………………………………………………………………………………………..63

8.0 COST ESTIMATES …………………………………………………………………………………………..64

  1. 8.1  Twenty-five Year Project Plan ……………………………………………………………………65
  2. 8.2  Five Year Operating & Maintenance Plan…………………………………………………….66
  3. 8.3  Demolition Option and Due Diligence …………………………………………………………66

APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: APPENDIX E: APPENDIX F: APPENDIX G: APPENDIX H: APPENDIX I: APPENDIX J:

Reference Documents ……………………………………………………………………….. A-1

FHBRO Heritage Character Statement, Score and Building Report ……B-1

The Stone Tower………………………………………………………………………………..C-1

Supplementary Chronology of Historical Information ………………………. D-1

Archival Drawings……………………………………………………………………………..E-1

Executive Summaries of Environmental Assessment Reports……………… F-1

Site Specific Safety Plan ……………………………………………………………………. G-1

Field Observations……………………………………………………………………………. H-1

Detailed Cost Table for all Recommendations ……………………………………..I-1

Five Year Operating and Maintenance Plan ………………………………………..J-1

See the Full PDF at :Condition Assessment

A beacon of hope for Race Rocks ( Times Colonist, 2007)

Posted on by

A beacon of hope for Race Rocks — Times Colonist (Victoria) February 6, 2007

When Garry Fletcher pulls his hand away from the wet wall of the Race Rocks light station, chunks of stone come off in his palm and fall to the steps of the curving stairwell.

The 147-year-old tower’s base, built out of Scottish granite, isn’t so bad, but up at the top, salt and water have worked through the sandstone. Outside, on the parapet encircling the light, old orange paint peels off in sheets. Continue reading →

Creating power to stay in power:

Posted on by

Creating power to stay in power: 

Conservatives are out to prove that their plan is better than the Liberal oneTimes Colonist (Victoria) Saturday, January 20, 2007Page: A16 Section: Comment Byline: Les Leyne Column: Les Leyne Source: CanWest News Service

What a lot of trouble Prime Minister Stephen Harper went to in order to announce that a rather obscure alternative energy program that the Liberals unveiled earlier is going to carry on under his government. By plane, by motorcade and by water taxi he made his way almost literally to the ends of the Earth to illuminate the point that “Canada’s new government,” as Tories like to say, is following Canada’s old government when it comes to nurturing alternative energy suppliers.

Lester B. Pearson College isn’t the end of the earth, but it’s on the edge of the western frontier as far as most Canadians are concerned. It was a good backdrop for an alternative energy announcement (even if it is named for a Liberal PM) because it’s home base for the ecological reserve at Race Rocks, on which sits a tiny tidal-power demo project.

Harper has a newfound passion for eco-friendly initiatives that can be said to curb greenhouse-gas emissions that contribute to climate change. It’s burning so intently that he even ventured past the college, hopping a boat for a quick run out to Race Rocks for a photo opportunity.The project is the only one of its kind in Canada. Getting electricity out of this sort of natural power — tidal, solar, geothermal, wind — is about the coolest thing you can imagine. But the technology needs a lot of work before it can go big league, so alternative energy needs to be coddled for years to come. Harper put down $1.5 billion over 10 years.

Federal Liberals fronted a similar program during their last term. Its future was uncertain when the Conservatives took over. But the conventional wisdom is that something clicked in the public’s mind recently.

Perhaps it was prompted by the extreme weather — savage storms in the west, freakishly warm days in the east. Climate change became a big deal and the Conservative government became determined, even desperate, to stay on top of it.

So Harper canned Rona Ambrose, his environment minister, replaced her with someone more familiar with the game of political hardball– John Baird — and set his government on an eco-blitz, which touched down at Pearson College.

Amazing what can come from Ontarians playing golf in December.

The blitz is an impressive one. The prime minister brought two supporting acts with him — Baird and Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn. The federal incursion demanded a provincial response, so B.C. Energy Minister Richard Neufeld made an appearance. And a host of people from the alternative energy world — third-party validators — were invited to bulk up the audience.

The message is double-edged. Conservatives want it known that not only are they concerned about climate change and doing something about it, they’re doing more than the Liberals ever did.

So Harper and Baird outlined their alternative energy funding and quickly compared it to the Liberal record. As Baird put it, meeting the targets set by the Kyoto accord was the start of a marathon, but the Liberals spent the first 10 years after signing it running in the wrong direction.

And Harper said the initiatives were funded in the last budget.

“It may seem like a year is a long time to get them in place, but what we faced when we took office was a whole series of environmental programs that either weren’t reducing emissions in most cases or hadn’t even got off the ground…”

That in a nutshell is what the next few months of environmental debate are going to sound like in Ottawa. Some voters will welcome the new thrust, regardless of its timing. Some will decide Harper’s commitment to cleaner air is too late to be trustworthy. And everyone will have to measure it against the Liberal alternative, which was skimpy, at least prior to the leadership change.

The money promised yesterday for clean power is supposed to createthe same effect as getting a million cars off the road. But if they wanted to tackle climate change head-on, why didn’t they just get a million cars off the road?

It would hurt too much. Harper said people have to have the ability to earn an income. ” What we’re trying to do with our environmental plan is allow people to be prosperous and have energy security as well.”

Harper pointed out the emissions debate often centres on the sectors of the economy that produce them. But everyone uses transportation, energy and industrial products. “If we’re going to make the transformations in our economy we want to make over time, there’s going to be a responsibility of everyone to participate in that.”

The winner of this argument will be the one with the best argument about why their plan to curb emissions won’t hurt as much as the other guy’s plan.

Reprinted with the permission of Les Leyne
lleyne@tc.canwest.com

Tidal Energy ENCANA video

Posted on by

This video is a compressed version of the one produced by Brainstorm for the Tidal Current Power Project. It documents the partners and the process along the way in the establishment of the Turbine Project . (released January 19, 2007 to correspond with the visit of Prime Minister Stephen Harper to Lester Pearson College and Race Rocks. )

The Tidal Current Energy Project at Race Rocks

Posted on by

This video is a compressed version of the one produced by Brainstorm for the Tidal Current Power Project. It documents the partners and the process along the way in the establishment of the Turbine Project . (released January 19, 2007 to correspond with the visit of Prime Minister Stephen Harper to Lester Pearson College and Race Rocks.)

See other archived video with Pearson College Divers

Extreme Weather Events at Race Rocks

Posted on by

How We Got Blasted: Record-ripping winds took rare path:

Judith Lavoie, Times Colonist Published: Saturday, December 16, 2006

Wind gusts at Race Rocks, off the Island’s southwest tip, reached a record 158 kilometres an hour as the third intense wind storm in a week plowed a trail of destruction through southern Vancouver Island and the Lower Mainland. Yesterday morning’s storm knocked out power to thousands of residents, toppled trees, and damaged buildings and cars. More residents were forced from their homes because they didn’t have power, and ended up moving into hotels or into the homes of friends and relatives. Around the capital region, areas that suffered the most damage had winds that gusted to between 70 and 90 km/h . In the last three storms, including yesterday’s, the wind has gathered over the North Pacific, whooshed across the ocean, gathered speed in the funnel of Juan de Fuca Strait and then whacked Vancouver Island with its full force, said Chris Emond, Environment Canada meteorologist. “There are tremendous wind speeds and three in one week is unusual.” The wind is coming straight across the cold North Pacific and hitting land, rather than taking the more common route of dipping south and picking up tropical moisture, Emond said.

Anne McCarthy, weather services specialist with Environment Canada, said the storms are cutting a swath straight across Vancouver Island instead of the more usual pattern of tracking to the north coast around Prince Rupert and the Queen Charlottes (Haida Gwaii.) Although we have only recorded extreme values since earlier this year, It is interesting to note the Maximum wind and the Minimum Pressure records for the 14th and 15th of December 2006.

You can read the complete story in the Times Colonist , Dec 16, 2006 The right conditions for a hurricane:

Storm surf conditions which correspond to the low pressure systems. These images were captured from the Stormsurf site at 2300 hrs. Pacific Time , just a few hours before the maximum impact.

This image was taken from the US National Weather Service Images of the evening of December 14. Note the “HURRICN FORCE” location right beside Vancouver Island. Also the atmospheric pressure is as low as 970.

Current Satellite imagery is shown on this page

Return to the Physical Factors Index

Pat Carney. Continued her fight for heritage protection for lighthouses

Posted on by

Debates of the Senate (Hansard)

1st Session, 39th Parliament,
Volume 143, Issue 44

Wednesday, November 1, 2006
The Honourable Noël A. Kinsella, Speaker

Heritage Lighthouse Protection Bill

Second Reading—Debate Adjourned

Hon. Pat Carney moved second reading of Bill S-220, to protect heritage lighthouses.

She said: Honourable senators, this bill represents the sixth attempt in as many years to grant protection to heritage lighthouses of Canada. It was introduced five times previously, including during the Second Session of the Thirty-sixth Parliament, the First, Second and Third Sessions of the Thirty-seventh Parliament, and the First Session of the Thirty-eighth Parliament, and it has proceeded to committee stage in the other place. It never received Royal Assent before those parliaments rose.

While this bill was co-authored by me and the late Senator Forrestall, it was introduced five times by him, and it is in his memory that I speak today.

Despite the broad support in Parliament for this bill from all parties, the fact that we have not been able to enact it thus far represents a legislative embarrassment. It should be noted that this bill is supported in principle by the Departments of the Environment, Heritage and Fisheries and Oceans. Aside from the obvious negative political optics of such failure, even more regrettable is the practical damage being sustained by the lighthouses no longer in operation and the loss to the communities they have served, and where they stand as a proud pillar of heritage. Each day that goes by without the kind of legal protection afforded by the heritage lighthouse protection bill is a day that lighthouses are left exposed to neglect.

This bill addresses the problem that lighthouses, once deemed to be surplus to operational requirements, have no mechanism for their preservation. In the past they have been blown up, burned down, jack-hammered or left prey to vandalism, because the operational departments have no means of transferring them to interested community groups that are prepared to take on their maintenance. The present heritage designations are too restrictive to apply to most and do not provide a public consultation process.

The main feature of this bill is to facilitate the designation and preservation of heritage lighthouses as part of Canada’s culture and history, and to protect them from being altered or disposed of without public consultation. The bill defines heritage lighthouses as any lighthouse, together with all buildings and other works belonging thereto and in connection with which, as designated by the minister on the recommendation of the board as a heritage lighthouse.

The board referred to is the National Historic Sites and Monuments Board.

It defines “alter” as “to change in any manner” and includes “to restore or renovate” but does not include the performance of routine maintenance and repairs.

Honourable senators, I could take the time of the Senate to read the other main purposes of this short bill, but it would serve the interests of the Senate better to move this bill into committee where these aspects can be addressed.

The key to this bill is that the Canadian public will be consulted before any lighthouse is disposed of or destroyed, because currently there is no method by which to protect those structures.

The substantive provisions of this bill remain the same as they were the past five times it was introduced, and each time it received unanimous support in this chamber. I have been in communication with the government and believe that there may be minor amendments made to the bill at committee stage to align it with other legislation that was passed since this bill was first proposed.

I hope this bill can be referred to committee today.

Hon. Jim Munson: Honourable senators, I agree that this bill should be sent to the appropriate committee today. I have a keen interest in this bill. My great-great-uncle, James Munson, was the first lighthouse keeper in Cape Enrage, New Brunswick. It is a wonderful place just outside of Fundy National Park. It is the home of regulation-sized Munsons. I somehow got short shrift.

It is a great historical story which must be put on the record. I would like to speak to this bill at report stage when it returns from committee.

The Hon. the Speaker: Are honourable senators ready for the question?

Some Hon. Senators: Question!

Hon. Gerald J. Comeau (Deputy Leader of the Government): I move the adjournment of the debate.

Senator Carney: Honourable senators, it was my understanding from my house leader that this bill would go to committee today. Can I be told why the deputy leader has moved the adjournment of the debate when it has been agreed with the opposition and the committee that it be sent to committee?

Senator Comeau: There is no agreement that it would be sent to committee today.

On motion of Senator Comeau, debate adjourned.

Upper Piling Installation for the Tidal Energy Current Project

Posted on by


Images by Gary Bouman, Garry Fletcher and Chris Blondeau