HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-07-05 Committee of the Whole Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
July 5, 2010
1:00 P.M.
Council Chamber
Committee of the Whole is the initial venue for review of issues. No voting
takes place on bylaws or resolutions. A decision is made to send an item to
Council for debate and vote or to send an item back to staff for more
information or clarification before proceeding to Council.
Note: If required, there will be a 15-minute break at 3:00 p.m.
Chair. Acting Mayor
1. DELEGATIONS/STAFF PRESENTATIONS - (10 minutes each)
1:00 p.m.
1.1
2. PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Note: Owners and/or Agents of Development Applications maybe permitted
to speak to their applications with a time limit of 10 minutes.
Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council
Agenda:
1101 DP/DVP/047/09, 22207 Brown Avenue
Staff report dated June 23, 2010 recommending that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to sign and deal DVP/047/09 to vary setbacks and further that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DP/047/09 to permit 46 unit
supportive housing building.
Committee of the Whole Agenda
July 5, 2010
Page 2 of 3
1102 AL/053/10, 25433 117 Avenue, 25412 117 Avenue, 25494 117 Avenue, &
Lot B Plan 6831.
Staff report dated June 22, 2010 recommending that a non -farm use
application for AL/053/10 be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission
for their consideration.
1103 Award of Contract - Abernethy Way Realignment at 224 Street
Staff report dated June 25, 2010 recommending that the contract for the
Abernethy Way Realignment at 224 Street, be awarded to Tag Construction
Ltd.
3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131 Fire Hall #1 Expansion and Renovations
Staff report dated June 28, 2010 recommending that the report be received
for information and that the expenses indicated be approved.
1132 Disbursements for the Month Ended May 31, 2010
Staff report dated June 25, 2010 recommending that disbursements for May
2010 be approved.
4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES
1151
5. CORRESPONDENCE
1171
6. OTHER ISSUES
1181
Committee of the Whole Agenda
July 5, 2010
Page 3 of 3
COMMUNITY FORUM
The Community Forum provides the public with an opportunity to ask questions of
Council on items that are of concern to them, with the exception of Public Hearing
by-laws that have not yet reached conclusion.
Council will not tolerate any derogatory remarks directed at Council or staff
members.
Each person will be permitted 2 minutes to speak or ask questions (a second
opportunity is permitted if no one else is sitting in the chairs in front of the
podium). Questions must be directed to the Chair of the meeting and not to the
individual members of Council. The total time for this Forum is limited to 15
minutes.
If a question cannot be answered, the speaker will be advised when and how a
response will be given.
Other opportunities are available to address Council including public hearings and
delegations. The public may also make their views known to Council by writing or
via email and by attending open houses, workshops and information meetings.
Serving on an Advisory Committee is an excellent way to have a voice in the future
of this community.
For more information on these opportunities contact:
Clerk's Department at 604-463-5221 or clerks@mapleridge.ca
Mayor and Council at mayorandcouncil@mapleridge.ca
Checked by:
Date: [ 0 U G G
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO:
FROM:
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: June 23, 2010
and Members of Council FILE NO: DP/DVP/047/09
Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: C of W
SUBJECT: Development Permit and Development Variance Permit
22207 Brown Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Development Permit application and a Variance Permit application have been received for 22207
Brown Avenue to regulate the form and character of the proposed apartment building for the
"Supportive Housing Use" which falls within the north precinct of the Town Centre Area Plan. This
report will address the requirements of Section 8.11 of the Official Community Plan for the Town
Centre Development Permit Guidelines. On June 22, 2010, Council gave final reading to the Zoning
Bylaw amendment required for this proposal.
The project is a partnership between the District (land -owners), BC Housing (project -funding) and the
Alouette Home Start Society (operators). The subject property, owned by the District of Maple Ridge
is being leased to BC Housing. BC Housing is committed to make it a "LEED-Gold Certified building"
and is funding the project as part of the Provincial Homelessness Initiative Program.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DVP/047/09 respecting property located
at 22207 Brown Avenue; and further
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DP/047/09 respecting property located at
22207 Brown Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant Anthony Milkovich of NSDA Architects
Owner: District Of Maple Ridge
Legal Description: Lot: 1, D.L.: 399, Plan: LMP12218; PID: 018-066-496
OCP:
Existing: Med/High Density Residential
Proposed: Med/High Density Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RT-1 (Two Family Urban Residential), RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential)
Proposed: RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
iEI17,1
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Multi -family
Zone: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Low-rise Apartment
South: Use: Commercial
Zone: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential) and C-3
(Town Centre Commercial)
Designation: Commercial
East: Use: School District 42 office
Zone: P-6 (Civic Institutional) and RM-3 (High density
apartment)
Designation: Institutional
West: Use: Single family dwellings
Zone: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Park
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Previous Applications:
b) Project Description:
Vacant
Supportive Housing
0.171 Hectares (1709.99 m2)
Vehicular: 222nd street & Brown Avenue;
Pedestrian access: Brown Avenue
Full Urban
RZ/047/09
The subject site totaling 1709.99 m2, owned by the District of Maple Ridge is located north of Brown
Avenue and east of 222nd Street, within the North View Precinct of the Town Centre Area. The
proposal is for a Supportive Housing use in a 4-storey wooden framed structure. 46 units (45 studio
units plus 1 care -taker suite) with 13 under -ground parking stalls and 3 at grade parking stalls have
been proposed. The project is anticipated to achieve LEED-Gold certification (44 LEED credits
anticipated), which is a BC Housing commitment province -wide for similar projects. The District
owned land is currently vacant and centrally located with respect to public transport and other
amenities. The land will remain in District ownership and be leased for this use as specified in the
lease document approved by Council.
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan & the Town Centre Area Plan:
The Town Centre area is divided into 7 precincts and the subject site lies within the North View
Precinct. The North View Precinct lies directly north of the Town Centre's civic core, between 124tn
Avenue to the north, Brown Avenue to the south, Dunbar Street to the West and Burnett Street to the
east.
-2-
Among other designations, the North View Precinct supports "Low -Rise Apartments" which is the
Town Centre area designation for the subject site. The Low -Rise Apartment use is intended to be a 3
to 5 storey apartment form of housing with central access to all the units and underground parking.
North View Precinct - Town Centre Develo ment Permit Guidelines:
The Town Centre Development Permit Guidelines are meant to provide possible design solutions for
achieving architecture and site -related development objectives. Application of the North View
Precinct -Town Centre Development Permit Guidelines have been assessed against the following:
• Promote North and South View as distinctive, highly livable multifamily neighbourhoods.
The proposed 46-unit supportive housing building is an addition to the mix of existing
housing types, bringing in the "social housing" element. It is a special use that requires a
single secured entry and no balconies for individual units due to the nature of the use itself,
however an effort is seen to compensate the absence of balconies and increase livability
through bay windows, horizontal sunshades and a semi -private amenity garden (open space)
proposed at the eastern portion of the site controlled by swing gates to allow enclosure &
safety. An apartment use of medium density in form fits well within the neighbourhood and
achieves good connectivity with the central business district.
• Create a pedestrian -friendly, ground -oriented, multifamily community.
Due to the nature of the supportive housing use, the proposal shows a single controlled
entry from Brown Avenue which is the main pedestrian access to the building. Vehicular
access to the underground parkade is proposed from 222nd Street via a security gate and a
secondary vehicular access is from the east. The underground parking separates vehicular
circulation from pedestrian. Due to the nature of the use, individual entries to the units were
not encouraged.
• Maintain cohesive building styles.
The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses: an apartment building on the north,
institutional use on the east, single family residential use on the west and commercial use
on the south. The single family residential properties on the west are designated as "Park" in
the future and many are currently owned by the District. The proposed building is of a
contemporary residential style massing and finishes. It utilizes materials such as vertical
brick veneer cladding, a canopy to mark the pedestrian access; painted cement board siding
and panels; painted wooden trim; stained wood and prefinished metal fencing and
composite panel siding.
• Capitalize on important views.
The proposed structure is slightly taller than the existing older multi -family building on the
north and as a result will render some views to the upper units. Proposed hedges and trees
help in channelizing the views south, east and west.
• Provide private and semi -private green space.
A single pedestrian access and secured under -ground parking is proposed to reduce
vandalism, retain control over entry into and exit from the building and increase overall
W11
safety. A semi -private open space and garden is provided on the eastern portion of the site
controlled by swing gates to allow enclosure & safety.
• Provide climate appropriate landscaping and green features.
The proposed landscaping on site includes a balanced combination of soft and hard
landscape elements such as lawn, shrubs, trees, raised planters, hedges, gravel paving,
concrete paver surfaces, benches, timber bollards and a bio-swale. The project is anticipated
to achieve LEED—gold standard (44 credits) hence effort has been put in to carefully
designing the landscaping and other green features. The deciduous street trees will render
shade to pedestrians in the summer months.
• Maintain street interconnectivity
No changes to the surrounding streets will occur as a result of this project.
Green Building Components:
The Town Centre Area Plan emphasizes the importance of sustainable building practices for
development proposals, through several policies within the Official Community Plan. The proposed
building has been registered with the Canadian Green Building Council and is anticipated to achieve
44 credits through the LEED certification process to become a "LEED-Gold Building". Some of the
green design elements contributing towards LEED-Gold rating are:
• Proximity of the subject site to public transit bus routes 701, C-44, C-45, C-46, C-47 and the
Port Haney West Coast Express Train Station;
• Multi -modal connectivity: subject site is on the bicycle network route and long-term bicycle
parking (bicycle storage lockers) and short-term bicycle storage (bicycle racks near the main
entrance) have been proposed in the building;
• Water -efficiency through low -flow fixtures, landscaping requiring minimal water, rainwater
leaders and bio-swale;
• High-energy performance building envelope with low -emitting glass, optimal window sizes,
increased thermal insulation and energy -efficient mechanical & electrical design;
• Storage of recyclable material and proper construction management to reduce waste from
landfill;
• Use of building materials with recycled content and Certified wood where ever possible; and
• Maximizing occupant comfort by control of indoor environmental quality (low emitting paints,
occupant sensors for lighting & heating controls, central heat -recovery ventilation system,
etc);
Zoning Bylaw:
On June 22, 2010, Council gave final reading to the rezoning application. The proposed RM-2
(Medium Density Apartment Residential) zone is intended for low to medium density apartment use
and permits a maximum floor space ratio of 1.8 times the net lot area. The proposed floor space
ratio is 1.12 with a total gross floor area of 2565 m2 with each self-contained unit of 37 m2 (400 ft2)
and one larger caretaker unit. The useable open space required in this zone is 341.99 m2 (20% of
the lot area) and proposed usable open space is 616.7 m2 (36.3%). The proposed common activity
area of 117 m2 is a triangular shaped room with an open space for seating, a TV, computer work
stations, a sink and fridge, a common washroom and a connection to a common laundry room. The
required common activity area in the zone is 46 m2.
i!
The height of the building in this zone must not exceed 15.0 meters or 4 storeys. The proposed
building is 13.09 meters up to the roof parapet. However the top of the mechanical room & elevator
shaft extend 0.30 meters beyond 15.0 meters. As section 403 (6) Height Exceptions exempts this
item, a height variance is not required.
Variances to the Zoning Bylaw:
The zone specifies a 7.5 meter setback from all property lines. The applicant is seeking the following
setback variances:
• 1.824 meter setback variance to the west
• 0.402 meter setback variance to the north
• 3.356 meter setback variance to the south
The above listed setback variances do not adversely impact any surrounding properties and all the
sides have been designed to be fenced and landscaped for screening and shade.
Off -Street Parking & loading Bylaw:
This proposal is subject to the revised minimum parking standards applicable within the Central
Business District of the Town Centre Area due to its location and special use (Supportive Housing).
The Town Centre Parking Strategy done by Bunt & Associates was based on research of existing
scenarios and potential future land -use scenarios, density, projected population and mix of land -
uses identified within the Town Centre Area. As per Section 10.1 of the Maple Ridge Off -Street
Parking and Loading Bylaw # 4350-1990, revised parking standards for a "Supportive Housing Use"
specify a minimum of 0.35 spaces per unit. Based on this ratio a total of 16 parking spaces
(including four visitor parking stalls) have been proposed; 13 in the underground parkade and 3
spaces at grade along the eastern property boundary. Access to the underground parkade is from
222nd Street via a security gate and access to the at grade stalls is from the Brown Avenue road
right-of-way on the south-east property line. Section 10.3 of the Maple Ridge Off -Street Parking and
Loading Bylaw # 4350-1990 specifies long-term and short-term bicycle parking standards for various
uses. For this proposal, a total of 6 short-term bicycle parking rack and 24 long-term bicycle parking
stalls in the form of bicycle storage lockers in the under -ground parkade have been proposed. The
required short-term bicycle parking is provided at grade, closer to the main entrance of the building
on the right hand side, in a well -lit area visible to pedestrians and cyclists.
d) Advisory Design Panel:
On July 14, 2007, the Advisory Design Panel reviewed the proposal and commended the
applicant on the quality of ADP package, presentation and choice of material and resolved that
the following issues be addressed with the Planning Department:
• Landscaping around the concrete pad; either relocate it downstairs or change the
material type and add a buffer around the garbage pad;
• Proposed gravel path from exist stair; change material and consider shifting it for tree
preservation;
• Applicant to investigate the treatment of the corner to add an urban element like a
sitting area and maintain continuity to current landscaping along 222nd and the Town
Centre Area. Look at connecting the corner to the entry;
• Hedging around the at grade parking to provide a landscaped buffer;
-5-
• Provide additional detail for the raised planters in the outdoor open space;
• BCNTA details (including soil depths, planting spacing, etc) are required to be
incorporated on all landscape drawings prior to DP approval;
• Recommend the possible deletion of the parking stalls to the east property line of the
building.
The project architect has made the recommended revisions to address the panel concerns except
the possible deletion of the at grade parking stalls as the project must comply with the minimum
Town Center Area parking standards for the Supportive Housing use.
e) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The mail -outs to inform residents of the proposed setback and height variances were mailed 10 days
prior to the anticipated Council Meeting date. Concerned residents in the neighbourhood have had
the opportunity to voice their opinions.
f) Financial Implications:
In accordance with Council's Landscape Security Policy, a refundable security equivalent to 100% of
the estimated landscape cost will be provided to ensure satisfactory provision of landscaping in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Development Permit. The estimated landscape
cost by Eckford & Associates Landscape Architecture Inc. dated May 11, 2010 is $146,463.80.
There will be trees added to the municipal street tree inventory on completion of this project. The
costs associated with maintaining these trees will need to be included in a subsequent operating
budget.
g) Alternatives:
Council has given final reading to the rezoning application on June 22, 2010 and approved the lease
for the Supportive Housing Use. Not approving this proposal would result in a zoned and
consolidated piece of land remaining vacant within the Town Centre Area. Under Section 919.1 of
the Local Government Act and Section 8.11 of the Official Community Plan the property has been
included in the Town Centre Development Permit Area. Council approval is required for the Town
Centre Development Permit as presented in this report prior to a Building Permit being issued. The
applicant anticipates proceeding in a project time -line which will see construction begin this year.
CONCLUSION:
The proposal is centrally located, served by public transit bus routes and an initiative to reduce
homelessness and provide secure, affordable social housing for the homeless and those at risk of
homelessness in the District. The project design is a partnership between the District (land -owners),
BC Housing (project -funding) and AHSS-Alouette Home Start Society (operators). This is the first
Supportive Housing Project within the District and is anticipated to be a starting point in addressing
the social housing requirements for our community. The proposed building features articulated
fagades with quality materials chosen for its durability, recycled content and aesthetic appeal. It is
an effort to advance environment -friendly and sustainable development within Maple Ridge through
the LEED-Gold certification.
The proposal by nature of use is different compared to typical apartment type uses within the Town
Center Area that are designed as standard multi -family buildings. In spite of its differences, the
proposal largely complies with the Town Center Development Permit Guidelines. The proposed
setback variances are of a minor nature and do not negatively impact the neighbouring properties.
Therefore, it is recommended that DP/047/09 and DVP/047/09 be approved.
k �, k " wK::::: -
Prepared by asika Acha , B-Arch, M-Tech, UD, LEED® AP
Planner
Plckerin , MCIP
l;or- j*nning
Approved by: Fronk Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
Public Works & Development
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
RA/d p
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A -
Subject Map
Appendix B -
Under -ground Parking Plan
Appendix C -
Site Plan
Appendix D -
Building Elevations
Appendix E -
Building Sections
Appendix F -
Landscape Plan
Appendix G -
Landscape details
-7-
A
95
00Appendix
179
12182
51
P 49482
r +ivov
r +rcii
rn 2
96
P 57090
m
12168
Pcl."A"
d 12159
NWS 1357
59
97
12158
W
12151/73
12170
1
1 CID 13
12147
12149
275
98
li
14
$
12138
12
2
N 12139
0 274
11
3
Rem
12131
99
12129
21
12120
4 10
273
G
a 15
�
P 10689
r!-
Z
"B
r 12127
100
5
12123
(P 9669)
d
3
12112
16
6 7 8 9
272
280
12119
12128
12117
01
12106
v
N 1- P 1 997
NWS 133
LIMP
27702
17
281
cfl
v o Q m P
Q
N r ch `°
cn
1
12097
lzoss
N a N N
,z,,,
N SUBJECT PROPERTY
N
18
103
121 AVE.
i
(P 3
d
12086
N O
N
O
Me
m
104
N N
N
9s
N
N
N
N
19
12087
1
7)
12080
K L M
N
LMP 27701
P 169 7
LMP 12218
BROWN
AVE.
105
12075
1
1
12070
N
12061
P 169 7
N
Rem 8
106
J I H
G
P
20094
12060
�
r
0
55 Lr)
N N
N 12061
M
D
107
CHURCH AVE.
A
r120148
12048
P 20094
LMP 8411
12051
m
N
108
N
F
a
4 rn
a
1
12032
12038
9
2OM12
E
12035
a
3
50
109
P 14898
Cn
P 20094
12026
M
C
12028
li
P 0669
N
A LIS
P 20094
c
5
110
w2
0 1 v
0.
�
� rn
� n"ryry'i d
�
1 fl
N
N N
(oyy
yy N to
�+
N 'LMP2967
N
DEWDNEY
TRUNK RD.
W
RP 59105
E
m
a
a1/2
E
N r
Rem
m
N M
N
N
N
N
1/2 O
m E
2
N
N N
N
N
N
N h
n E
o
N
N
�12 11 N
cA.. n
O N E N N CC N N
A P 70168 r N N N P 8978 N N
P
Q) 0- P 632 N 32 16
C P 3175 NWS 2870 M w N
-kWS 3233
City of Pitt -
Meadows
- !
22207 BROWN AVENUE
_
�- — !Cn
-
' of
CORPORATION OF
e _
THE DISTRICT OF
!
.� MAPLE RIDGE
N
1
l � District of }
Langley 1
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Jun 23, 2009 FILE: VP/047/09 BY: PC
SCALE 1:2,000
J
d
��FRASER .A.
Appendix B
YI i 3 m
I
s
I I --
t
sR� - 'R
r
��
�
•
B _
t
'PEA
—
I
8
I
u=
Appendix C
Appendix D
!��
{
�),,
�
/)!!))!
•.{.
���` /■
]-
|!!!
ƒ
G
All
!!�
Z ■ \ 2: /. 2 !;!
co
±
]
Appendix E
1�
IN
w
Ac.,
� K t
1
o�
Qm
a1c
V
W
;rn
�t
w
2 �
N
3$
a 'k ;9ii �ry�
�VJW
Annimnriiy
Appendix �
I
I
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
L•1611ALei &]aaMU121:a•INa
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
DATE: June 22, 2010
FILE NO: AL/053/10
ATTN: C of W
Non -Farm Use Application from the Agricultural Land Reserve
25433 117 Avenue, 25412 117 Avenue, 25494117 Avenue, & Lot B Plan
6831.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A non -farm use application has been received under Section 20 (1) of the Agricultural Land
Commission Act. The purpose of this application is to legitimize a use that has been found non-
compliant by the Agricultural Land Commission. The site area is approximately 9.1 hectares
(22.5 acres) within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The applicant has expressed the intent to use
the site for agri-tourism purposes but does not have farm status as defined by BC Assessment
Authority. The property is therefore limited to the uses permitted in the RS-3 One Family Rural
Residential Zone.
RECOMMENDATION:
That application AL/053/10 be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission for their
consideration.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Gordon Robson
Owner: Gordon Robson & Marina M Robson
Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 12 Lot: 9, Section: 14,
Township: 12, Plan: 2701 Lot: B, Section: 14,
Township: 12, Plan: 6831 Lot: C, Section: 14,
Township: 12, Plan: 6831
OCP:
Existing: Agricultural
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation Agricultural
South: Use: Regional Park Site
1102
East: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation Agricultural
West: Use: Regional Park Site
Existing Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
b) Project Description:
Rural Residential and Golf Course
9.1 hectares (22.5 acres)
117 Avenue
Water and Septic Disposal
The applicant describes the landscape treatment as a pitch and putt operation. This operation is
proposed to be run by a non-profit society engaged in agri-tourism as well as farming.
c) Context:
SITE HISTORY
May 2005
District records indicate that the site has been prepared with soil amendments brought on site with
knowledge and consent from the Agricultural Land Commission, based on an understanding that the
intent of the landscape modifications (placement of 5.0 cm of sand) was to enhance the agricultural
potential of the subject properties (Commission File No. 320-30) which at the time were to be used
for a hazelnut orchard.
October 2005
District records indicate that questions arose within the neighbourhood about a golf course being
constructed on the subject properties.
November 2005.
Notes to file dated November 3, 2005 indicates the Commission would not be concerned about a
golf course for private use.
Spring 2010
The Commission raised concerns about the property being used as outdoor recreation. On demand
by the Commission, the applicant has filed this non -farm use application for this landscape
treatment.
Analysis:
The applicant was given permission to modify the subject properties on the premise that the
intended use was for agricultural purposes. However, it is important to consider that neither the
Commission nor the District's bylaws would require property owners to farm their properties.
Private land that is developed for sports activities could be considered a part of a rural residential
lifestyle provided that the use of that property was solely for the personal enjoyment of the
occupant. However, properties with Rural Residential zoning could not legitimately engage in
outdoor commercial recreation activities unless those activities were demonstrably related and
accessory to a principal agricultural use in compliance with the policies of the Agricultural Land
Commission. A commercial recreation use would be indicated by the following:
• allowing the general public to engage in activities for a fee,
• advertising the use of the space for a fee,
• posting admission rates or membership fees for the use of the site,
• signage indicating the use of the site for the general public.
Although the subject properties are not being used for agricultural purposes according to BC
Assessment Authority information, it seems reasonable to conclude that the site preparation
undertaken so far would not preclude agricultural uses at a later date.
Zoning Bylaw
The subject properties are zoned RS-3 One Family Rural Residential. A proposed text amendment to
the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw is currently under review by Council. If successful, the permitted uses
will be expanded as stated within the Zoning Bylaw for properties within the Agricultural Land
Reserve. These expanded uses will better align the Zoning Bylaw with the policies of the Agricultural
Land Commission. This proposed bylaw amendment will recognize the following as activities
designated as farm use:
• Agri -tourism Activities in the ALR
• Farm Product Processing in the ALR
• Farm Retail Sales in the ALR
• Wineries and Cideries in the ALR
The applicant wishes to be considered as an agri-tourism use with a pitch and putt operation
combined with diverse agricultural activities. The Commission's requirements for permitting uses as
agri-tourism are discussed later in this report.
Official Community Plan
The subject property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve and therefore is designated Agriculture
in the Official Community Plan. As noted earlier in this report, if this application for non -farm use is
approved by the Agricultural Land Commission, the applicant will have the right to use the subject
properties for rural residential, agricultural, or personal use only. Outdoor commercial recreation
activities are not permitted within the RS-3 One Family Rural Residential Zone unless they
considered by the Commission to meet their conditions for agri-tourism.
If the applicant wishes to pursue an outdoor commercial recreation use which is not considered to
be a bona fide agri-tourism use, a rezoning of the subject properties to permit this use would be
required.
992
The Official Community Plan makes allowances for rezoning properties for non -farm use purposes.
Appendix C of the Official Community Plan (the Zoning Matrix) notes that any zone may be aligned
with the Agricultural designation for non farm uses that have been permitted by the Commission.
Agricultural Land Commission
The Commission permits temporary and seasonal agri-tourism activities in the Agricultural Land
Reserve provided the land is assessed as 'farm' under the Assessment Act and provided the activity
promotes or markets farm products produced on that farm. These activities are accessory and, at
the same time, related to the principle use of the farm or ranch and must promote or market farm
products from the farm or ranch. This use is permitted only if the property is assessed as 'farm' and
if the assessment changes, this use is no longer permitted.
The subject properties do not currently have assessed farm status and on this basis alone, could not
qualify as agri-tourism. It is worthwhile noting that there are golfing facilities within British Columbia
that do combine bona fide farming and this outdoor recreation use. From their perspective, the
Commission still considers this recreation use to be a non -farm use (the use is not considered an
accessory to the farm use). If these other examples are an indication, the portions of the subject
properties that are developed for this recreational use would still need to be rezoned appropriately if
the applicant wished to charge admissions or membership fees to participants. To allow outdoor
commercial recreation uses on the subject properties with their existing RS-3 One Family Rural
Residential Zoning, the Commission would have to expressly state that they considered the use to
meet their conditions for agri-tourism.
d) Alternatives:
This application has been made as a result of bylaw enforcement action upon the applicant by the
Agricultural Land Commission, who advised the applicant how to proceed. On this basis the staff
recommendation is to forward the application to the Commission for their further consideration. If
Council denies this application, the Commission would likely continue with their course of action.
CONCLUSION:
This report discusses the history of the subject properties, and the implications for agri-tourism as
they relate to the subject properties within the context of their RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Zoning. As noted in the report, under the current zoning of the subject properties, an outdoor
commercial recreation use could only be permitted if this application is approved by the Commission
for both a non -farm and an agri-tourism use, and if the properties attain farm status through BC
Assessment Authority. If the application is approved for non -farm use only, the applicant will be
restricted to personal use only for the pitch and putt portion of the subject properties. Under these
conditions, the applicant could not legally seek admission fees or membership charges from
participants without first rezoning the properties to permit outdoor commercial recreation. Should
this development proposal proceed to an eventual rezoning application, Council would need to
assess the merits of the proposed zoning amendment at the time of application.
It is noted that property owners are not required to farm within the Agricultural Land Reserve, and
can develop and use their properties for personal use. It appears that the landscape modifications
introduced by the applicant would not preclude farming the property at a later date.
This application has originated on the basis of bylaw enforcement action by the Agricultural Land
Commission. Based on this and other circumstances as noted in this report, the recommendation is
to forward the application to the Commission for their consideration.
z -7�)
Prepared by: Diana Hall
Planner II
1
Approved.by ne i ,1 C , MCIP
rectoi`of Planning
1
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
GM: Public Works & Developme t Services
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rulk
Chief Admini rative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: Subject Map
Appendix B: Applicant information
-5-
f-
Pd. 31
RP 68686
Appendix A
P 4247
4
P 3164
N 117 AVE
Pd. 29
RP 66834 - -_
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
e
P 6831
Rem B
'PP107
5
I
EP 32717
1
HP J/22
116 AVE
I
31098
i
14
}1 12 13
,L 10
ya
Q P 2509
55 P 09
P 5119
P 37096
I
City of Pitt
Meadows • 25412/33/94 117 AVENUE &
° LOT B, PLAN 6831
CORPORATION OF
i - THE DISTRICT OF
N District of • + MAPLE RIDGE
`� = f I� I o,
Langley ; _ I ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SCALE 1:3,000 -— - o fit'
DATE: Jun 11, 2010 FILE: AL/053/10 BY: PC
Appendix B
Heather Hills Farm Society
25494 1 1 7th Avenue
Maple Ridge, BC V411 1132
Telephone: (604) 462-1004
May 10, 2010
Agriculture Land Commission
133 — 4940 Canada Way
Burnaby, BC V5G 41<6
Atttention: Mr. Thomas Loo
Agriculture Compliance & Enforcement Officer
Dear Mr. Loo:
Re: ALC File #46751
In response to your letter of March 9 and our many telephone discussions since, our
response is as follows:
All of our lands have been leased to the Heather Hills Farm Society with restricted uses.
The conditions of the lease are that the society must preserve the lands for present and
future use as a farm supporting the Maple Ridge farming community. Any net proceeds
derived from the farm are to be used to help youth in need in our community.
In your letter, you allege and conclude that the property is being used for non farm uses.
It is our advised position that our seasonal agri-tourism activities qualify under Part 2
(Permitted Uses) Section 2(e). Our pitch and putt is temporary and seasonal, and
promotes and markets farm products grown on the farm.
As we have explained to you, our soil (confirmed by the BC Agriculture Department) is a
very poor quality for raising farm products. We have 50 to 100 feet of blue clay with an
average of two to three inches of top soil. Enclosed with this letter is a report on the
operations of Heather Hills Farm Society as you have requested.
We perceive your letter to be an unwarranted attack on our farm; one that has caused
us and continues to cause us damage.
In that regard, we wish to bring this matter to a speedy conclusion so we may proceed
with our contract to be included in the test orchards with the BC Hazelnut Growers
Association and the Department of Agriculture.
If it is the Commission's desire to weaken the agriculture restrictions currently imposed
on our farm by the Agricultural Land Commission and wish us to apply for a permitted
use, we will comply. Although we feel it is not necessary, we have also enclosed a
signed application for a non -farm use in the ALR.
In closing, we ask you to expedite your actions in regard to our farm
Sincerely,
HEATHER HILLS FARM SOCIETY
Per:
GORDON ROBSON
PRESIDENT
/mr
MAPLE RIDGE
Deep Roots
Greater Height
feel
FROM:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: June 25, 2010
and Members of Council FILE NO: E02-010-128
Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: C of W
SUBJECT: Award of Contract (Reference No. ITT-EN10-162; Project No. E02-010-128)
Abernethy Way Realignment at 224 Street (from 500m east of Blackstock Street
to 160m east of 224 Street)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The realignment of Abernethy Way at 224 Street has been identified in the OCP since 1996.
Approval from the Agricultural Land Commission was first obtained in the mid 1990s and reaffirmed
in April 2010. The intersection is currently an off -set intersection and the plan identified in the
Capital Works Program is to realign a 200 metre section of Abernethy Way. This realignment will
change the T-intersections into one intersection. The project plan also includes constructing bicycle
lanes, a storm sewer, and traffic signals, as well as installing streetlights at the intersection. The
project involved obtaining necessary property to realign the road.
The project has been approved for a Federal Infrastructure Grant. The project was tendered on May
25, 2010 and closed on June 15, 2010. Six tenders were received and the lowest compliant bid was
submitted by Tag Construction Ltd. at $1,328,000.00.
A number of Open Houses and meetings have been held to provide information on the design and
staff are recommending that Council approve the award of the construction contract.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Contract (Reference No. ITT-EN10-162; Project No. E02-010-128) Abernethy Way Realignment
at 224 Street, be awarded to Tag Construction Ltd. in the amount of $1,328,000.00 plus applicable
taxes; and
THAT the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The realignment of Abernethy Way at 224 Street, currently an off -set intersection, has been
identified in the OCP since 1996. The project objectives are to combine two existing T-
intersections into one 4 leg intersection by realigning a 200 metre section of Abernethy Way.
As well, the project includes constructing bicycle lanes on the approaches and a storm sewer,
1103
and installing a traffic signal and streetlights at the intersection of 224 Street and Abernethy
Way. The proposed improvements have been approved in the District's 2010 Capital Budget
and grant funding has been confirmed.
Tender results
Six tenders were received and opened in public on June 15, 2010. These are listed below
from lowest to highest price.
TAG Construction Ltd.
Mainland Civil Works Inc.
Triahn Entreprises Ltd.
BD Hall Constructors Corp.
Imperial Paving Ltd.
Double M Excavating Ltd.
Tender Price (excluding taxes)
$1,328,000.00
$1,348,408.10
$1,369,822.60
$1,407,571.99
$1,428,027.00
$1,637,336.18
The lowest compliant bid was $1,328,000.00 from TAG Construction Ltd. They are a
qualified contractor that has successfully completed previous road improvement projects for
the District.
b) Desired Outcome:
The desired outcome of this report is to obtain Council approval to award the contract and
proceed with the intersection improvements.
c) Strategic Alignment:
This project completes a section of the Abernethy Way Corridor that will provide an east -west
route from Golden Ears Way to 232 Street.
d) Citizens/Customer Implications:
The project will improve the safety and mobility for all users. There were two Open Houses
held, the first on November 19, 2009 and the second on April 20, 2010. Staff have made
considerable effort to address all comments and developed a design that balances the
objectives. Individual meetings have been held with property owners located at the four
corners of the intersection as well as other key property owners.
In order for the project to proceed, Rights -of -Ways (ROW) were expropriated from two
properties west of 224 Street. An existing barn will need to be removed and staff are
working with the owner on the issue of constructing a new replacement which will require a
variance to existing setback requirements.
Construction will commence soon after the project is awarded and attempts will be made to
minimize the impact to everyday traffic, residents, and businesses in the neighbourhood.
The road is expected to remain open to traffic throughout the construction. A communication
strategy will be developed to ensure that the travelling public and the adjacent property
owners are informed.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
This project is supported by a number of departments. The Operations Department has
provided input during the design stage and the Clerks Department is coordinating with legal
counsel on the legal and property matters.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The project received has approved federal funding and as such, the 2010 approved Capital
Budget provides sufficient funds under LTC 2003 to complete this work. The lowest tender is
below the estimated construction cost.
CONCLUSIONS:
The tender price of $1,328,000.00 (excluding taxes), by Tag Construction Ltd. for the Abernethy Way
Realignment at 224 Street project is the lowest tendered price. Council approval to award the work
to Tag Construction Ltd. is recommended.
Maria querra, PEng.
Senior,,Project Engineer
Reviewed by: AKdrew Wood, PhD., PEng.
Municipal Engineer
Financial review by: evor Thompson, CGA
Manager of Financial Planning
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
General Manager: Public Works & evelopment Services
Y
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule t,
Chief Administrative Officer
MG/mi
RIDGEMAPLE
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
Fire Hall # 1 Expansion and Renovations
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
DATE: June 28, 2010
FILE NO:
ATTN: C of W
The Fire Hall #1 construction project is drawing to a close and will be completed within the few weeks.
This report highlights the special features incorporated in the building's design and construction and
outlines the costs of the project.
The fire hall is now constructed to post disaster standards that are designed to allow the building to
continue to function during an earthquake or other catastrophic event. The building is equipped with an
emergency generator and the training room is equipped to function as an emergency operation centre. The
District's Information Technology Department has also established a back-up server in the fire hall to
ensure critical systems are maintained during an emergency.
In addition to being a post disaster building, the fire hall is a LEED Certified project. The building's in
ground geo-exchange heating/cooling system is a first of its kind for a municipal building in our
municipality. Other features incorporated into the design of the buildings electrical and mechanical
systems ensure the building will consume the least amount of water and electricity possible.
The sustainability aspects of this project have generated a lot of community interest and these features,
coupled with the post disaster construction standards, will serve our citizens well into the future.
RECOMMENDATIONN:
That the staff report dated June 28, 2010 titled Fire Hall #1 Expansion and Renovation be received
and that the following expenses, funded by the Fire Department Capital Acquisition Reserve Fund,
be approved.
Mierau Contractors
$7,741,871
Contract Additions
310,000
Professional Fees
750,000
Transition Costs
135,000
Total $8,936,871
Page 1 of 4 1131
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The fire hall #1 expansion and renovation project is coming to a close. While construction took
nearly two years, the project has been a work in progress for about 10 years. Property around the fire
hall had to be purchased and assembled. Further, site preparation, demolition of existing buildings,
the construction of Brown Avenue and maintaining operations during the renovations process all
presented challenges that were resolved satisfactorily.
In January 2006, a Request for Proposal for qualified architectural firms to provide professional
services related to the planning, design, renovation and expansion of our Number Fire Hall #1 was
issued. The architectural firm of Graham, Hoffart Mathiasen Architects was chosen to lead a team of
professionals who would design and oversee the project through to completion.
In addition to being constructed to post disaster standards, the fire hall project is a LEED Building
registered with the Canadian Green Building Council and while the final "points" tabulation will not
be completed for several months, we expect to achieve silver and possibly even gold rating. Of
particular note is the heating and cooling of the building which is provided by an in -ground geo-
exchange system that is economical to operate and, will significantly reduce the building's carbon
foot print. Careful selection of electrical and plumbing fixtures ensure the least amount of water and
electricity is consumed and the roofing material was selected to reflect as much heat as possible to
reduce the "heat island effect" of the building.
As the fire hall was constructed to post disaster standards to remain functional during a catastrophic
event, the District's Information Technology Department has established their primary backup server
within the fire hall as part of their disaster recover plan. The fire hall has a training room that is
equipped to function as the Districts Emergency Operations Center if needed.
In June, 2008, the District awarded the construction contract to Mierau Contractors of Abbotsford.
Construction began in July, 2008 and was designed to be completed in stages as the fire hall had to
remain operational at all times.
Over the 2 year course of the construction/renovation process, we have had to do work that was not
within the scope of the original tender. These costs are primarily associated with the renovation and
seismic upgrading of the existing portion of the fire hall that was originally constructed 40 years ago
and changes required to the design and installation of the buildings mechanical systems. The costs
associated with these additional works amount to $310,000 which equals 4% of the original contract
price for the Fire Hall project, bringing the total contract price to an estimated $8,051,871.
Professional fees total close to $750,000 which equates to just under 10% of the total contract price.
Professional fees on construction, renovation project of this magnitude typically equate to 12 to 16%
of the contract price.
Over the last 4 years, the District has incurred additional costs of $135,000 that have been required to
move the project forward and meet the operational needs of the department in the interim. Storage
containers were acquired to provide secure storage for emergency equipment during the renovation
process. Surveying, security fencing, geotechnical and environmental assessments were required prior
to design work and tendering taking place. Professional fees were incurred to assist with the design of
the building's telephone and security systems and to monitor such activities as asbestos removal,
environmental testing and qualitative material testing for steel, concrete and workmanship issues.
Page 2 of 4
In summary, the costs related to the expansion and renovations of the fire hall are as follows:
Mierau Contractors
$7,741,871
Contract Additions
310,000
Professional Fees
750,000
Transition Costs
135,000
Total $8,936,871
Of this amount, $7.5 million was funded from the Fire Department Capital Acquisition Reserve in
2009. The remainder will be funded from the same reserve this year. As can be seen from the
attached analysis of this account, there are sufficient funds to pay for this project, though some other
fire department projects needed to be deferred.
The Brown Ave Extension Project was funded from a combination of General Revenue, Development
Cost Charges and Capital Works Reserve at a total cost of $530,000. An additional lift of asphalt
paving will be applied later this year at an estimated cost of $75,000.
b) Desired Outcome(s):
A post disaster building that meets our evolving needs and reduces our carbon footprint.
c) Strategic Alignment
This project is in line with our objective of having a safe and livable community for our present and
future citizens. The special features of the project are also in line with Council's commitment to
sustainability.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
This is a building that our citizens can be proud of. It is also centrally located and will continue to
serve our community for years to come.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
The project was a collaborative effort of many departments, and in particular Public Works and
Development Services.
Page 3of4
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
This project represents a significant capital investment. Our focus on long term financial planning
allowed sufficient resources to be available to complete the project.
g) Policy Implications:
None
CONCLUSIONS:
The Fire Hall # 1 renovations and expansion project is nearing completion and this report provides an
overview of its features as well as the costs associated with the project.
1
- Z,4�
Prepare by: Dane Spe
Fire Chief/Director of Community Fire Safety
Prepared by: Peter Grootendorst,
Fire Chief/Director of Fire Operations
Approved by: Paul Gill,
GM: Corporate &/Kin'anc al Services
Concurrence: J . (Jim) Rute
,Chief Administrative Officer
Page 4of4
Fire Department Capital Acquisition Reserve Projection
$ thousands 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Opening Balance
Interest Earnings
Taxation/General Revenue
Planned Capital Expenditures
Fire Hall #4 Debt Payments
Fire Hall #1 Renovation
Unencumbered Balance
1,807
663
448
11 627
63
23
16
0 22
1,072
1,182
1,297
1,416 1,539
-841 -1,020 -950 0 -350
-400 -800 -800 -800
-7,504 -1,440
1,807 663 448 11 627 1,038
Planned Capital Expendiures Detail
$thousands 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Fire Hall #4 Engine New
Fire Hall #4 Rescue 4
Fire Hall #5 Land Acq
Fire Hall #1 Air Lighting Truck
Fire Hall #1 Antenna
Fire Hall #1 Computer Training Centre
Fire Hall #1 Sign
Fire Hall #3 Expansion
Fire Hall #3 Generator
Fire Hall #4 Equipment
Fire Hall #4 Protective & Safety Equip
Fire Hall #4 Technical & Furnishings
Fire Rescue Boat w/Trailer
Public Education Vehicle
525
25
45
60
50
ET, 1.
700
50
70
200
625
325
350
37
15
841 1,020 950 0 350
District of e Maple Rid
p g
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE:
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Disbursements for the month ended May 31, 2010
0:I X9i11I►V/:K11WliW110
June 25, 2010
Council has authorized all voucher payments to be approved by the Mayor or Acting Mayor and a
Finance Manager. Council authorizes the vouchers for the following period through Council resolution.
The disbursement summary for the past period is attached for information. Expenditure details are
available by request through the Finance Department.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the "disbursements as listed below for the month ended May 31, 2010 now be approved".
GENERAL $ 3,380,790
PAYROLL $ 1,455,321
PURCHASE CARD $ 108.531
$ 4.944&42
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The adoption of the Five Year Consolidated Financial Plan has appropriated funds and
provided authorization for expenditures to deliver municipal services.
The disbursements are for expenditures that are provided in the financial plan.
b) Community Communications:
The citizens of Maple Ridge are informed on a routine monthly basis of financial
disbursements.
1132
c) Business Plan / Financial Implications:
Highlights of larger items included in Financial Plan or Council Resolution
• Mierau - Fire Hall No. 1 expansion $ 270,417
d) Policy Implications:
Approval of the disbursements by Council is in keeping with corporate governance practice.
CONCLUSIONS:
The disbursements for the month ended May 31, 2010 have been reviewed and are in order.
Az�
f
Prepared by: G'Ann egg
Accounting Clerk II
Approved by. 'Trevor Thompson, CGA
Manager of Financial Planning
1
Approved by: Pa I Gilt BBA, CGA
M - r ra#e cial Services
Concurrence: /Chief
J.L. (Jim) Rule
Administrative Officer
gmr
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS - MAY 2010
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION OF PAYMENT
AMOUNT
666921 BC Ltd
Security refund
35,895
790827 BC Ltd
Security refund
156,591
Alouette River Management Soc
2010 service grant
20,000
Alpha Beta (228 St Hldgs) Corp
Security refund
40,957
BC Hydro
Hydro charges May
100,436
BC SPCA
Community Animal Centre development - 50%share
103,824
BDO Canada LLP
2009 Financial statement audit
26,208
Boileau Electric & Pole Ltd
Maintenance: Albion Sports Complex
6,253
Antenna installation @ McNutt Reservoir
298
Banners
1,824
Firehall
12,915
LED installation @ 224th & 223nd
1,206
Municipal Hall
1,340
Pole repairs
3,402
Street lighting
8,265
Telosky Stadium
1,236
Underground wiring repairs @ 240th & 104th
2,780
UPS installation @ 216th & Lougheed
2,586
42,105
CUPE Local 622
Dues - pay periods 10/09 & 10/10
22,387
Chevron Canada Ltd
Fuel June
57,104
Coral Engineering Limited
Leisure Centre heat recovery solution
86,611
Featherbed Holdings Inc
Security refund
35,801
Fitness Edge
Fitness classes & programs
17,779
Guillevin International Inc
Fire fighters' equipment
7,230
Fire fighters' protective wear
2,506
Operations electrical supplies
6,379
16,115
Happy Heart Fitness & Educ
Weight room supervision & childcare activity room
20,548
Holmes & Brakel (BC) Inc.
RCMP workstations
21,890
Integrated Direct Response Ser
Tax notice mailing
16,170
Kanaka Education & Enviromental
2010 service grant
20,000
Manulife Financial
Employee benefits premiums
98,033
Medical Services Plan
Employee medical & health premiums
26,499
Mierau
Fire Hall No. 1 expansion
270,417
Municipal Pension Plan BC
Pension remittance
273,178
Myra Systems Corp.
GIS spatial data engine
17,758
Server replacement module
1,661
19,419
Raincity Janitorial Sery Ltd
Janitorial services April & May:
Firehalls
5,982
Library
11,088
Municipal Hall
10,954
Operations
5,623
Randy Herman Building
8,277
RCMP
6,345
48,268
Receiver General For Canada
Employer/Employee remit PP10/09 & 09/10
658,346
RCMP services for film production
724
659,070
RG Arenas (Maple Ridge) Ltd
Ice rental April
57,812
Curling rink operating expenses March
Ridgemeadows Recycling Society
Monthly contract for recycling May
86,746
Weekly recycling
504
Litter pick-up contract
1,725
88,974
Ross Data Canada Limited
Smart-Tek Communications Inc
Terasen Gas
Union BC Municipalities - Vict
Warrington PCI Management
Disbursements In Excess $15,000
Disbursements Under $15,000
Total Payee Disbursements
Payroll
Purchase Cards - Payment
Total Disbursements May 2010
Annual maintenance fees
60,340
Database conversion
5,028
iRenaissance upgrade
5,038 70,406.52
Leisure Centre CCTV installation
27,552
Natural gas
22,777
West Nile Risk Reduction Initiative surplus funding refund
37,502
Advance for Tower common costs May
45,328
2,585,657
795,133
3,380,790
PP10/09 & PP10/10
1,455,321
GMR
\\DOVE\CorpServ\Finance\Accounting\Accounts Payable\AP Remittances (Disbursements)\2010\[Monthly Council Report 2010.xlsx]MAY'10
108,531
4,944,642