HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-07-19 Committee of the Whole Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
July 19, 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 RZ/093/06, 23050, 23024 and 23000 136 Avenue, Final One Year
Extension
Staff report dated July 7, 2010 recommending that a final one year extension
be granted for rezoning application RZ/093/06 to permit development of 84
single family lots and 6 street townhouses units (duplex -type units) under the
R-1 (Residential District), R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RS-1b
(One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential) and RST (Street Townhouse
Residential) zones.
Committee of the Whole Agenda
July 19, 2010
Page 2 of 3
1102 AL/048/10, 12787 256 Street
Staff report dated July 13, 2010 recommending that Application AL/048/10
to subdivide 6.4 hectares (15.1 hectares) of land within the Agricultural Land
Reserve not be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission.
1103 Award of Contract, River Road Drainage Improvements (Darby Street to
Carshill Street
Staff report dated July 14, 2010 recommending that the contract for River
Road Drainage Improvements (Darby Street to Carshill Street) be awarded to
Double M Excavating Ltd. and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to
execute the contract.
3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131 Disbursements for the Month Ended June 30, 2010
Staff report dated July 5, 2010 recommending that disbursements for June
2010 be approved.
4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES
1151
5. CORRESPONDENCE
i5val
6. OTHER ISSUES
1181
7. ADJOURNMENT
Committee of the Whole Agenda
July 19, 2010
Page 3 of 3
8. COMMUNITY FORUM
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: i " "f
Date: d
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Final One Year Extension Application
23050, 23024 and 23000 136 AVE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
DATE: July 07, 2010
FILE NO: RZ/093/06
ATTN: C of W
Council granted a one year extension to the above noted application on July 28, 2009. The
applicant has now applied for a final one year extension under Maple Ridge Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. This application is to permit the development of 84 single family
lots and 6 street townhouse units (duplex -type units) under the R-1 (Residential District), R-3
(Special Amenity Residential District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), and
RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zones.
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, a final one year
extension be granted for rezoning application RZ/093/06 (property located at 23050, 23024 and
23000 136 Avenue) and that the following conditions be addressed prior to consideration of final
reading:
(a) Department of Fisheries and Oceans approval for instream works and creek crossing in
the southwest corner of the site;
(b) Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement including the deposit of security as
outlined in the Agreement;
(c) Amendment to Part IV, Figure 2 (Land Use Plan), Figure 3A (Blaney Hamlet Land Use Plan)
and Figure 4 (Trails / Open Space) of the Silver Valley Area Plan of the Official Community
Plan.
(d) Registration of a Section 219 Covenant for a Geotechnical Report that addresses the
suitability of the site for the proposed development;
(e) A Statutory Right -of -Way plan and agreement must be registered at the Land Title Office
for the sanitary sewer system to be built from Foreman Drive and 136 Avenue;
(f) Consolidation of the development site;
-1-
1101
(g) Park dedication as required;
(h) Road dedication for site access purposes as required, including those portions of 136
Avenue and 231 Street south of 136 Avenue that will be located on the property north of
the development site (23103 136 Avenue);
(i) Construction of those portions of 136 Avenue and 231 Street south of 136 Avenue that
will be dedicated on the property north of the development site (23103 136 Avenue),
reconstruction of the portion of existing 136 Avenue from development site east to 232
Street to an urban standard, and construction of the emergency access road through the
Park land at the southwest corner of the site.
Q) Removal of the existing buildings;
(k) A Section 219 Restrictive Covenant for the duplex design must be registered at the Land
Title Office;
(1) Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management Act,
the Developer will provide a Site Profile for the subject lands.
(m) Construction of an equestrian trail through the Park along the south boundary of the site.
(n) An Archaeological Impact Assessment for potential archaeological finds on the site. is
required and any recommendations or impacts to be addressed.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: DAMAX CONSULTANTS LTD (Dave Laird)
Owner: PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION LTD
RAJINDER S CHHINA
Legal Description: N 1292' of Lot B, Sect 29, Tp 12, NWD, Plan 5048;
Lot 1, Sect 29, Tp 12, NWD Plan BCP29524;
Lot 2, Sect 29, Tp 12, NWD, Plan 5116.
OCP:
Existing: Eco Clusters, Low/Medium Density Residential,
Conservation
Proposed: Eco Clusters, Low/Medium Density Residential,
Conservation
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
-2-
Proposed: R-1(Residential District), R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential), RST (Street Townhouse Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North:
South
East
Use: Proposed Single Family, School and Park
Zone: Current: CD-3-98 and A-2
Under application for R-1, R-3, RS-1b, RST-SV and P-1
Designation Eco-Cluster, Low/Medium Density Residential, Low
Density Urban, Conservation
Use: Agriculture, Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3
Designation: Agricultural, ALR
Use: Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3
Designation: Eco-Cluster, Conservation
West: Use:
Zone:
Designation
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Companion Applications:
Proposed Eco-Cluster Single Family Residential
Current: RS-3
Under application for R-1, CD-3-98, RS-1d and RST
(RZ/070/06)
Eco-Cluster and Conservation
One Family Rural Residential
Eco-Cluster Single Family Residential and Street
Townhouse Residential
10.13 hectares (25 acres)
136 Avenue
Full Urban services to be provided.
SD/093/06, DP/093/06, VP/093/06
This application is to permit the development of 84 single family lots and 6 street townhouse units
(duplex -type units) under the R-1(Residential District), R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RS-
1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), and RST (Street Townhouse Residential)
zones.
The following dates outline Council's consideration of the application and Bylaws 6581-2008 and
6580-2008:
• The First Reading report (see attached) was considered on July 22, 2008;
• First Reading was granted July 22, 2008
• Public Hearing was held August 19, 2008;
• Second and Third reading was granted on August 26, 2008.
• First extension was granted July 28, 2009.
-3-
Application Progress:
The project has been delayed due to issues in resolving the downstream sanitary sewer trunk to the
sanitary pump station at Foreman Drive and 136 Avenue. This situation is expected to be resolved
shortly and the applicant is hoping to finalize the rezoning and subdivision in September 2010.
Alternatives:
Council may choose one of the following alternatives:
1. grant the request for extension;
2. deny the request for extension; or
3. repeal third reading of the bylaw and refer the bylaw to Public Hearing.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant has been actively pursuing the completion of this rezoning application and has applied
for a final one year extension. It is anticipated that within the next few months final consideration
will be applied for.
Prepared by: Ann kdwards
} Senipr PIAning Technician, CPT
e Pickeri CP, M.C.I.P
Director of'Wanni
Approved by: Frank Quinn
GM• bi!r�
s &D elop ent Services
Concurrence: J. L. (J'� ) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
AE/
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B - First Reading Report
$$ 66 ty N ]25
— 364056 65 ss N a 4
Q 64 �3say 27� 26 24 r 13633
PAVE $7
63 r7 SN 13620 U
58 62 '3s�, 18 19 2 13610
59
ZO 61 rJs25 � m � 1
60
136 AVE
o m
P 27885 76
80 79N 78^ 77 75 74 73 72
H R
P �
I
i
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
I
BCP 29524
P 14756 1
1 \ P 5048 P 5116
\\i\ N 1292' B 2
17
P
LMP 9042
2
RP 17267
A
District of L
Pitt Meadows , I
--
S. Valley I 23000/24/50 136 AVENUE
f1, _
r
--*r, o nay CORPORATION OF
.. I. � _
THE DISTRICT OF
N �aMAPLE RIDGE MAPLE RIDGE
District of f
_ ,I .c. ��- � � � ! PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Langley:. _' . l
SCALE 1:3,000 �� _ ,— L1I `
DATE: May 29, 2008 FILE: RZ/093/06 BY: PC
Mumma
.,
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
TO: His Worship Mayor Gordon Robson DATE: July 9, 2008
and Members of Council FILE NO: RZ/093/06
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6580 - 2008 and
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6581- 2008
23024, 23000 and 23050 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to R-1 (Residential District), R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RS-1b (One
Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential and RST (Street Townhouse Residential), to permit the
development of 84 single family lots and 6 street townhouse units (duplex -type units). The
proposed RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zone received 31d Reading from Council on October
25, 2007 as part of Rezoning application R7/070/06 on the adjacent property (Nelson Peaks) to
the west of this site. However, should the Nelson Peaks project not proceed or is delayed, this
application would be stalled awaiting the adoption of. the RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zone.
To avoid this potential delay it would be appropriate to proceed with another RST (Street Townhouse
Residential) zone bylaw. Whichever application proceeds to final reading first will adopt the bylaw.
The bylaw that does not complete can simply be closed.
The proposed development is consistent with the Silver Valley Area Plan policies for Eco-cluster
residential development in the Official Community Plan. This application requires an amendment to
the Official Community Plan to adjust the boundaries between Eco-Cluster and Conservation land
uses, and between Eco-Cluster and Low/Medium Density Residential in the northeast corner of the
site. The horse trail is to be relocated to the south end of the site.
The site is bounded by three branches of Cattell Brook on the west; south and east sides. Setbacks
from the top -of -bank have been provided and these areas will be dedicated as Park. The applicant
will also be providing Park dedication adjacent to the west side of the site entrance to protect a large
rocky outcropping as well as other areas within the central part of the development. The amount of
Park that will be dedicated for with this development is more than of 33% of the site area. A
Watercourse Protection and Natural Features Development Permit is required for this site.
An equestrian trail is proposed to run east/west through the dedicated park area across the south
end of the site. This trail will connect with new trails in proposed developments to the west and will
connect to the existing,trail network at 136 Avenue and Foreman Drive. A portion of this trail will
also serve as an emergency access route providing a secondary exit for emergency purposes only
and will connect with the proposed developments to the west.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6580 - 2008 be given first
reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
2. That in accordance with Section 870 of the Local Government Act opportunity for early and on
going consultation has been provided by way of posting Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6580 - 2008 on the municipal website and requiring that the applicant host a
Development Information Meeting, and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any
further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a public hearing on the bylaw;
3. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6580 - 2008 be considered in
conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6580 -
2008 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
5. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6581- 2008 be given first reading and be forwarded to Public
Hearing; and
6. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading:
a) Department of Fisheries and Oceans approval for instream works and creek crossing in
the southwest corner of the site;
b) Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement including the deposit of security as
outlined in the Agreement;
c) Amendment to Part IV, Figure 2 (Land Use Plan), Figure 3A (Blaney Hamlet Land Use Plan)
and Figure 4 (Trails / Open Space) of the Silver Valley Area Plan of the Official Community
Plan.
d) Registration of a Section 219 Covenant for a Geotechnical Report that addresses the
suitability of the site for the proposed development;
e) A Statutory Right -of -Way plan and agreement must be registered at the Land Title Office
for the sanitary sewer system to be built from Foreman Drive and 136 Avenue;
f) Consolidation of the development site;
-2-
g) Park dedication as required;
h) Road dedication for site access purposes as required, including those portions of 136
Avenue and 231 Street south of 136 Avenue that will be located on the property north of
the development site (23103 136 Avenue);
i) Construction of those portions of 136 Avenue and 231 Street south of 136 Avenue that
will be dedicated on the property north of the development site (23103 136 Avenue),
reconstruction of the portion of existing 136 Avenue from development site east to 232
Street to an urban standard, and construction of the emergency access road through the
Park land at the southwest corner of the site.
j) Removal of the existing buildings;
k) A Section 219 Restrictive Covenant for the duplex design must be registered at the Land
Title Office;
1) Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management Act,
the Developer will provide a Site Profile for the subject lands.
m) Construction of an equestrian trail through the Park along the south boundary of the site.
n) An Archaeological Impact Assessment for potential archaeological finds on the site is
required and any recommendations or impacts to be addressed.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Progressive Construction Ltd
Gezine M Doorman
Progressive Construction Ltd
Legal Description: N 1292' of Lot B, Sect 29, Tp 12, NWD, Plan 5048;
Lot 1, Sect 29, Tp 12, NWD Plan BCP29524;
Lot 2, Sect 29, Tp 12, NWD, Plan 5116.
OCP:
Existing: Eco Clusters, Low/Medium Density Residential,
Conservation
Proposed: Eco Clusters, Low/Medium Density Residential,
Conservation
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: R-1(Residential District) ,
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
-3-
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential
RST (Street Townhouse Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North:
Use:
Vacant
Zone:
CD-3-98 and A-2
Designation
Eco-Cluster, Low/Medium Density Residential, Low
Density Urban, Conservation
South:
Use:
Agriculture, Rural Residential
Zone:
RS-3
Designation:
Agricultural, ALR
East:
Use:
Rural Residential
Zone:
RS-3
Designation:
Eco-Cluster, Conservation
West:
Use:
Proposed Eco-Cluster Single Family Residential
Zone:
Current: RS-3
Under application for R-1, CD-3-98, RS-1d and RST
(RZ/070/06)
Designation:
Eco-Cluster and Conservation
Existing Use of Property: One Family Rural Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Eco-Cluster Single Family Residential and Street
Townhouse Residential
Site Area: 10.13 hectares (25 acres)
Access: 136 Avenue
Servicing: Full Urban services to be provided.
Companion Applications: SD/093/06, DP/093/06, VP/093/06
b) Project Description:
The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject site to permit the subdivision and development of
90 Eco-Cluster units, of which 84 are single family lots and 6 are street townhouse units (duplex -
type units). To provide a variety of lot sizes and housing types within the development in accordance
with the Silver Valley Area Plan, the following four zones are proposed:
• R-1(Residential District) to permit the subdivision of 55 lots;
• R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit the subdivison of 27 lots;
• RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit the subdivison
of 2 lots; and
• RST (Street Townhouse Residential) to permit the subdivision of 6 lots.
The proposed RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zone received 3rd Reading from Council on
October 25, 2007 as part of Rezoning application RZ/070/06 on the adjacent property to the west
of this site. This applicant is proposing a similar duplex -style form of fee -simple townhouse that will
not be bound together by a strata -title, but instead will be subdivided along the line that extends
through the party -wall and continues to the front and rear lot lines. An easement and maintenance
-4-
agreement will be registered on these. lots at subdivision to ensure that all joint servicing and
maintenance issues are addressed prior to occupancy.
Road access to this site will require the dedication and construction of a road on the property north
of this site (23103 136 Avenue) as an extension of 136 Avenue to the intersection with the main
access road into this development. The applicant will also provide improvements to the existing
portion of 136 Avenue east of the development site to 232 Street to meet an urban standard within
the existing road right-of-way. A secondary emergency access road will be constructed to connect
this development with the 2 proposed eco-cluster developments to the west. The right-of-way for the
emergency access road will also incorporate the equestrian trail and sanitary sewer right-of-way in
the southwest corner and will connect to the lower loop road on the site.
The site is bounded by three branches of Cattell Brook on the west, south and east sides. Setbacks
of 30 metres from the top -of -bank have been provided and these areas will be dedicated as Park.
The applicant will also be providing Park dedication adjacent to the west side of the site entrance to
protect a large rocky outcropping as well as additional areas within the central part of the
development. The amount of Park that will be dedicated with this development is more than 33% of
the site area with an additional 11% for Parkettes. A Watercourse Protection and Natural Features
Development Permit is required.
The residential development proposed for this site is aligned with the Eco-Cluster designation as
defined in the Silver Valley Area Plan.
Running concurrently with this application are a Subdivision application for 90 residential lots; an
Environmental Development Permit for watercourse and natural features protection; and an
Intensive Residential Development Permit for the lots to be zoned R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District). The applicant has requested a Development Variance Permit for some of the R-1
(Residential District) zoned lots to reduce the rear setback from 8m to 6m and reduce the front
setback from 5.5m to 4m for the building while retaining the 5.5m front setback to the garage, and
to vary the maximum height to 11m for the R-1 (Residential District) and R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) zoned lots. A Restrictive Covenant for building design will be required for the
duplex -style street townhouse lots.
c) . Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
This Eco-Cluster development is one of only a few Silver Valley sites to date that has required
rezoning in addition to a subdivision application, as most of the previous Eco-Cluster developments
have occurred on pre -zoned land. This project is consistent with the proposed Eco-Cluster
development on the adjacent site to the west, which received third reading from Council on October
25, 2007.
An Eco-Cluster is defined in the Silver Valley Area Plan as "a group of housing units, condensed
within clearly defined limits, surrounded by open space and linked to other pants of the Silver Valley
community by a single local road" and includes the following principles:
• Condensing housing clusters within clearly defined limits;
-5-
• Considering a variety of lot sizes and housing types within the overall site density;
• Proposing minimal site re -grading;
• Incorporating parkettes, which serve as green frontage for most units;
• Maximizing retention of existing vegetation;
• Limiting development to areas where existing grades are less than 20%;
• Natural open spaces are connected and continuous, creating wildlife corridors;
• Protecting environmentally sensitive areas through public ownership;
• Retaining and enhancing unique natural features, such as rocky knolls;
• Providing a variety of trails that ensure linkages and connections to surrounding
amenities.
The plan recognizes that the areas designated as Eco-Cluster often have steep slopes and the intent
is to encourage lots that take advantage of areas with slopes less than 20% grade by clustering
development in these areas and leaving the steeper sloped areas in a forested condition. This
development approach requires minimal site re -grading. The Plan vision is for a fairly rural type of
development that is sensitive to all aspects of the environment, including views, watercourses,
environmental features, tree preservation, and connected and continuous natural open spaces.
Parkettes are to be incorporated into the site plan as a frontage focal point for the housing unit
clusters.
The development site is located within the Silver Valley Area Plan, southwest of the Blaney Hamlet,
and is designated Eco-Cluster and Conservation with a small area for Low/Medium Density
Residential in the northeast corner. 84 single family lots and 6 street townhouse units (duplex -type
units) are proposed. Approximately 33% of the site will be dedicated as Park with an additional 11%
for Parkettes. Within the Eco-Cluster three looped roads are proposed and all units will front onto
Parkettes and back onto dedicated Park. A large rocky out -cropping at the north end of the site will
be protected as Park and will require 136 Avenue and 231 Street to be diverted around the area.
The lot layout and road pattern takes into consideration the many large mature trees retained in the
interior of the site in areas dedicated as Park. Natural open spaces are connected and continuous
to provide wildlife corridors in multiple locations through the site. To emphasize the rural
characteristics of this Eco-Cluster development, Park areas are provided on both sides of the
entrance road to this site.
Roads within Eco-Clusters are designated as Rural Local Roads in the Silver Valley Area Plan.
They are rural in character, adapted to the site topography, are relatively narrow, have a sidewalk
on one side and drainage swales where possible, and require pockets of limited parking on
pervious surfaces where possible.
The road width and on -street parking requirements for this site were carefully considered to meet
the specific site conditions, the Silver Valley Area Plan road standards, and the Engineering
Department and Fire Department requirements. Three road types are proposed within this
development: first, an entrance road with a 7.3m paved carriageway with additional 2.1m wide
pocket parking with a pervious surface where appropriate; second, parkette loop roads with a
7.3m paved carriageway that includes parking on one side; and third, a link road between
parkette loops with a 7.3m paved carriageway plus 2.1m wide pocket parking with a pervious
surface. Driveways will be grouped in pairs wherever possible to provide suitable areas for on -
street parking.
An equestrian trail is proposed to run east/west through the dedicated park area across the
south end of the site. The trail will be contiguous with the trail system on proposed developments
to the west, and will connect to the existing trail network at 136 Avenue and Foreman Drive. A
portion of this trail will also serve as an emergency access route providing a secondary exit for
emergency purposes only and will connect with the proposed developments to the west.
Pedestrian trails are proposed that will link green spaces within the development.
Proposed amendment to the Official Community Plan:
Although the proposed development is in compliance with the policies of the Silver Valley Area Plan
of the Official Community Plan, the applicant has requested an OCP amendment to adjust the
boundary between the Eco-Cluster and Conservation land uses in the south and west areas of the
site, and between Eco-Cluster and Low/Medium Density Residential in the northeast corner of the
site. Approximately 17,372m2 will be re -designated from Eco-Cluster to Conservation and 8,140m2
will be re -designated from Conservation to Eco-Cluster for a net gain of 9,232m2 to Conservation.
The details of the boundary adjustment between Eco-Cluster and Conservation are discussed in the
Environmental Implications section below. The location of the horse trail is to be amended to the
park area at the south end of the site. This trail will connect with new trails in proposed
developments to the west which will then connect to the existing trail network at 136 Avenue and
Foreman Drive
Densities:
The applicant has proposed a density of 9 units per hectare, which is within the range set for Eco-
Clusters in the Silver Valley Area Plan (5 - 15 upha). The plan encourages a variety of housing types
within and between Eco-Clusters and the form of development proposed here is 6 units of attached
duplex style housing and 84 single family homes, of which 55 are zoned R-1 (Residential District),
27 are zoned R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), and 2 are zoned RS-1b (One Family Urban
(Medium Density) Residential. The 6 duplex style homes will be zoned RST (Street Townhouse
Residential) which is a new multi -family zone for street townhouses specific to Eco-Cluster
designated areas in the Silver Valley.
Zoning Bylaw:
There are four zones proposed for this development: R-1 (Residential District);
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District); RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential);
and RST (Street Townhouse Residential). The proposed single family lots range from approximately
330 m2 to 660 m2 and the street townhouse lots are 300 m2. In the northeast corner of the site the
developer has applied to the District to close a small portion (277 m2) of the 136 Avenue road right-
of-way that will become redundant with the construction of the new road and are proposing to
incorporate this into a future RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential zoned lot.
The proposed RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zone received 3rd Reading from Council on
October 25, 2007 as part of Rezoning application RZ/070/06 on the adjacent property (Nelson
Peaks) to the west of this site. However, should the Nelson Peaks project not proceed or is delayed,
this application would be stalled awaiting the adoption of the RST (Street Townhouse Residential)
zone. To avoid this potential delay it would be appropriate to proceed with another RST (Street
-7-
Townhouse Residential) zone bylaw. Whichever application proceeds to final reading first will adopt
the bylaw. The bylaw that does not complete can simply be closed.
Draft of Proposed RST (Residential Townhouse Zone):
A new zone is proposed as part of this rezoning application to permit the development of 6 duplex
units. The Silver Valley Plan encourages a variety of housing types throughout Eco-Cluster
developments, but currently Maple Ridge does not have an existing zone that could easily
accommodate this type of development. In order to accommodate and encourage a variety of
housing types in Silver Valley Eco-Clusters, as part of the ongoing implementation of the Silver Valley
Area Plan, the RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zone was drafted and is attached for Council
consideration.
The zone is intended for use in the Eco-Cluster designated areas of Silver Valley Area only. It permits
a fairly large 223 m2 (2400 ft2) unit (excluding basement, garage and accessory building) either in a
duplex, triplex, or fourplex form, which is greater than the anticipated size of attached housing form
within the urban area boundary. Although rear lanes are encouraged in Silver Valley, the topography
can make this type of development difficult and therefore, the zone will allow both rear lane and
non -rear lane access.
The RST (Street Townhouse Residential) zone is intended to permit a "zero lot line" subdivision,
which will result in each owner having no common property between them. For such fee -simple
proposals, an easement will be required on the property titles prior to unit construction. The
easement will deal with issues relating to shared walls and will set out the terms under which each
owner will be required to cooperate.
The building design proposed for the duplexes will be secured through a Restrictive Covenant put on
title prior to subdivision of the individual units. This covenant will also require that the duplex lots
cannot be sold separately until after the duplexes have been fully constructed.
Requested Variances:
The applicant, has requested a number of variances that will be the subject of a future Council
report, but which are common requests in the past in Silver Valley. The relaxations are as follows:
• To reduce the front setback for R-1(Residential District) zoned lots from 5.5m to 4m
for the building while retaining the 5.5m front setback to the garage.
• To reduce the rear setback for R-1(Residential District) zoned lots from 8m to 6m to
provide opportunity to preserve existing ground cover in the rear gardens.
• To increase the maximum height from 9m to 11m for the R-1(Residential District)
zoned lots and from 9.75m to 11m for the R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
zoned lots. This variance is consistent with those approved for the "Silver Ridge"
development to the north of this site for dwellings similar in design.
Development Permits:
An Intensive Residential Development Permit is required for the R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District) lots to assess the form and character of the proposed dwellings.
-8-
A Watercourse Protection and Natural Features Development Permit is required for the preservation,
protection, restoration and enhancement of the natural environment of Cattell Brook and of the
natural features on the site. The details are discussed in the Environmental Implications section
below. A Security will be taken as a condition of the issuance of the Development Permit to ensure
that the Development Permit Area guidelines are met.
Development Information Meetin :
A Development Information Meeting was held on April 7, 2008 and the following excerpts from the
minutes were provided by the applicant:
• In general the reaction to the proposal was positive. Comment sheets were available
but none were completed.
• The majority of the attendees live in the lower ALR lands adjacent to 132 Avenue.
With the recent flooding there concerns that the development of this site would
increase downstream flows. The applicant confirmed that through the use of the 3
tier Best Management Practices drainage systems_ there would be no impact on the
downstream lands.
• There were general concerns for the affects of increased traffic in the area and
construction traffic during the development stage. The applicant confirmed that the
present roadway (136 Avenue) would be widened eastwards from the site to 232
Street.
■ The applicant answered many questions about the proposed sanitary sewer and
confirmed that the sewer would be sized adequately to serve all the upstream
catchment areas.
• Some of the residents inquired about possible archaeological finds. The applicant has
subsequently met with local archaeologist Mike Rousseau who said that the only area
of note might be the southern sloped portion above the ALR lands. An archaeological
impact assessment is being prepared by Golder and Associates.
• It was explained that there will be a horse trail running from east to west along with a
tree buffer and park land along the south property line.
d) Environmental Implications:
The applicant has submitted an Environmental Assessment, a Geotechnical Report and an Arborist
Report for the site. A Watercourse Protection and Natural Features Development Permit is required
for this site. The development area has been logged on multiple occasions and therefore its
vegetation consists mainly of mixed forest and shrubland, although less extensive areas of riparian
mixed forest and rural developed areas are also present. No rare, threatened or endangered plant
species or communities are known to occur in the development area.
SM
The site is bounded by three branches of Cattell Brook on the west, south and east sides and
setbacks of 30 metres from the top -of -bank have been established. Limited localized
encroachments into the setback areas on the northwest and southwest development edges are
proposed. The resulting loss of riparian habitat will be 104m2; however, this loss will be
compensated for by a total habitat gain of 602m2 outside the 30m setback at other locations along
the watercourse. A wetland area, designated as marginal in the Environmental Assessment, is
located in the southwest corner outside of the 30m setback area and requires an additional setback
of 15m. All the watercourse and wetland protection setback areas will be dedicated as Park.
The southwest corner of the development site is located within the North Alouette River floodplain
and is designated as Conservation in the Silver Valley Area plan. The Environmental Assessment
indicates that the area is flat, with little or no topographical features, and there are no trees of note
in the area. The area is primarily grassland that appears to have previously been pasture. The
applicant is proposing to develop approximately 7,555m2 and will dedicate the environmentally
sensitive area as Park. A minimal amount of fill would be required under the houses, roads and bio-
filtration pond in the parkette to raise the area above the floodplain.
The Arborist's tree retention report identified 77 trees to be retained and protected, 44 trees to be
removed due to poor health and structure and 9 otherwise viable trees to be removed to
accommodate development. Trees located within the deciduous forest stands on the south and
west perimeters will be assessed for risk and structural condition and removed as necessary during
land clearing to avoid conflicts with development. The new forest edge will be inspected for hazard
trees once clearing is completed. The areas containing trees to be retained are within those
portions of the site to be dedicated as Park or will be within the Parkettes. Trees identified by the
arborist to be removed are proposed to be replaced at 2:1 ratio, or as determined by the Arborist as
suitable for the topography.
A large rocky outcropping adjacent to the west side of the site entrance and within the
unconstructed 136 Avenue road right-of-way at the north end of the development site is identified
as a Natural Feature of the site and offers a panoramic view of the Fraser Valley to the south. The
area on the development site will be dedicated as Park and 136 Avenue and 231 Street will be
diverted around the area. Natural open spaces are connected and continuous to provide wildlife
corridors in multiple locations through the site. To emphasize the rural characteristics of this Eco-
Cluster development, Park areas are provided on both sides of the entrance road to this site.
A conceptual' Stormwater Management Plan has been received proposing three naturalized bio-
detention ponds within the parkettes. Roadside bio-swales will be incorporated into the
development where road grades are less than 6%. Individual lot drainage will be to rock pits. An
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan has been submitted showing the site will be cleared in phases as
development progresses.
Ministry of Environment and Department of Fisheries and Oceans approval is required for a crossing
on Cattell Brook in the southwest corner of the site. The crossing is required for the emergency
access road and trail system, and the 5m sanitary sewer right-of-way.
I�
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has identified that all the services required in support of this
development application do not exist to the site. It will therefore be necessary for the owner to enter
into a Rezoning Servicing Agreement and post securities to do the work identified in that agreement
prior to final reading. Comments provided by the Engineering Department include:
• Construction/ reconstruction of 136 Avenue from 232 to 231 Street and construction
of 231 Street into the site is required.
• Construction of sidewalks and the equestrian trail are required.
• A Sanitary Sewer system is required to serve the site and it must be extended from the
pump station at 136 Avenue and Foreman Drive. A 5m right-of-way across the
properties between this site and the pump station is required.
• A Storm sewer system and road drainage facilities are required.
• A Water system on 231 Street from 136 Avenue is required and a water main along
the emergency access road is required.
• Existing buildings on the site are to be removed.
• Consolidation of the site at the zoning stage is required.
• Ministry of Environment and Department of Fisheries and Oceans approval is required
for road and sewer works at the watercourse at the southwest corner of the site.
• Erosion and Sediment control facilities are required during construction.
• The amount of security and related cash payments required for the Rezoning Servicing
Agreement will be determined after the consulting engineer's design has been
received.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has reviewed the road standards proposed for this Eco-Cluster development
and has identified the following requirements to address emergency access and potential future
wildfire protection:
• Roads with only a single access point have 7.3m of unobstructed carriageway to allow
2 vehicles to pass.
• Cul-de-sacs greater than 180m in length have a secondary access.
• A 6m wide emergency access road with a gravel surface where there is a single access
road into a development.
• Sections of the road with grades of 15% provide intermittent areas of lesser grade to
allow large truck stabilization;
• Appropriate fire hydrant location is to be reviewed;
• Consider designing the first 8m of the emergency access road as a hammerhead
turnaround;
• Final road design and emergency access gate specifications are to be reviewed by the
Fire Department;
• "No Parking" signs are to be posted where required to ensure emergency vehicle
access is not impeded.
-II-
Clerks De rtment:
In the northeast corner of the site the developer has applied to the District to close a small portion
(277 m2) of the 136 Avenue road right-of-way that will become redundant with the construction of
the new road and are proposing to incorporate this into a future RS-1b zoned lot. Staff will be
negotiating with the developer to close and then sell the road to them subject to Council approval of
the sale terms and a Highway Closure & Removal of Highway Dedication Bylaw
The Clerk concurs with the decision to proceed with a second RST (Street Townhouse Residential)
zone bylaw to permit this application to proceed independently.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
An equestrian trail is proposed to run east/west through the dedicated park area across the south
end of the site. This trail will connect with new trails in proposed developments to the west which
will then connect to the existing trail network at 136 Avenue and Foreman Drive. A portion of this
trail will also serve as an emergency access route providing a secondary exit for emergency
purposes only that will connect with the proposed developments to the west.
The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the subdivision is completed
they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. In the case of this project it is estimated
that there will be an additional 90 trees, which is based on one tree per lot and the final subdivision
design will provide exact numbers. The Manager of Parks & Open Space has advised that the
maintenance requirement of $25.00 per new tree will increase their budget requirements by
$2250.00.
f) School District:
No comments have been received.
g) Intergovernmental Issues:
Ministry of Tourism. Culture and the Arts Archaeolopv Branch:
As a result of comments received at the Development Information Meeting about a potential
archaeological heritage site located on the property, the applicant has submitted a permit
application to the Ministry for an archaeological impact assessment (AIA) and the assessment is
being prepared by Golder and Associates.
Local Government Act:
An amendment to the Official Community Plan requires the local government to consult with any
affected parties and to adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section
882 of the Act. The amendment required for this application, (insert amendment), is considered to
be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional consultation beyond existing
procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional District, the Council of an
adjacent municipality, First Nations; the School District or agencies of the Federal and Provincial
Governments.
The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste
Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have no impact.
CONCLUSION:
The lot geometry presented for the proposed Eco-Cluster development is aligned with the Silver
Valley Area Plan in that the design has achieved the clustering of units within distinct boundaries, a
rural character with lots facing a parkette or Park, a variation in housing form, innovative stormwater
management, wildlife corridors, and the protection of environmentally sensitive areas resulting in
33% of the site proposed as conservation area. A new zone is accompanying this application to
permit a street oriented fee -simple townhouse form of housing for Eco-cluster developments in the
Silver Valley area and to encourage a greater variation in housing form as envisioned within the Area
Plan.
Therefore, it is recommended that this application and accompanying bylaws proceed to Council for
first reading and forwarding to Public Hearing.
r
Prepared by. • •
Planning Technician
r Approved by: Jane P' ering, MCP, MC1P
Director of Planning
Approveoy: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
// GM: Public Works & Development Services
Concurre e: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
AE/dp
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B - OCP Amending Bylaw 6580 - 2008
Appendix C - Zone Amending Bylaw 6581- 2008
Appendix D - Proposed Subdivision
-13-
g 55 65 10
4
Sfi 55 2730
Sr 136
6a �'�a � 25 24 3
I FAVE `"
63 � 136W L
58
62 ''447� 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 m
i 59 ' 4 w ,3610
61
60
136 AVE q
pp M x
n ry
P 27685 76 72
g 80 19 78 77 N 75 74 73 g
R
I
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
BGP 29524
P 14756 1
j P 5048
2 N 1292' B
I
I
P 5116
2
APPENDIX A
A
a 136 AVE
R g
P 43
67
17 16
is
LP43A7
AMP 9042
2
I
1
District of
Pitt Meadows
---' - . 511rar vrilq t ; 23000/24/50 136 AVENUE
1 Io
_ a
=ru�� CORPORATION OF
N s�...
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
District of 'Iw+ Rk.an; li3 f, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Langley
SCALE 1:3,000 �'�-� �. _ I ,._��
,_x — DATE: May 29, 2008 FILE: RZ/093/06 BY: PC
SCHEDULE 8
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6580-2008.
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Section 10.3. Part IV - Silver Valley Area Plan,
Figures 2, 3A and 4 of the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6580-2008."
2. Figures 2, 3A and 4 are hereby amended for those parcels or tracts of land and
premises known and described as:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 Plan 5116 New Westminster District
And North 1,292 Feet Lot "B" Section 29 Township 12 Plan 5048 New Westminster
District.
And Lot 1 Section 29 Township 12 Plan BCP 29524 New Westminster District.
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 757 , a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby redesignated as shown.
3. Figure 4 is hereby amended for those parcels or tracts of land and premises known
and described as:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 Plan 5116 New Westminster District
And North 1,292 Feet Lot "B" Section 29 Township 12 Plan 5048 New Westminster
District.
And Lot 1 Section 29 Township 12 Plan BCP 29524 New Westminster District.
and shown in heavy black line on Map No. 758, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, as added or removed from Horse Trail.
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.6425-2006 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the day of , A.D. 200.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of
READ A SECOND TIME the day of
READ A THIRD TIME the day of
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the
MAYOR
, A.D. 200 .
, A.D. 200.
, A.D. 200.
day of , A.D. 200.
CORPORATE
OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6580-2008
Map No. 757
PURPOSE: To DESIGNATE AS SHOWN BELOW ON FIGURES 2, 3A & 4 AND TO DELETE
THAT PORTION SHOWN ECO CLUSTER FROM CONSERVATION ON FIGURE 4
ECO CLUSTER ® CONSERVATION ® LOW DENSITY URBAN
APLE RIDGE
1.3000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6580-2008
Map No. 758
PURPOSE: To Amend Figure 4 As Shown Below
■■■■■ Add Trail ■� Delete Trail
bell-
1APLE RIDGE
1:3000
SCHEDULE C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO.6581-2008
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended.
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6581-2008."
2. That Part 2 Interpretation is amended by inserting the following definition in the
appropriate alphabetical location within the section:
STREET TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL USE means a residential use consisting of one
dwelling unit vertically attached to one or more dwelling units (i.e. a duplex, triplex, or
fourplex) with each dwelling unit located on a lot abutting a street.
3. That Part 3 Basic Provisions is amended by inserting the following after Section 302,
Zones (1):
RST Street Townhouse Residential
4. That Part 6 Residential Zones is amended by inserting the following after Section
601C and renumbering subsequent sections accordingly:
601D RST Street Townhouse Residential
Intent: The Street Townhouse Residential Zone is intended for use only within the
areas of Silver Valley designated as Eco-Cluster.
1.0 Permitted Uses
Only the following uses shall be permitted in the RST zone:
1. Street Townhouse Residential Use
2. Duplex Use
3. Accessory Boarding Use
4. Accessory Home Occupation Use
2.0 Conditions of Use
1. A Street Townhouse residential use shall be permitted where no more than four
street townhouse residential units are attached and located on a lot abutting a
public street.
2. Vehicular access for lots backing on a Municipal lane will be restricted to the
lane.
3. All motor vehicle parking areas must be fully enclosed within a garage structure.
3.0 Density
The maximum permitted gross floor area of a unit shall be 223 m2 (2400 s.f.),
specifically excluding basement, garage, and accessory building.
4.0 Lot Coverage
The maximum permitted lot coverage shall be as follows:
Lot Type
Maximum Lot Coverage
Exterior Lot
55%
Interior Lot
65%
Exterior Lot on Street
Corner
45%
Accessory Buildings & Structures:
The maximum lot coverage for accessory buildings and structures shall be 3%, which
shall form part of the maximum lot coverage for the entire lot. A detached garage is
not considered an accessory building in this zone.
5.0 Height of a Building or Structure
The maximum height of a principal building shall be 3 storeys or 11 metres,
whichever is less.
The maximum height of any accessory building or structure shall be 4.6m
6.0 Setbacks
If building in this zone is next to an existing single-family development, then front
setback must match that of single-family neighbourhood on same side of same
street*.
If building in this zone is not adjacent to single-family development, then buildings
and structures shall be sited in accordance with the following minimum setbacks:
Building or Structure
Front
Rear
Interior
End Lot/
Corner Lot/
Side
Exterior Side
Exterior Side
Principle Building
4m
8m
Om
1.5m
` 3m
(no lane access)
See #3 below
Garage (no lane
6m
N/A
Om
1.5m
3m
access)
Principle Building
4m
14m
Om
1.5m
3m
(lane access)
Garage (lane
N/A
1.5m
Om
1.5m
3m
access)
Accessory Building
N/A
j 0.5m
1.5m
1.5m
3m
or Structure
1. Interior Side: 0 metre permitted where listed above, provided that the full length
of the interior side wall of the principle building and/or garage is adjoined to the
full length of the interior side wall of a neighbouring principle building and/or
garage. Where a fee -simple subdivision results in no common property
ownership among the attached units, the property line will run equally distant
through the attached interior walls.
2. On a lot with rear lane access:
a) Each lot shall have useable rear yard private outdoor space with minimum
dimensions of 6.5m x.7.5m that is defined by fences and landscaping.
b) Accessory buildings larger than 5m2 are not permitted in the rear yard private
outdoor space.
c) A minimum 1.5 metre wide walkway must be maintained along the length of
the garage, into the rear laneway. This walkway does not make up any part of
the private outdoor space requirement.
3. On a lot with no lane access, the rear yard setback maybe reduced to a minimum
of 6 metres if the rear yard backs onto a greenbelt that is dedicated as
Conservation Area or Park.
4. All accessory buildings and structures must be located in the rear yard.
7.0 Minimum Lot Size
Lot Type
Minimum Lot Area
Minimum Lot Width
Exterior Lot
234m2
gm
Interior Lot
195m2
7.5m
Exterior Lot on Street
273m2
1O.5m
Corner
* In a neighbourhood where redevelopment is expected and the current zoning of the single-
family neighbourhood in question is not consistent with the designation in the Official
Community Plan, or the zoning matrix within the Official Community Plan, the front setback
must match that of a zone that would be consistent with the current Official Community
Plan.
8.0 Parking Requirements
To be the same requirements listed in Schedule "A", under 1.0 b) for one and
two family residential use in the Maple Ridge Off Street Parking and Loading
Bylaw No. 4350-1990.
9.0 Other Regulations
1. A Street Townhouse Residential use shall be permitted only if the site is serviced
to the RT-1 zone standard, excluding road standards, set out in the Maple Ridge
Subdivision Servicing Bylaw No. 4800-1993.
2. A Street Townhouse Residential use shall be permitted only if the site is serviced
to the Eco-Cluster road standards identified within the Silver Valley Area Plan.
5, That Schedule "D" Minimum Lot Area Dimensions is amended by inserting the
following under each heading:
Zone: RST
Minimum Width: See Section 601D, Item 7.0 Minimum Lot Size
Minimum Area: See Section 601D, Item 7.0 Minimum Lot Size
6. Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 Plan 5116 New Westminster District
And North 1,292 Feet Lot "B" Section 29 Township 12 Plan 5048 New Westminster
District.
And Lot 1 Section 29 Township 12 Plan BCP 29524 New Westminster District.
and outlined in heavy black line are hereby rezoned as shown on Map No. 1431, a
copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this bylaw.
7. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the day of , A.D. 200.
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 200.
READ a second time the day of A.D. 200.
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 200.
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 200.
MAYOR.
CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6581 —2008
Map No. 1431
From: RS-3(One Family Rural Residential)
To: �RS-1b(One Family Urban(medium density)Residentia1) 0 R-1 (Residential District)
R-3((Special Amenity Residential District) RST(Street Townhouse Residential)
APLE RIDGE
1:3000
SCHEDULE D
Ibis dfamW am ae,pqn is the property a! 1 09 Sev.tes L and zwV not be used, reused orS:epmdwm wilhapt We of the widl
i,ampa�McEl.�anmy Cwsull N mces Uo 70k
oiler
the —rkh.--d use of Ihm dri
3-
2, 2,
tarts Mew
r, Mar R004 to be Closed
2
14 33 12 10 9
i8
7 2
3 4
5
117
7
41
TT
42
-37, 43
22
23
24
46
25
47
10
8
-26 J 48
31 F-:�-49
4 28
4
. 4-
N
6V Aj
17 1 5
73
r66
-.67 '68 69
:
4
NOTES: aaend
- PRELIMINARY POUT ONL BJEC r T0A7ETAR0j'LAED RS- I b Zone
M - AREAS AND MENSFONS ARE E C TTO SU
AND CALCULATION, AND MAY VARY. R-1 Zone
- NOT TO BE USED FOR LEGAL TRANSACTIONS.
MeElhanney R-3 Zone
Scale: 1:1500
McElhanney Consulting Services Ltd. =RST Zone (Duplex)
Date: July 4, 2008
13160-86TH-AVENUE PHONE(604)596-D391
SURREY,B.C. FAX(604)596-8853 Park
Job No.: 2112-07250 -0
' DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
' Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: July 13, 2010
and Members of Council FILE NO: AL/048/10
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: C of W
SUBJECT: Application to Subdivide Land within the Agricultural Land Reserve
12787 256 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received under Section 21 (2) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act to
subdivide 6.4 hectares (15.1 acres) of land that is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The
application conforms to the submission requirements of the Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the application not be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Stephen Ramsay
Owner: Armando Bolognese & Cherry -Dawn Bolognese
Legal Description: Section: 23, Township: 12, Plan: 2034
OCP:
Existing: Agricultural
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North:
Use:
(7 properties) 4 rural residential, 3 with assessed
farm status
Zone:
RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation:
Agricultural
South:
Use:
Rural residential
Zone:
RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation:
Agricultural
East:
Use:
Farm and rural residential
Zone:
RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation:
Agricultural
West:
Use:
Rural residential
Zone:
RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation:
Agricultural
1102
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
b) Project Description:
Rural Residential
Rural Residential
6.1 hectares
256 Street
The applicant wishes to subdivide the 6.1 hectare (15.2 acre) subject property into 2 parcels, of 1.1
hectares (2.8 acres) and 5.0 hectares (12.4 acres). The subject property fronts 256 Street to the
east, and has undeveloped road allowance to its north (128 Avenue) and to its west (251 Street).
The applicant has not explicitly stated how access will be taken from these road allowances for the
proposed new lot.
The minimum lot size in the RS-3 Zone is 0.8 hectares (2 acres) where municipal water is available.
If this application is ultimately successful, and receives Agricultural Land Commission approval, the
applicant will have to apply for a subdivision through the municipality. Through this process, the
applicant will have to demonstrate that both of the proposed lots will have on -site septic capability to
current standards. In addition, both properties must comply with municipal requirements with
respect to lot geometry, road frontage and parcel size. The Subdivision and Development Servicing
Bylaw requires 60 meters road frontage for the RS-3 Zone. The costs for constructing this required
road allowance on 251 Street and 128 Avenue are estimated to be roughly $820.00 per meter
(without traversing watercourses). These costs would be assumed by the developer.
A watercourse traverses the property near its eastern perimeter. The District's usual practice for
protecting natural features in the Agricultural Land Reserve is through a conservation covenant.
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan
On November 14, 2006, Council adopted the Official Community Plan, which contains supportive
agricultural policies. On December 16, 2009 Council adopted an Agricultural Plan to support
agriculture within the rural area and the Agricultural Land Reserve. The merits of this application will
be viewed within this policy context.
Section 6.2.1 Economic Development Strategy.
Policy 6-6 states:
Maple Ridge will develop an Agricultural Plan that:
a) maintains an inventory of local agricultural products and agricultural land use;
b) develops and maintains a database of farm businesses and operators;
c) promotes leasing opportunities of agricultural land;
d) promotes agricultural heritage initiatives;
e) identifies appropriate land uses within agricultural areas and at the rural/urban interface;
f) promotes urban agriculture;
g) recognizes the positive role that agricultural lands have on the environment;
-2-
h) will identify a variety of mechanisms to assist farm operators and to protect agricultural
lands, including but not limited to the creation of trusts, endowments, and life -leases;
i) includes an assessment of the agricultural land base; and
j) develops Development Permit area guidelines to direct non-agricultural development at
the urban/ rural interface.
One reason for promoting alternative tenures (Policies 6-6 c and h) relates to the high cost of land,
which is a known barrier for new farmers wishing to start an agricultural business. By supporting
other forms of tenure that can delay or avoid the need for this capital investment by individual
farmers, the municipality can improve its agricultural potential, and bring more of its agricultural
land into full production.
The intent of Policy 6-6 is that property owners who do not wish to derive income themselves from
farming should be encouraged to lease their land to agricultural producers. In addition to rental
income, these property owners will benefit from tax benefits gained from generating farm income on
their properties.
Subdivision is not required in order to lease land. In fact, further subdivisions tend to increase
speculative activity within the Agricultural Land Reserve, thereby increasing the market value of
farmland, and exacerbating the issue of economic barriers to entry for new farmers.
Section 6.2.2 Sustainable Agriculture.
Policy 6-12 states:
Maple Ridge will protect the productivity of its agricultural land by.,
a) adopting a guiding principle of "positive benefit to agriculture" when making land use
decisions that could affect the agricultural land base, with favourable recognition of
initiatives including but not limited to supportive non -farm uses, infrastructure improvements
for farmland, or the inclusion of land elsewhere in the Agricultural Land Reserve;
b) requiring agricultural impact assessments (AIAs) and Groundwater impact Assessment of
non -farm development and infrastructure projects and identifying measures to off -set
impacts on agricultural capability,
c) preserving larger farm units and areas by using appropriate buffers such as roads,
topographic features, watercourses, ditching, fencing, or gradually reduced residential
densities on properties adjacent to agricultural land;
d) discouraging the subdivision of agricultural land into smaller parcels, except where
positive benefits to agriculture can be demonstrated,
e) reinforcing the concept that the Agricultural Land Reserve is intended for agricultural use
by increasing the minimum lot size for ALR properties that are zoned Rural Residential,
f) encouraging the amalgamation of smaller parcels of farmland into larger, more cohesive
parcels.
The applicant has not assessed this proposal on the basis of the guiding principle of "positive
benefit" to agriculture. Policy 6-12 also emphasizes the importance of discouraging the subdivision
of agricultural land into smaller parcels, increasing the minimum parcel size of ALR properties with
Rural Residential zoning, and amalgamation to create larger farm parcels.
We
For the above noted reasons, this application should be considered inconsistent with the
Agricultural policies of the Official Community Plan.
Agricultural Plan
The Agricultural Plan notes the following issues that are of particular relevance to this application:
Issue 1 of the Plan notes the difficulty emerging farmers face in gaining access to underutilized
agricultural land. The main concerns noted are the extent of Agricultural land held in an idle state
within the community, and the high land costs which restricts those wishing to enter the industry.
Strategies to improve this situation could include initiatives to encourage non -farming land owners
to make idle land available to farmers or to start farming it themselves. The Plan states the
importance of emphasizing the role of agriculture in the Agricultural Land Reserve and to remove
some of the perception that the Agricultural Land Reserve is a land reserve for development in the
District.
Specific Recommendations in the Plan build on the policy recommendations to the Official
Community Plan to include the following:
a) Develop a strategy to increase landowner awareness of farmland leasing options, taxation
benefits, and community demand for local production
b) Create a database of farmland available for leasing, including a database maintenance
strategy
c) Develop access to materials on lease/rental terms and sample agreements, possibly
website delivered
d) Create educational materials for agricultural property owners regarding stewardship of
agricultural land
e) Through various workshops and electronic media, initiate discussion on the role of small
lot property owners in enhancing local agriculture in the District (gaining access to land,
pooling of small lots, rent calculator, lessee responsibilities)
f) Identify and promote opportunities for development of urban agriculture.
Issue 5 of the Plan notes concerns with the loss of the agricultural land base, describing the
following situations that are pertinent to this application:
• Many small parcels
• High level of rural residential incursion into Agricultural Land Reserve
• Non -farmed areas of the Agricultural Land Reserve tend to be smaller parcels
• Continued conversion pressure from the District of Maple Ridge's urban growth
• Financial pressure on farming
The Plan also notes that more recent priorities given to food safety, food security, and climate
change, includes the development of a local food system. Towards this end, the community would
benefit from greater certainty that the agricultural land base is not undermined by incremental land
use decisions that result in the loss of agricultural land.
The Plan makes the following recommendations that pertain to this application:
b) Continue to implement the OCP policies to protect the agricultural land base by creating
guidelines for reviewing applications for non -farm use, exclusions, fill applications,
transportation and, utility applications, subdivisions, and government applications;
-4-
g) Explore retention of lots 2 ha (5 acres) and larger in the Agricultural Land Reserve.
Appropriate parcel sizes for the RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) zone may be reviewed through
the implementation of the Agricultural Plan. Currently, the minimum parcel size in this zone is 0.8
hectares (2.0 acres) where community water is available. This zone pertains to most of the land that
is within the Agricultural Land Reserve, including the subject property. The RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) zone pre -dates the creation of the Agricultural Land Reserve. Although designated for
Agriculture, there is a concern that this historic zoning contributes to the perception that farming is
not the primary use of this zone.
Based on the issues and strategies as noted in the Agricultural Plan, this application should not be
considered supportive of agriculture within the community.
Environmental Concerns:
The lot slopes gently from north to south, with a well defined channel for Websters Creek / Zirk
Brook. There are several creeks on the property (Websters Creek, Zirk Brook and other un-named
tributaries) that will require setbacks of up to 30 meters.
The District's usual practice for ensuring watercourse protection in the Agricultural Land Reserve is
through restrictive covenants which must be approved by the Agricultural Land Commission prior to
being registered on title.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department.
The Engineering Department would review this application for its servicing requirements as part of
the municipal subdivision application should Commission approval be granted. It should be noted
that depending on assessed community need, the Engineering Department may require that all
undeveloped road frontages be constructed as part of this application. Exemptions to these
servicing requirements may be granted through a development variance. Preliminary comments
about this development proposal in relation to the Subdivision Bylaw are that the section of 256
Street that fronts the subject property is an arterial road with a width of 20 meters. The Bylaw
indicates that a minimum of 26 meters is required for an arterial road. Therefore road dedication
may be required for this corridor. Road dedication may also be required for 251 Street to the west
'of the subject property.
Road construction for access to the western portion (5 hectares / 12.4 acres) of the site is required,
and should be provided from the west, from 251 Street at 128 Avenue. The Subdivision Bylaw
indicates that the rural standard is 20 meters. There is an equestrian trail in the 128 Avenue road
allowance from 251 St to 256 St.
Alternatives:
Based on the policies of the Official Community Plan and the Agricultural Plan, the recommendation
is not to forward the application to the Commission, in which case the application will be considered
-5-
denied. If Council decides to forward this application to the Agricultural Land Commission, the
Commission will evaluate the merits of this application, and make their decision accordingly.
CONCLUSION:
This application has been evaluated for its consistency with the policies of the Official Community
Plan, and its implications for the Agricultural Plan. The application is found to be not in compliance
with this policy framework. On this basis, the recommendation is that this application not be
authorized to go forward to the Commission. This report also notes servicing deficiencies that would
require redress prior to subdivision occurring.
Prepared by: Diana Hall
Planner 2
Approved by. Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
,C_r ~ GM: Public Works & Development Services
Concurre : J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: Subject Map
Appendix B: Proposed Subdivision.
1:Z
l
R¢ A
U
Appendix A
1 d
- 3
P ]635
ry i,2a
SUBJECT PROPERTY P]639
3�2 -
696]
RP 025
P18-
City of Pitt
Meadows 12787 256 STREET
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
- - Z5
N - MAPLE RIDGE
!
District of PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Langley I'
SCALE 1:5,000
DATE: Jun 2, 2010 FILE: AU048/10 BY: PC
FF1,45FA R-.
q
f4
$g
�i
Appendix B
252nd Street (Unconstructed)
�o
a
7
a
m
a
�cb
c
J
��5
y
n
W
ti
n
256th Street
zN
Deep Roots
Greater Heights
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
DATE: July 14, 2010
FILE NO: EO5-010-027
ATTN: C of W
Award of Contract No. ITT-EN10-171
River Road Drainage Improvements (Darby Street to Carshill Street)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The River Road Drainage Improvements project from Darby Street to Carshill Street was tendered on
June 22, 2010, and closed on July 13, 2010. The construction work will consist of storm trunk sewer
installation complete with services to the property line, a storm sewer outfall in the ravine,
replacement of a section of existing 4-5 year old sanitary sewer, and the option to reconstruct and
pave the roadway.
There was only one tender received, from Double M Excavating Ltd. for $2,971,738.01 (excluding
taxes), although five general contractors picked up the tender documents. The tender submitted by
Double M Excavating Ltd. is compliant and the Schedule of Quantities and Prices have been checked
by staff. Double M Excavating Ltd. is a qualified contractor for this project and have completed
relevant projects in the past for the District.
Staff recommend that the construction of the River Road Drainage Improvements be awarded to
Double M Excavating Ltd. without the optional road reconstruction component for a contract award
amount of $2,454,227.06 (excluding taxes).
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Contract No. ITT-ENIO-171: River Road Drainage Improvements (Darby Street to Carshill
Street), be awarded to Double M Excavating Ltd. in the amount of $2,454,227.06 excluding taxes;
and
THAT the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract; and further
THAT the Financial Plan be amended to include a capital project to replace a section of sanitary
sewer for $398,945 funded from the Sewer Utility.
1103
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The River Road Drainage Improvements project involves the construction of storm trunk
sewer and storm services frorn Darby Street to Carshill Street and construction of a storm
sewer outfall in the Fraser Escarpment ravine. This storm sewer is important and necessary
to collect surface and subsurface water, which will improve the stability of the Fraser River
Escarpment adjacent to River Road. The project was initiated several years ago and has been
approved in the Capital Program for 2010. In the May 27, 2010 report to Council, staff
recommended Council approval to tender the storm sewer improvements project, including
replacement of the existing 45 year old sanitary sewer at the eastern end. As well, it was
recommended that the tender have an optional component for pavement rehabilitation and
road improvements. The tender for the River Road Drainage Improvements project was then
structured to allow for Council the choice to approve the optional works.
The project was tendered on June 22, 2010 and closed on July 13, 2010. There were five (5)
plan takers but only 1 tender was submitted, a compliant tender by Double M Excavating Ltd.
for $2,971,738.01 (excluding taxes). Staff and AECOM have checked the unit rates and
confirm that the unit rates and total tender price are reasonable.
Double M Excavating Ltd. is a qualified contractor and have completed several relevant
projects for the District of Maple Ridge in the past years. They are currently completing the
Roberts Bank, East Causeway Habitat Compensation Project for the Vancouver Fraser Port
Authority. Their reference for that project was very good.
Staff recommend that the construction be awarded to Double M Excavating Ltd.
Pavement Rehabilitation and Road Improvements
The total tender price of $2,971,738.01 includes $517,510.95 for the optional component
for pavement rehabilitation and road improvements. It entails road reconstruction work
including roadway excavation, supply and place granular subbase and granular base, and
laying 100mm thick asphalt pavement to provide a 6.8m wide paved roadway surface with
1.Om wide gravel shoulders. The roadway will be widened in the future on both sides to
accommodate bicycles, curbs and sidewalk.
Since there is no funding at this time for the optional road works, staff recommend that
approval of the pavement rehabilitation and road improvements be deferred until further
analysis has been carried out for justification and source of funding.
b) Desired Outcome:
The desired outcome of this report is to obtain Council approval to award the necessary
contract and commence construction in August 2010, during the drier summer period. The
high water table on River Road and the wet conditions in the ravine prohibits the work during
wet weather conditions that are more prevalent in the fall and winter.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The drainage improvements will improve the safety risk of the Fraser River Escarpment
stability for the Maple Ridge citizens. It will also provide the infrastructure for future storm
sewer laterals that will connect to the storm trunk sewer on River Road.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
There have been two Open Houses for the River Road Drainage Improvements project with
the most recent one held on June 23, 2010. The feedback was generally positive from the
Open Houses. All residents fronting the storm sewer were informed of the requirement to
connect to the storm sewer. Staff explained to the owners the technical aspects of installing
the storm service within private property and sump pumps if necessary.
Double M Excavating Ltd. shows a construction schedule of approximately nine weeks of
storm and sanitary sewer installation. There will be some inconvenience to traffic and
residents along River Road. Efforts will be made to ensure that residents, the travelling public
and all users are notified of the construction schedule. Information will be posted on the
website and letters will be sent out regarding the construction. Staff will monitor the
construction to ensure that the impacts are minimized.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
The Operations Department has been involved during design stage. The Engineering
Department has also been coordinating with the Building Department to determine private
property storm service installation permit requirements.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
There are two parts to this tender, one for the required drainage works which includes
replacement of a section of sanitary sewer and an option for the road reconstruction works.
The cost for the drainage portion of this tender is within budget. A Loan Authorization Bylaw
is already in place to authorize the borrowing of the required funds.
The replacement of the 45 year old sanitary sewer section costing $398,944.98 will be
funded by the Sewer Fund and will require an amendment to the Financial Plan.
The cost of road reconstruction, $517,000, as well as new sidewalks and bikeways, which
were not part of this tender, was to be funded by grants however grant applications have not
been successful and no funds have been secured to proceed. While there are some cost
savings of doing this work in conjunction with the drainage work, there is no funding in our
Capital Plan for it. While the Capital Works Reserve could be used, our projections indicate
that with the other works planned, this account will fall below the minimum balance that we
like to keep in it for emergency purposes. Further, it is unlikely that these works will be done
this year and as such, it is suggested that the paving portion of the project be considered as
part of our 2011-2015 capital plan deliberations so that this request can be evaluated in
relation to other capital requests.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Council has 60 days after the tenders have been received to
award the road paving works if circumstances change and a compelling argument can be
made to proceed with optional works.
CONCLUSIONS:
A single compliant tender was submitted by Double M Excavating Ltd. for River Road Drainage
Improvements (Darby Street to Carshill Street). Council approval to award the work to Double M
Excavating Ltd. for a contract amount of $2,454,227.06 (excluding taxes), without the optional road
reconstruction component, is recommended.
Prepared by: Richard Wong PE of Desi d Con truction er
IA- ^ el 0
Reviewed by: dre ood, P D., PEn -
unicipal Engi er
Financial review 7NMana
r r ompso , CGA
cial Planning
Approved by: ' Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
` General Manager: Public Works & Development Services
d� ,
Concurrence: " k (J ) Rule
t6l Chief Administrative Officer
RW/mi
District of Maple Ridge
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 June 30, 2010
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
July 5, 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 June 30, 2010 now be approved".
GENERAL $ 7,368,289
PAYROLL $ 1,489,623
PURCHASE CARD $ 108.521
$ 8.966,433
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.
1131
c) Business Plan / Financial Implications:
Highlights of larger items included in Financial Plan or Council Resolution
• Fraser Valley Regional Library - 2nd quarter member assessment $ 560,831
• G.V. Water District - water consumption Mar 3 - Mar 30/10 $ 331,492
• Norquist Watkins - land acquisition @ 11942 221 Street $ 373,874
• Receiver General - RCMP contractJan-Mar/10 $ 2,394,704
d) Policy Implications:
Approval of the disbursements by Council is in keeping with corporate governance practice.
CONCLUSIONS:
The disbursements for the month ended June 30, 2010 have been reviewed and are in order.
i
Prepared by: G'Ann Rygg
Accounting Clerk II
Approved by: - rev r Thompson, CGA
Manager of Financial Planning
Approved by. PEhjkGill, 6BA, CGA
GM--t CorDerate Fin cial Services
Concurrence: J.L (Jim) Rule-
Ct6ef Administrative Officer
gmr
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS -JUNE 2010
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION QF PAYMENT_
775983 BC Ltd
Roadside mowing
Aecom Canada Ltd
Vernon Trail Bridge aka Bil Farms Bridge
BC Hydro
Hydro charges June
BC SPCA
Contract May & June
Community Animal Centre development - 50% share
BDO Canada LLP
2009 Financial statement audit
Boileau Electric & Pole Ltd
Maintenance: Banners
Fairground
Hanging baskets
Kiosk & pad @ 108 Loop
Pole repairs
Street lighting
UPS installation @ 238B & DTR
Busch Systems Int'L Inc
Recycling blue boxes
CUPE Local 622
Dues - pay periods 10/11 & 10/12
Canada Pipe Company Ltd
Pipe & gaskets
Chevron Canada Ltd
Fuel July
City Of Pitt Meadows
Arena cost share 2009
Memorial benches
Cineplex tickets for 2010 volunteer appreciation
Commercial Electronics Ltd
Fire Hall No. 1 training equipment
ESRI Canada Limited
Annual software support
Fraser Valley Regional Library
2nd quarter member assessment
GCL Contracting & Engineering
Kanaka Creek bridge replacement
GCR Rail Crossings
Tamarack rail crossing
Greater Vane Water District
Water consumption Mar 3 - Mar 30/10
Barnston pump station design
Guillevin International Inc
Firefighters' equipment
Fire fighters' protective wear
Operations electrical supplies
Parks electrical supplies
Happy Heart Fitness & Educ
Weight room supervision & childcare activity room
Imperial Paving
Roadwork
Asphalt paving @ worksyard & lawn bowling
Manulife Financial
Employee benefits premiums
Maple Ridge & PM Arts Council
Art Centre grant June
Program revenue April & May
Theatre rental & catering
Public art
Mark Suttle Agencies Ltd
Playground equipment 239B & 130A Park
Playground equipment
Mary Jones Honda
Security refund
Medical Services Plan
Employee medical & health premiums
Metro Motors Ltd
Ford F150 Super Cab 4X4
Ford F150 Super Cab 4X4
Ford F250 Cargo Van
Ford F150 Regular Cab 2WD
Mierau
Fire Hall No. 1 expansion
Monarc Hospitality Corp
Security refund
Municipal Pension Plan BC
Pension remittance
Norquist Watkins
Land acquisition @ 11942 221 Street
Northwest Hydraulic Consultant
Alouette Rivers hydrotechnical review
Ocean Marker Sports Surfaces L
Tennis court resurfacing
46,026
93,917
349
1,784
992
484
11,195
5,521
3,509
108,012
938
4,015
331,492
43,820
11,986
1,200
2,333
5
52,116
43,192
44,787
7,594
7,641
1,343
51,008
1,882
24,484
25,940
28,375
21,876
AMOUNT
19,346
15,067
91,104
139,943
33,852
23,834
28,088
22,263
19,499
56,029
112,965
44,385
61,600
560,831
73,502
28,807
375,312
15,524
20,058
95,308
107,510
61,365
52,889
34,313
26,418
100,675
119,901
54,165
275,784
373,874
24,926
16,695
Ocean Pipe T6045
Manhole covers & catch basins
Open Storage Solutions Inc
IS equipment replacement
Paul Bunyan Tree Services
Tree removal at various locations
Professional Mechanical Ltd
Maintenance: Firehall
Leisure Centre
Library
Municipal Hall
Pitt Meadows Heritage Hall
Pitt Meadows Family Rec Centre
Randy Herman Building
RCMP
The Act
Whonnock Lake Centre
Raincity Janitorial Sery Ltd
Janitorial services July'09 & June'10:
Firehalls
Library
Municipal Hall
Operations
Playground equipment
Randy Herman Building
RCMP
Receiver General For Canada
Employer/Employee remit PP10/11 & 10/12
RCMP contract Jan-Mar/10
RG Arenas (Maple Ridge) Ltd
Ice rental May
Curling rink operating expenses April
Ridgemeadows Recycling Society
Monthly contract for recycling June
Weekly recycling
Litter pick-up contract
Canada Day recycling honorarium
Smart-Tek Communications Inc
Leisure Centre CCTV installation
Tempest Development Group
Latecomer software license & maintenance
Terasen Gas
Natural gas
Warrington PC] Management
Advance for Tower common costs June
Young, Anderson - Barristers
Professional fees April
Disbursements In Excess $15,000
Disbursements Under $15,000
Total Payee Disbursements
Payroll PP10/11 & PP10/12
Purchase Cards - Payment
Total Disbursements June 2010
78
4,340
1,411
1,754
358
1,965
1,150
19,401
2,779
?R1
4,337
11,464
5,870
5,623
2,100
8,277
6,345
653,971
2,394, 704
53,775
3,098
86,746
517
1,848
100
GMR
\\DOVE\CorpServ\Finance\Accounting\Accounts Payable\AP Remittances (Disbursements)\2010\[Monthly Council Report 2010.xlsx]JUN'10
16,499
35,631
17,141
33,517
44,016
3,048,675
56,873
89,211
48,771
15,157
19,313
50,000
28,100
6,588,738
779,551
7,368,289
1,489,623
108,521
8,966,433