Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-01 Committee of the Whole Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA October 1, 2012 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. DELEGAT/ONS/STAFFPRESENTAT/ONS- (10 minutes each) 1:00 p.m. Note: The staff presentation for Item 1.1 has been allotted approximately one hour 1.1 RCMP Financial Overview - Officer in Charge, Superintendent Dave Walsh - Max Xiao, RCMP- E Division, Regional Director of Finance and Accounting 1.2 Non -Farm Use Application 2012 -074 -AL - Andy Cleven 1.3 Non -Farm Use Application 2012 -074 -AL - Steve Hamilton 2. PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERV/CES Note: Owners and/or Agents of Development Applications may be 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: Committee of the Whole Agenda October 1, 2012 Page 2 of 4 Note: Item 1101 has been deferred from the August 27, 2012 Council Meeting 1101 2012-031-RZ, 11055 Hazelwood Street, RS -3 to M-3 (Addendum to report dated August 27, 2012) Staff report dated October 1, 2012 providing additional information to a staff report dated August 27, 2012 and recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 to permit future construction of potential industrial or big box retail styled buildings be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules B, D, E and F of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. 1102 2012-079-RZ, 21722 and 21734 Dewdney Trunk Road, RS -1 to RT -1 Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6944-2012 to allow each lot to have the existing dwelling replaced by a duplex be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedule B of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. 1103 2011-084-RZ, 11185 and 11133 240 Street, RS -3 to RST, R-2, R-1 and C-1 Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011 to adjust conservation area and Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6947-2012 text amendment for the C-1 Zone to allow for 4 proposed rental apartment units be given first and second readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6853-2011 to allow for 24 RST lots, 39 R-2 single family lots, one remnant R-1 lot for future subdivision and a mixed used building be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. 1104 2011-089-RZ, 22309, 22319 and 22331 St. Anne Avenue, Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 to permit relocation, restoration and adaptive use of an existing heritage house be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. 1105 DVP/040/09, 10125 248 Street Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DVP/040/09 to vary the height of the proposed single family homes, to vary the road right-of-way on 100A and 101B Avenues and 247B Street and to vary the carriage way on 247B Street. Committee of the Whole Agenda October 1, 2012 Page 3 of 4 1106 2012 -005 -DP, 20528 Lougheed Highway Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign 2012 -005 -DP to permit an extension and exterior renovation. 1107 SD/040/09, 10125 248 Street, Local Area Service Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012 for Upper Jackson Enhanced Landscape Maintenance be given first, second and third readings. 1108 2012 -074 -AL, 23613 124 Avenue and 12349 237 Street Non -Farm Use within the Agricultural Land Reserve Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that application 2012 -074 -AL for non-farm use on land within the Agricultural Land Reserve to permit a gravel removal proposal not be authorized to proceed to the Agricultural Land Commission. 3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police) 1131 Disbursements for the month ended August 31, 2012 Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that the disbursements for the month ended August 31, 2012 be approved. 4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES 1151 Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre - Phase 1 - Hatchery Component Staff report dated October 1, 2012 recommending that funding for Pacific Parklands Foundation towards the Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre - Phase 1, Hatchery Component be approved. 5. CORRESPONDENCE 1171 6. OTHER ISSUES Committee of the Whole Agenda October 1, 2012 Page 4 of 4 1181 7. ADJOURNMENT 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: Date: 4L1APLE RIDGE erri.neaws. ..-.a,=:.5r.•. District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-031-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: First Reading - Addendum to First Reading report dated August 27, 2012 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 11055 Hazelwood Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On August 28, 2012 Council deferred Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012, which is to rezone the subject property from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential zone) to M-3 (Business Park zone), due to a number of concerns. Specifically, Council wanted the applicant to discuss the project with lower Hammond residents; provide information on the buffering; provide information on the storm water management and erosion sediment control; and additional information on the proposed uses. The developer has since provided additional information and is hosting a neighbourhood information session on Sept. 27, 2012 and intends to update Council on this meeting at the Oct. 2nd Committee of the Whole meeting. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 be given First Reading; and; That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules B, D, E and F of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Christopher Bozyk Architects Ltd Camp Development Corporation Legal Description: Lot 2, D. L 280 and 281; Group 1, NWD Plan BCP50883; PID: 028-855-515 OCP: Existing: Zoning: Existing: Proposed: Industrial RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential zone) M-3 (Business Park zone) Surrounding Uses: North: South: East: West: Use: Industrial and Kingston Street Zone: M-3 (Business Park) Designation: Industrial Use: Industrial and Single Family Residential and Wharf Street Zone: M-2 (General Industrial) and RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Designation: Industrial Use: Single Family Residential (Lower Hammond Area) Zone: RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Urban Residential Use: Vacant lands and City of Pitt Meadows lands Zone: RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) and other Designation: Industrial and other Existing Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Industrial Site Area: 16.637 Hectares (41.10 acres) Access: Kingston Street and Wharf Street Servicing requirement: Full Urban b) Project description: On August 28, 2012 Council deferred Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012, which is to rezone the subject property from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential zone) to M-3 (Business Park zone). The Official Community Plan designation for the subject site is "Industrial" and the proposed land use aligns well with this designation. An older environmental report done with the previous application by Golder Associates identified some drainage Watercourses along the periphery of the site in need of protection and conservation. Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection Development Permit application is required to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourse and riparian areas. The deferral to this application was due to Councils' concerns with: 1. Impact on the neighbourhood (Hammond area residents) and the need for resident involvement; 2. Landscape buffer between the proposed industrial use and the existing residential area; 3. Inadequate details of the design layout options, flood plain concerns, storm water management and erosion sediment control mitigation for the site; 4. Industrial uses permitted in the proposed zone and what does the developer intend to build. Item 1 above: The developer has had one informal meeting on April 2, 2012 with some residents of the Hammond area and has scheduled a second meeting for Sept 27, 2012 at the Best Western Inn at 7:00 pm. The developer intends to continue with these meetings and community involvement of the Lower Hammond residents will be on-going throughout the approval process. Community feedback has -2- been incorporated into the preliminary site plan and landscape plan attached (Appendix B and C). A formal "Development Information Meeting" for the neighbourhood, will be conducted once all the design details of the proposal are worked out, following First Reading. The concerns/comments from this meeting will be included in the Second Reading report for Council consideration. Neighbourhood residents will also have an opportunity to voice their concerns at a future Public Hearing. Item 2 above: The developer has submitted a preliminary landscaping plan (Appendix C) showing buffering along Wharf Street, Hazelwood Street, and under the Golden Ears Bridge right-of-way (proposed detention pond) and in the north-eastern portion backing onto some existing residential lots. The conceptual landscape plan also shows some pedestrian -friendly features such as a multi-purpose trail parallel to Wharf Street connecting the residents of the Hammond Area to areas around the detention pond and on-site park area in the middle of the site. The landscaping requirements will need to comply with both the M-3 (Business Park Zone) and the Industrial Development Permit Guidelines and would be the subject of a future Development Permit report. Item 3 and 4 above: The developer has provided a statement of intent, outlining that they are familiar with the previous application and issues pertaining to the flood plain, storm water management and drainage for the site. The preliminary site plan (Appendix B) shows an industrial business park for small to medium distribution companies on the northern portion, which is intended to be phase 1 of the development. This would render an opportunity for both purchasing and leasing industrial space, similar to what exists along 113B Avenue. For the southern portion of the subject site, which is envisioned to be phase 2 of this proposal, the developers intend to continue looking for a large scale long-term manufacturing tenant, subject to market demand. The details of the proposal will evolve and Council will get to see them with the Second Reading report, prior to which the project architect will be required to present to the Advisory Design Panel as well. Pursuant to Section 8.6 of the Official Community Plan, an Industrial Development Permit application is required for the form and character of the project. CONCLUSION: The developer has addressed the Council concerns listed above. Community involvement of the Lower Hammond residents will be on-going throughout the approval process. Appendix B and C attached give preliminary details of the site layout and landscaping on site. This application has not been forwarded to the Engineering, Building, Fire and Operations Departments for comments at this time; therefore, an evaluation of servicing and code requirements has not been undertaken. We anticipate that this evaluation will take place between First and Second Reading. -3- The development proposal is in compliance with the Official Community Plan and the developer has addressed Council's concerns, therefore, it is recommended that Council grant First Reading subject to additional information being provided and assessed prior to Second Reading. It is expected that once complete information is received, Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 will be amended and an Official Community Plan amendment for Conservation boundary adjustment may be required. "Original signed by Rasika Acharya" Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B -Arch, M -Tech, UDC, LEED® AP, MCIP Planner "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - First Reading report dated August 27, 2012 Appendix B - Proposed preliminary site plan Appendix C - Proposed preliminary landscape plan -4- MAPI.i Ft nk,F ['cep Allots Grams? xe,'gh4o District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: August 27, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-031-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: First Reading Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 11055 Hazelwood Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) to M-3 (Business Park zone). To proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. The proposed land use aligns well with the "Industrial" designation as per the Official Community Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 be given First Reading; and; That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules B, D, E and F of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Christopher Bozyk Architects Ltd owner: Camp Development Corporation Legal Description: Lot 2, D. L 280 and 281; Group 1, NWD Plan BCP50883; PID: 028-855-515 OCP: Existing: Zoning: Existing: Proposed: Surrounding Uses: North: South: Industrial RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential zone) M-3 (Business Park zone) Use: Industrial and Kingston Street Zone: M-3 (Business Park) Designation: Industrial Use: Industrial and Single Family Residential and Wharf Street Zone: M-2 (General Industrial) and RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) East: West: Designation: Industrial Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing requirement: Single Family Residential (Lower Hammond Area) RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Urban Residential Vacant lands and City of Pitt Meadows lands RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) and other Industrial and other Vacant Industrial 16.637 Hectares (41.10 acres) Kingston Street and Wharf Street Full Urban b) Site History and Characteristics: The subject site (Appendix A) is irregular shaped and located in the southwest corner of Maple Ridge in close proximity to the Golden Ears Bridge. It is located within the 200 -year flood plain of the Fraser River and must achieve the flood construction level for the site. The southern part of the subject site had an older application for a "Combined Bus Fleet Overhaul Facility and Heavy Equipment Training Facility" (RZ/057/07) by TransLink, which was withdrawn in 2009. In anticipation of the earlier proposal, in 2008 significant amount of fill was placed on the southern portion of the subject site. The site was historically (1938 to 2004) utilized for agricultural/grazing purposes and is now dominated by weedy grass/herb species and the sand fill. This rezoning proposal is for the subject site located at 11055 Hazelwood Street (Appendix A) to rezone it to M-3 (Business Park zone). The applicant is considering some preliminary design options that will be crystallized after Council grants First Reading. The proponent is aware of the environmentlaly sensitive areas on site and is committed to incorporating them, as the design develops. At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official Community Plan and provide a land use assessment only. Some very preliminary layout options are being discussed and have not been assessed from design point of view. Detailed review and comments will need to be made once full application packages have been received. A more detailed analysis and a further report will be required prior to Second Reading. Such assessment may impact proposed density on site, Official Community Plan designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for further development permits. c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan: The Official Community Plan designation for the subject site is "Industrial" and the proposed land use aligns well with this designation. An older environmental report done with the previous application by Golder Associates identified some drainage Watercourses along the periphery of the site in need of protection and conservation. An amendment to the Official Community Plan may not be required to adjust the conservation boundaries as these will be placed under a conservation covenant. -2- Zoning Bylaw: The current application proposes to rezone the subject site from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential zone) to M-3 (Business Park zone) to permit future construction of potential industrial or big box retail styled buildings. The proposed M-3 (Business Park zone) allows maximum lot coverage of 60% of the site and a maximum height of buildings to be 15.0 metres. The required front yard setback is 6.0 meters; rear yard setback is 3.0 meters; exterior side yard setback is 4.5 metres and the interior side yard setback is 1.5 meters. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance Permit application. This will be determined before the Second Reading report is brought forth for Council consideration. Off -Street Parking and Loading Bylaw: The Off -Street Parking and Loading Bylaw # 4350-1990 specifies parking based on uses in the M-3 zone (Business Park zone). Based on the uses proposed, any variations from the parking requirements will require a Development Variance Permit application. This will be determined before the Second Reading report is brought forth for Council consideration. Development Permits: Pursuant to Section 8.6 of the Official Community Plan, an Industrial Development Permit application is required to ensure that the form and character of the current proposal meets the needs of industry, through attractive design that is compatible with adjacent development. Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection Development Permit application is required to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourse and riparian areas. Advisory Design Panel: An Industrial Development Permit is required and must be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel prior to Second Reading. Development Information Meeting: A Development Information Meeting is required for this application. Prior to Second Reading the applicant is required to host a Development Information Meeting in accordance with Council Policy 6.20. d) Interdepartmental Implications: In order to advance the current application, after First Reading, comments and input, will be sought from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below: a) Engineering Department; b) Operations Department; c) Fire Department; d) Parks Department; e) Building Department; f) City of Pitt Meadows. -3- The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application progresses, to liaise with agencies and/or departments not listed above. This application has not been forwarded to the Engineering Department for comments at this time; therefore, an evaluation of servicing requirements has not been undertaken. We anticipate that this evaluation will take place between First and Second Reading. e) Development Applications: In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as required by Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999 as amended: 1. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule B ); 2. An Industrial Development Permit Application (Schedule D); 3. Development Variance Permit, if applicable (Schedule E); 4. Watercourse Protection Development Permit Application (Schedule F); The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the assessment of the proposal progresses. CONCLUSION: The development proposal is in compliance with the Official Community Plan, therefore, it is recommended that Council grant First Reading subject to additional information being provided and assessed prior to Second Reading. It is expected that once complete information is received, Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 will be amended and an Official Community Plan Amendment for Conservation boundary adjustment may be required. The proposed layout options have not been reviewed in relation to the relevant bylaws and regulations governing subdivision applications. Any subdivision layout provided is strictly preliminary and must be approved by the District's Approving Officer. "Original signed by Rasika Acharya" Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B -Arch, M -Tech, UDC, LEED® AP, MCIP Planner "Original signed by Charles R. Goddard" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B - Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914-2012 -4- I J - i• 1A413 Ei V. 11111' ill' iti>. #,iik 11*11010%. r i f11111' 1111, lip • .lir** SUBJECT PROPERTY lob .4. III' 1111** .... .41101, i iD cl I I %ti . 1110r#11, lkiii, Illb NIL% liir Alb. ;•-• r IllA. 111111' AI' i .�. 1111.6111111,. 4 1111, - AI' . . . • 1 : . 111011), 11;,1113., • SAL -.1. 8 % - .., *,,,L , .,. . to,,. ,.- ' Si, v, 11,,, iI 6Ii .,, I._cl I I . 0 .. ..r. V` S 8 . x N+ 1111, /10, ,f 0 ,,.._ _ *0, # • iiiiii % 111 N: SCALE 1:5,000 Cit`..f Pitt Mea•Aws ' r ` � 11055 HAZELWOOD STREET o rn _ „31griairaLm - its _I, trAmuffilNlllll'l O�?�I! ,� r y�i CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF Y– -,--r.- ��; _•• iam yPAO ' -� r�.•— 1 it i IP District of \4 MAPLE RIDGE MAPLE RIDGE British CoLumbia PLANNING DEPARTMENT ' Langley-_ �j o DATE: Aug 14, 2012 FILE: 2012-031-RZ BY: PC _ _ FRASER CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 6914-2012 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. 6914-2012" 2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot 2, District Lot 280 and District Lot 281; Group 1; New Westminster District Plan: BCP50883 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1565 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to M-3 (Business Park Zone). 3. 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. 2012. READ a second time the day of , A.D. 201 . PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 201 . READ a third time the day of , A.D. 201 . RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 201 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER — — ,I / AFi 9 - 10 - ��S SCP508ffi y ml a UA P251i8I ' I Po.A I 1 1 .P251755 (*- 006o00t0 sT F98914 y 1131 N� 1 i � LMS2889 e®.�® SittWe " B P4183 • A BCP 1 AteltiO �%e e 0 # A 91” P418 1 B x385] I if ® R., • es B 3'8e/ V $ ' s A .M1 38 �� /�© ® S ,8 '� e0 .eo 0. % ' `' 01411kik t)a 40 e�► e®5: ®0 Q\1 O00A•___ R , 472444tee�\I 'e ee % 04 • #A#0 0OA`y,s © 940w,,,,\ O®S % , --„,. AO s ,,_ p, fps PAa . �,Po ©�„, 0 ie . . ,.., r .� _ _. 00. 2 P94. Po.1 — 1 y I �— 1 ] BCP312]52 ' Pd � _ ,; 1/1 I ' ;ee / I 11 1, \\ -,/ 1 I 1 1 , \ , \ , \©� , \ , \ , , , , , 1 11111 II \\ \ BCP508ffi WHq RR 3T 531 LMP 202® 82 VADLI R DG- /0\- AV- \D Bylaw No. 6914-2012 Map No. 1565 From: RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) To: M3 (B usiness Park Zone) \G /00:\ N SCALE 1:5,500 MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia 810 133`';; APPENDIX C 'MAPLE RILIVE Bnrhh'-'a.4e7. J:rr• aai: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer MEETING DATE: FILE NO: MEETING: First Reading Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6944-2012 21722 and 21734 Dewdney Trunk Road October 1, 2012 2012-079-RZ C of W EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject properties located at 21722 and 21734 Dewdney Trunk Road from RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RT -1 (Two Family Urban Residential). To proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6944-2012 be given First Reading, and; That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedule B of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Legal Description: OCP: Existing: Zoning: Existing: Proposed: Surrounding Uses: North: South: Ashok K. Sharma Ashok K. Sharma and Rajrani Sharma Lot: 9, D.L.: 247, Plan: 8772 and Lot: 10, D.L.: 247, Plan: 8772 Urban Residential RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) RT -1 (Two Family Urban Residential) Use: Zone: Designation Use: Zone: Designation: Town houses RM -1 (Townhouse Residential) RM -4 (Multiple Family Residential District) Urban Residential Single Family RS -1 (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Urban Residential East: West: Existing Use of Properties: Proposed Use of Properties: Site Area: Access: Servicing requirement: b) Site Characteristics: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Duplex RT -1 (Two Family Urban Residential) Urban Residential Single Family and Preschool RS -1b (One Family Urban Residential) and P-2 (Special Institutional) Urban Residential and Institutional Single Family Duplex 1,929 m2 Dewdney Trunk Road Full Urban The site consists of two relatively flat lots on the south side of Dewdney Trunk Road. An existing duplex, which is strata titled, is situated immediately to the east of the subject site. To the south and immediately to the west of the subject site are single family homes zoned RS -1 and RS -1b respectively. Two lots further to the west on Dewdney Trunk Road is a preschool. To the north across Dewdney Trunk Road, are townhouse developments zoned RM -1 (Townhouse Residential) and RM -4 (Multiple Family Residential District). c) Project Description: The proposal is to rezone the two lots from RS -1 (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to RT -1 (Two Family Urban Residential). This will enable each lot to have the existing dwelling replaced by a duplex. At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official Community Plan and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will need to be made once full application packages have been received. A more detailed analysis and a further report will be required prior to Second Reading. Such assessment may impact proposed lot boundaries and yields, Official Community Plan designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for further development permits. d) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan: The development site is designated Urban Residential and is located along Dewdney Trunk Road which is identified as a Major Corridor Network road. The proposed use and zone is in accordance with this designation and the proposed increased density (e.g. duplex) achieves the OCP objective of increasing densities along major roads. -2- Zoning Bylaw: The current application proposes to rezone the properties located at 21722 and 21734 Dewdney Trunk Road from RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RT -1 (Two Family Urban Residential) to permit a duplex on each of the existing two lots. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance Permit application. e) Interdepartmental Implications: In order to advance the current application, after First Reading, comments and input, will be sought from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below: a) Engineering Department; b) Operations Department; c) Building Department; d) Fire Department; and e) Ministry of Transportation; The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application progresses, to liaise with agencies and/or departments not listed above. Some of the likely requirements will be: • Widening of Dewdney Trunk Road; • Joint driveways; and • Restrictive covenant for duplex design. This application has not been forwarded to the Engineering Department for comments at this time; therefore, an evaluation of servicing requirements has not been undertaken. We anticipate that this evaluation will take place between First and Second Reading. f) Development Applications: In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as required by Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999 as amended: 1. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule B). The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the assessment of the proposal progresses. -3- CONCLUSION: The development proposal is in compliance with the Official Community Plan, therefore, it is recommended that Council grant First Reading subject to additional information being provided and assessed prior to Second Reading. "Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski" Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, RPP, MCIP, MCAHP Planner "Original signed by Charles R. Goddard" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Russ Carmichael" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B - Zone Amending Bylaw 6944-2012 Appendix C - Site Plan -4- *PP061 I_IvII 1vvvv Rem B NWS 2813 1 co N. N NWS 2037 219 1 P 79498 LMP 1 P 0 21651 N ?204 C co co P 76831 12049 P 62886 Lo_ N LMS N ; VN 1 N Subject Properties TRUNK RD. .__WDNEY O � Rem N4 P 8772 � Rem N 5 O (° N6 P 8772 0) N7 co o N1 P 67685 N2 N N9 P C) N 10 8772 -7 N A 1� EL 1189 O N93 O N94 O r• N95 P 44518 96 P L130 29839 131 61 P 2 917 62 0 63 139 11965 92 P 11968 44518 89 / M N. (.0 (71c7, (0 ' N •.--1 N ,,,e 64 11951 140 �� 8 119 AVE . 91 N- coo 90 tiNO Y) O o 11942 11945 11958 N y) z 132 a, co MNN� co I, 60 65 m ap 141 Q 119 AVE. L217' CV = w 11936 0, 1330_ 11939 (NI N 11938 0_ 66 11939 142 11936 145 P31180 P 331 21799 92.1-1 N P 29839 134 N P 28917 58 up N P 28917 17 67 N M P 31180 P 31144 m 143 N N 166 N DONOVANAVE. i co CO 00 co O co N O N. N Cr) , in If ''f f1 C LOC) COC co I. .-..,..,, L\ I\i Scale: 1:1,500 Ci �..f Pitt Mea.�ows — ' 21722/21734 Dewdney Trunk Road II 0 I �N �LS ��.I �+-- CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF �= MI= alvto-gia a • ' ° WE 1o �=u ke� Y1 }_RR:77 -- � `may iii�.� ! y MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Districtngley �! I Langley =1 -a1 -��• � m' ---12--' Sep 26, 2012 2012-079-RZ BY: JV ASER R. -. CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 6944-2012 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. 6944-2012." 2. Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as: Lot 9 District Lot 247 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 8772 Lot 10 District Lot 247 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 8772 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1576 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RT -1 (Two Family Urban Residential). 3. 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. 20 . READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 . PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 . READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 . APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 . RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER Rem B NWS 2813 1 '' N NWS 2037 219 1 P 79498 LMP 18956 E i _ P 71- 9N 22204 10 co C co RPr°73720 P 76831 12049 P 62886 ro 10 10 r N 11 LMS I \\ o \� 00 N - N \ r- -RP -RP 73655 RP 73511 I RW 74359 DEWDNEY TRUNK RD. 21656 1 co 3v 73402 2 Rem N 5 co 72 21680 0) OD v N 21698 v -021706 ti N2 7685 21722 co co ti N 10 8772 o co71- 00 N c "' 1co 1 118 21770 CD W 21780 CO co ti N95 P 4z Cn 21794 Co c9 rn P 130L, 29839 131 61 P 2917 62 2 63 139 11965 92 P 11968 44518 89 co co �, cocoN N r... N N N / 0 N 64 11951 140 8 119 AVE. 91 90 19. co `1' l` CO p p 11942 ti 11945 �' 11958 (n N z 132 m N N 60 65 rn 141 119 AVE. 21l oa N ct)11939 = w 11936 133 N 11939 a 59 0 N 11938 66 a 142 11936145 P 31180 P 33' 12 P P 29839 134 N P 28917 Y 58 u) N P 28917 - ti_ h7 N co P 31180 /P31180 0) ti 144 ti N 143 N ti 166 N 167 F 1 N vADL Bylaw No. Map No. From: To: R 6944-2012 1576 RS RT DG- 70\\ AV- \D -1 (One Family Urban Residential) -1 (Two Family Urban Residential) \G L\ N SCALE 1:1,500 MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia c co a. o >, co -.1 E 2 I c_ 41 . . 'MAPLE RILIVE Brahh'_'a.aeu1 J:rr• aai: District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-084-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: First and Second Reading Maple Ridge OCP Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6947-2012 Second Reading Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6853-2011 11185 & 11133 240 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RST (Street Townhouse Residential Zone), R-2 (Urban Residential District Zone), R 1 (Residential District Zone) and C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial Zone). This would permit 24 RST lots, 39 R 2 single family lots, one remnant R-1 lot to be subdivided when lands to the south of 111 Avenue are developed, and a mixed use building totaling 702.6 m2 (7,563.5 ft2) on the proposed C- 1 zoned lot. The C-1 building is proposed to have 4 ground -level commercial tenant spaces with access toward the streets and each of the 4 rental apartments on the second floor will have its own entrance from ground level at the south side of the building near the residential -only parking area. The commercial floor space, excluding the apartment entrance spaces, is 339.4 m2 (3,653.3 ft2) and the apartments floor space totals 363.2 m2 (3,910.2 ft2). The second storey floor area appears larger than the first story floor area because the residential floor extends over a portion of the wrapping porch and some of the first floor area is used for ground level entrances and stairs to the residential units on the second floor. There will be four (4) rental apartments - 3 one -bedroom units and 1 two-bedroom unit. The apartments range in size between about 73.4 m2 (789.9 ft2) for the smallest of the one -bedroom units to 127.6 m2 (1,373.6 ft2) for the one two-bedroom unit. This application requires amendments to the Official Community Plan (OCP) and the Zoning Bylaw as follows: • Adjusting the area designated in Schedules B & C of the OCP as Conservation to correspond to the boundary determined by the environmental assessment undertaken by the applicant; • Reducing the area designated in Schedule B of the OCP as Commercial in accordance with the Neighborhood Commercial Policies in the OCP that buildings on Neighbourhood Commercial sites have a floor area of less than 929 m2 (10,000 ft2); • Amending the Zoning Matrix in the OCP to allow the RST (Street Townhouse Residential) Zone under the Urban Residential designation; and • A site-specific Zoning Bylaw text amendment for the C-1 Zone to allow for four (4) apartments above the ground level commercial floor provided they are rental units. The designation changes and the site specific Zoning Bylaw text amendment are required so that the proposed application will be in compliance with the Official Community Plan and for the proposed rental apartments to be permitted. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That in accordance with Section 879 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. 6875-2011 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; 2. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011 be considered in conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 3. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 4. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011 be given First and Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 5. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6947-2012 be given First and Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 6. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6853-2011 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and 7. That the following term(s) and condition(s) be met prior to final reading: i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of security as outlined in the Agreement; ii. Amendment to Schedules "A", "B" & "C" of the Official Community Plan, including Amendment to Appendix C in Schedule "A" to add the RST Street Townhouse Residential Zone under Urban Residential designation in the Zoning Matrix on a site-specific basis; -2- iii. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses the suitability of the site for the proposed development; iv. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant which addresses storm/rain water management; v. Road dedication as required; vi. Park dedication as required; vii. Registration of a Housing Agreement in accordance with Section 905 of the Local Government Act and an associated Restrictive Covenant stating that the apartment units above the ground floor of the commercial building will be restricted to residential rental units; viii. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for the protection of habitat and natural features; ix. Removal of the existing building or buildings; x. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance with the regulations; xi. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the Residential Parking and the Visitor Parking. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Legal Description: OCP: Existing: Proposed: Zoning: Existing: Damax Consultants Ltd. (Dave Laird) INC. NO. 0914038 B.C. LTD. Lot "C" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 Lot "D" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 Urban Residential, Commercial Urban Residential, Commercial RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) -3- Proposed: Surrounding Uses North: South: East: West: Use: Zone: Designation Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing requirement: b) Project Description: RST (Street Townhouse Residential), R-2 (Urban Residential District), R-1 (Residential District), and C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) Single Family Residential (Proposal for Neighborhood Commercial and Townhouse) RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) (RZ/044/09 - Proposed C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) and RM -1 (Townhouse Residential) ) Commercial Single Family Residential RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Urban Residential Single Family Residential RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Medium Density Residential, Neighbourhood Commercial and Conservation Single Family Residential RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Urban Residential and Conservation Single Family Residential Single Family Residential, Commercial with rental apartments on the second floor, and park 1.693 Ha. (4.2 Acres) 112 Avenue and 240 Street (future access 111 Avenue) Full Urban Standard The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 11185 240 Street and 11133 240 Street from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RST (Street Townhouse Residential) to front 112 Avenue and 240 Street; R-1 (Residential District) for a small portion of the site to be compatible with lands to the south and the west; R-2 (Urban Residential District) for the interior portion of the site; and C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) at the corner. This would permit subdivision into 24 RST (Street Townhouse Residential) lots, 39 R-1 (Residential District Zone) single family lots, one remnant R-1 lot to be subdivided when lands to the south along 111 Avenue are developed, and one (1) commercial property. The headwaters of Rainbow Creek are located on the western side of the development site. This environmentally sensitive natural area and associated sloping lands will be dedicated as park. A Natural Features/Watercourse Protection development permit will govern the necessary enhancement and protection requirements, including securities and the required environmental setback for the single family residential lots abutting the park. -4- Commercial Mixed-use Component: A mixed-use 2 storey building is proposed to be built at the southwest corner of 112 Avenue and 240 Street. Entrances to the individual commercial units are along the frontage of the two adjacent roads, with a pedestrian walkway covered by a porch, wrapping along the sides of the bulding. An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RST (Street Townhouse Residential Zone), R-2 (Urban Residential District Zone), R 1 (Residential District Zone) and C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial Zone). This would permit 24 RST lots, 39 R 2 single family lots, one remnant R-1 lot to be subdivided when lands to the south of 111 Avenue are developed, and a mixed use building totaling 702.6 m2 (7,563.5 ft2) on the proposed C-1 zoned lot. The C-1 building is proposed to have 4 ground -level commercial tenant spaces with access toward the streets and each of the 4 rental apartments on the second floor will have its own entrance from ground level at the south side of the building near the residential -only parking area. The commercial floor space, excluding the apartment entrance spaces, is 339.4 m2 (3,653.3 ft2) and the apartments floor space totals 363.2 m2 (3,910.2 ft2). The second storey floor area appears larger than the first story floor area because the residential floor extends over a portion of the wrapping porch and some of the first floor area is used for ground level entrances and stairs to the residential units on the second floor. There will be four (4) rental apartments - 3 one -bedroom units and 1 two-bedroom unit. The apartments range in size between about 73.4 m2 (789.9 ft2) for the smallest of the one -bedroom units to 127.6 m2 (1,373.6 ft2) for the one two-bedroom unit. A site specific zone text amendment will be required to exceed the single one family residential use allowed as an accessory use in the C-1 Zone regulations. A Housing Agreement will be used to secure their rental tenure. A similar approach has been given approval (to Third Reading) by Council on the development to the north of this site. Parking is located to the side and behind the building. Eleven (11) parking spaces are proposed to serve the commercial uses and 5, including 1 for visitors for the residential units. The parking for the residential uses will have surface treatment and landscaping used to distinguish them from the commercial parking spaces. Access to this building is exclusively off of 112 Avenue. No vehicular access will be permitted from the lane that abuts a portion of this commercial lot; the lane provides alternative access to RST dwellings fronting on 111 Avenue and 240 Street. A gate for pedestrian access with an identified walkway through the parking area will provide convenient pedestrian access from the nearby residential area to the future stores in the proposed commercial building. RST Component: A total of 24 street -oriented RST dwellings are being proposed along 112 Avenue and 240 Street. Facing 112 Avenue, 2 buildings with 4 -units each, for a total of 8 units are proposed, and on 240 Street, 4 buildings with 4 -units each, for a total of 16 units. Parking is provided in detached car garages with laneway access. Two spaces are provided side-by-side in the garages for each unit. -5 Residential Subdivision: The remaining portion of the site south and west of the commercial and RST components is a single family residential subdivision. There will be 39 R-2 zoned (312 m2) lots, and one remnant R-1 zoned (371 m2) lot to be subdivided when lands to the south of 111 Avenue are developed. These lot sizes and the proposed pattern will ensure this subdivision is compatible with the recently subdivided Wynn Ridge project by Genstar. c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan: The subject site is designated Commercial, Urban Residential and Conservation on Schedule B of the Official Community Plan (OCP). Adjustment between the Urban Residential and Conservation boundary will reflect ground proofing based on the environmental and geotechnical consultants' recommendations. The Commercial designation is to be reduced from 1.0 ha (10,000 m2) to 0.32 ha (3,200 m2). The Urban Residential designated area would increase and to increase the urban residential designation by 0.68 ha (6,800 m2). This is in accordance with the Neighborhood Commercial Policies in the OCP that buildings on Neighbourhood Commercial sites have a floor area of less than 929 m2 (10,000 ft2). This reduction is supportable because it is consistent with OCP policies and it is recognized that the development of the Neighborhood Commercial Centers at this intersection provides ample commercial space to service the daily convenience shopping and service needs of the residents in this area. The OCP Zoning Matrix currently does not include the RST (Street Townhouse Residential) Zone as a zone permitted under the Urban Residential designation. The Matrix is proposed to be amended to add the RST Zone in the RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION - Major Corridor Residential Category. It was determined this zone would be appropriate for use in this instance because both 240 Street and 112 Avenue are major road corridors. Section 3.3.6 of the OCP identifies the subject site as part of a Neighbourhood Commercial Centre, which encompasses three of the four corners at the intersection of 112 Avenue and 240 Street. Under OCP Policy 6-32, a neighborhood commercial center is to be typically less than 930 m2 (10,000 ft2). The commercial project would consist of 339.4 m2 (3,653.3 ft2) of commercial floor area and 363.2 m2 (3,910.2 ft2) of residential floor area for a total floor area of 702.6 m2 (7,563.5 ft2). The justification for this reduction includes the following: • Rental housing, secured in perpetuity, will help to create a wide range of housing choices and increasing the rental stock in the community and is consistent with OCP policies; • A portion of the former Commercial Designated lands are proposed to be zoned for street facing townhouses to help achieve the objective of increasing densities along Major Corridors; -6- • Supports having a commercial development at a scale compatible with the emerging neighbourhood and attracting the kinds of businesses most suitable to serve the daily shopping and service needs of surrounding residents; • This is similar in nature to the proposed reduction of the Commercial Designated lands as part of application RZ/044/09 at the northwest corner; and • The size of the proposed commercial site is appropriate for a neighbourhood commercial node (i.e. less than 930 m2). OCP Policy 3-34 supports the provision of affordable, rental and special housing needs throughout the District, and Policy 3-33 supports the provision of rental accommodation in varying dwelling unit size and number of bedrooms. A Restrictive Covenant and Housing Agreement will include the language necessary to secure this as rental housing and prevent rental restrictions in the event the building is strata titled. The Housing Action Plan has not been completed; however the proposed rental apartments would be a step in addressing the kinds of housing and affordability issues this study will be identifying. This approach has been used elsewhere in the District and is also planned for the neighbouring site to the north. Zoning Bylaw: The site is proposed to be zoned a combination of C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial), RST (Street Townhouse Residential), R-2 Urban Residential District and R-1 Residential District, with the park area remaining RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential). To accommodate the rental apartments, a separate zone amending bylaw will allow a site specific text amendment to allow this as a principal use in the C-1 Zone on the subject site only. For the application on the property immediately to the north (RZ/044/09), a separate C-1 Zone text amending bylaw is in process also to allow for second floor rental apartments above ground floor commercial uses. Except for the variances being sought, a preliminary review of the proposed buildings and associated parking indicates that the proposal complies with applicable provisions of the Zoning Bylaw and parking regulations. A concurrent development variance permit application proposes to vary the provisions of the Zoning bylaw as follows: 1. The commercial building is proposed to be sited closer to the two abutting streets, as is the case for the commercial building proposed across 112 Avenue to the north. Therefore, the Zoning Bylaw is proposed to be varied as follows: • Section 701 (7) (a) is proposed to be varied from a minimum front yard lot line setback of 7.5 m. to a minimum setback of 5.8 m., and • Section 701 (7) (d) is proposed to be varied from a minimum exterior side lot line setback, (including the lot line forming the corner truncation), from 7.5 m. to a minimum setback of 2.0 m. These variances are to include encroachments like roof projections. These setback reductions are similar to the one proposed for the commercial building project (RZ/044/09) to the north across 112 Avenue. -7- 2. Entrance porches for the RST buildings along 240 Street and 112 Avenue are proposed to be sited closer to the respective streets. This will strengthen the relationship of the units to the streets and provide for an interesting streetscape by allowing the front entry porches and their roofs to be closer to the sidewalks. Therefore, Zoning Bylaw Section 601D 6.0 is proposed to be varied from a minimum front yard lot line setback of 4.0 m. to a minimum setback of 2.93 m. These variances are to include encroachments like roof projections. 3. The rear yard setback of the RST building (to the lane) is proposed to be reduced. The variance being sought is to reduce the requirements of Zoning Bylaw Section 601D 6.0 from 14 m. to 13.4 m. 4. The minimum dimension of the private outdoor space is proposed to be reduced. The variance being sought will reduce the requirements of 601D 6.0 2 a) from a rectangular shape of 6.0 m. by 7.5 m. to 5.5 to 7.5 m. for the RST building on 240 Street and to 5.0 m. by 7.5 m. for the RST building on 112 Avenue. The proposed stair wells to the basement entrance in the back yards will be modified in the development permit plans so they are not in the minimum private outdoor space. 5. The setback for the detached garages to the rear yard (e.g. to the lane) is proposed to be reduced. The variance being sought is to reduce the requirements of 601D 6.0 from 1.5 m. to 1.3 m. This reduction will be referred to Engineering and reviewed as part of the terms and conditions for this application. The variances will be reassessed and verified, and will be the subject of a future Council report. Development Permits: Pursuant to Sections 8.5 of the Official Community Plan, a Commercial Development Permit application is required to foster attractive commercial areas that are compatible with adjacent development and enhance the unique character of the community. Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan, a Residential Development Permit application is required to enhance existing neighbourhoods with compatible housing styles that meet diverse needs and minimize potential conflicts on neighbouring land uses, and will be required for the RST portion of the development. This development permit application will be the subject of a future Council report. Advisory Design Panel: The following concerns raised by the Advisory Design Panel are to be addressed by the applicant with planning staff: • Look at the material treatment on each residential block to better define individual units • Provide complete colored elevations of the commercial building with details for the sign band and access stairs -8- • Provide complete street landscape design coordinated with civil engineering plans • Provide detailed landscape design and specification for the residential units • Consider a hedge or fence to delineate in the private yards in the gaps between units • Consider relocating the garbage enclosure and provide details • Consider enlarging the porches on the commercial development and consider wrapping the porch around the south side of the building • Consider simplifying the planting palette of the commercial building • Consider an improved entry feature for residential units in the commercial building The future Council report noted above about the development permit will describe how these matters have been resolved by the architect. Development Information Meeting: A Development Information Meeting was held by the applicant on April 12, 2012 at the Thomas Haney Secondary School. A total of 15 residents and interested parties attended. The applicant reported that there were no major objections expressed about the project. The comments made by those attending included: high traffic volume and speed along 240 Street (there will be a signal at 112 Avenue and 240 Street), having more bike lanes, servicing and timing of the development. d) Interdepartmental Implications: Engineering Department: Comments from Engineering have identified some off site requirements associated with this project. These include: extending the sanitary and the storm sewers, underground wiring, road widening, corner truncation, and the usual requirements for a servicing agreement, geotechnical and other legal instruments. The applicant has been provided with a copy of the Engineering comments. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and the security are required for this application. Building Department: Comments from Building are related to confirming the geotechnical and environmental setbacks, and the storm water and rain water management strategy for this development site, and insuring restrictive covenants are registered on title. These covenants are included as conditions to be met prior to final reading. Parks & Leisure Services Department: The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the subdivision is completed they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. The required street trees will be provided -9- and secured through the development permit for the Commercial and Townhouse components and through subdivision for the single family subdivision. Fire Department: The Fire Departments provided comments concerning the usual requirements related to installation of fire alarm panels, hydrant placement, and sprinklering (all to be addressed at the subdivision or the building permit application stage), and the requirements for the temporary roads to be finished to the required allowable widths to accommodate emergency equipment (to be addressed through subdivision approval stage). School District: The School Board has indicated to the District in the past that schools in the area, such as Albion Elementary School, are beyond their capacity and future homeowners could expect their children to attend schools beyond their immediate neighbourhood. e) Intergovernmental Issues: 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 (adjusting the Conservation and the Commercial designations) is considered to be appropriate and 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. f) Environmental Implications: The site abuts a sloping area and watercourse (Rainbow Creek) along the west side of the site. A Natural Features/Watercourse Protection Development Permit Application is associated with this rezone application. Geotechnical and environmental setbacks will be established to insure park dedication, the subdivision layout and siting of dwellings will achieve the environment protection policies. - 10 - CONCLUSION: It is recommended that First and Second Readings be granted to Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011 to adjust the land use designation boundaries, and allow the RST Zone on a site specific basis under the RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS - Major Corridor Residential Designation category of the Zoning Matrix; that First and Second Readings be granted to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6947-2012 for the site specific zone text amendment to allow the four rental apartments on the second storey of the commercial building; that Second Reading be granted to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6853-2011 for the rezoning of this subject site; and that these bylaws be forwarded to a Public Hearing. "Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski" Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MCIP, RPP, MCAHP Planner "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by Kelly Swift" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B - OCP Amending Bylaw 6875-2011 Appendix C - Zone Amending Bylaw 6853-2011 Appendix D - Zone Amending Bylaw 6947-2012 Appendix E - Site Plan Appendix F - Building Elevation Plans Appendix G - Landscape Plans -11- RP 365 9 S 1/2 S 1/2 B 11300 r- of 11 263 0, M N 2 Pcl. 'P' 11 247 6 P 26163 a 11 250 RP 1224 11 213 5 P 26163 N m LMP 24 722 \ /PARK s Py 19 20 5 m gl B EP 15665 Subject Properties C P 19825 B NW P5589 1184 85 PARK PARK BCP 50702 P 24 722 20 D P 19825 Rem 1 P 17613 111854 11194 19 ,, 18 19 °90 e., o`l' 17 B, 7 h-16,°-s 11 S150'of1 11 080 0 15 °'i '� e 0 14 170ss 77 's 13 7705, 77° s" 23 s s 4 17os3 2 11 062 12 1j0 25 so 11 1j04> 11oss 26 11043 0 7/046 27 4611 10 1j 28 % 11039 m 0q24511 9 11036 29 04s 11035 4_17C 3 BCP 46902 11080 N P 17613 3 1052 30 110 8 11p m 11032 31 0 44 3� 47 29 in 11031 711026 43 11040 48 N 1 /2 of 4 1038 11023 32 11025 11028 11020 33 mU42 49 o S 1/2 of 4 11 017 11016 41 1019 11016500 11032 34 11 011 11 013 11 012 al I\i Scale: 1:2,500 Ci ..f MeaalowsPitt ___ *¢ S x 11 133 & 11185-240 St 11 ___„1"—‘11111•��i.' hi yn fYf !' 13 a . 0) i T 2 �t MAPLE RIDGE 8 riiish Columbia CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT tgogLS ��41Cf4rlr.i o ;sik°,y�_ �;E. Lei �a �I�,�- _ ti i .y Y,t}" ..�' District of 1, �I Langley �` Y1 10-7 DATE: Sep 26, 2012 2012-020-DP BY: JV ,�=� „FRASER CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 6875-2011 A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan No. 6425-2006 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 Schedules "A", "B" & "C" to the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 6425-2006; 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 for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6875-2011. 2. Schedule "A" of the Official Community Plan shall be amended as follows: Appendix C. Zoning, Section 2. Zoning Matrix, OCP Designation / Category, RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS, Major Corridor Residential Category is amended by adding the following in the Zones column: RST (Street Townhouse Residential), provided this zone shall only be permitted for that portion of the property described as 11185 240 Street (Lot "C" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825). 3. Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot "C" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 Lot "D" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No 820, a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw. 4. Schedule "C" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot "C" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 Lot "D" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No 821, a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding and removing Conservation. 5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.6425-2006 is hereby amended accordingly. READ A FIRST TIME the day of PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of READ A SECOND TIME the day of READ A THIRD TIME the day of , A. D. 20 . , A. D. 20 . , A.D. 20 . , A. D. 20 . RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D.20 . MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER 11263 N N 2 0 Pcl. 'P' 6 P 26163 11247 11250 240 ST. RP 1224 _JP 75056 r LMP 30218 11213 5 P 26163 o c33 112 AVE. LMP 24722 PARK 5 �� s eAs � I\ m 1( Fu' l� Co' B �Pyt `er 19 s 20 21'5 Q BCNWP5589 EP 15665 P 19825 11184 20 PARK PARK BCP 50702 LMP 24722 21 20 0 D P 19825 11133 240 ST. I Rem 1 P 17613 11118/54 19 ',0 0 18 ,0 s,' (9"17 oa, C, 776. 0 -r-BCP 50703 S150'of1 11080 015 moi �, 0 1 ' 7j063 7,0„, 6' 1 3 7j069 ,70 2 3 ss 4 71063 2 11062 12 �1 p 2 s0 22 11 710p. 77%26 1104 O 77 27 10 3 JO 170„048 28 46 17053 11039 2 29 457704 cr 11036 S 1035 r on 3 BCP 46902 110.5n P 17613 3 11052 VADLE R Bylaw No.6875-2011 Mai No. 820 From: Urban 3(1 n 1 i DG- 0==C Residential, Conservation AL COVV\ From: TY PLA\ A✓ Commercial -\D \G To: %% Q Conservation To: QUrban Residential Urban Residential :A N SCALE 1:2,500 4_ MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia 1 i RP 75056 LMP 30218 0o co M N 240 ST. RK 0702 21 20 0 0 112 AVE. To Conservation i IIS o co / /M N coL Q Z J B EP 15665 Add To C' P 19825 11185 11184 11118/54 � D P19825 11133 To Remove From Conservation 1 BCP 50703 VAPL- Bylaw No.6875-2011 Mau No. Purpose: RDC- 0"C 821 To Add To Conservation To Remove From AL COVV\ Conservation TY PLA\ A\/ -\D \G /% Q L\ N SCALE 1:1,500 MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 6853-2011 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. 6853-2011." 2. Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as: Lot "C" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 Lot "D" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1539 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RST (Street Townhouse Residential), R-1 (Residential District), R-2 (Urban Residential District), C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial). 3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the 30th day of August, A.D. 2011. READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 . PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 . READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 . RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER S 1/2 of Sv1/2 B 11300 r— 11263 v M N 2 Pcl. 'P' 6 P 26163 11247 0_ 11250 240 ST. RP 1224 RP 75056 L- LMP 30218 11213 5 P 26163 o, co R 112 AVE. LMP 2472 PARK 101 I\ N F3♦♦.♦. Jv ♦♦♦♦♦♦ . ♦. 30 y �P,�P�Pt 4Y' 12vo o �w oe 20 (b J B E P 15665 \ s 8 = ♦:♦:♦: :♦:.:♦ ♦♦♦.♦♦ ♦♦♦�♦ NWP5589 11184 22 \P PARK PARK BCP 50702 LMP 24722 P 9 5 :.:♦:♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦ _♦_♦_. Rem 1 P 17613 21 20 = 11 11118/54 1• ', 0 18 7,0 s0, 0117 os, 4016770 r - 776>7 oA _ I t' BCP 50703 S 150' o 11080 ) 0615 �, 14 77066 77 ob' 0 77069 7706 ,2 3 033 4 240 ST. 2 11062 1213 77°6 sp 25 22 11 //o4?. 7j0% 26 11pg3 O 77pqa 27 46 10 a 28 77063 11030 W 7pq? dc, 3 RCPdR9(19 P 17613 3 VADLI Bylaw No.6853-2011 Mau No. 1539 From: RS R -3 DG= /0\= A✓=\D (One Family Rural Residential) \G To: 2�2� RST (Street Townhouse Residential) %/IR -1 (Residential District) OC -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) \\\'R-2 (Urban Residential District) N SCALE 1:2,500 MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 6947-2012 A Bylaw to amend the text of Maple Ridge 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. 6947-2012." 2. PART 7, COMMERCIAL ZONES, SECTION 701, NEIGHBOURHHOOD COMMERCIAL: C-1 is amended by adding the following in SUBSECTION 1, PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES, after "d) personal repair services": e) Apartment is permitted in the following locations: (1) 11185 240 Street (Lot "C" District Lot 404 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 19825) 3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended is hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the day of , A.D. 20. READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 . PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 . READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 . RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 0 APPENDIX E Damax Consultants Ltd. 103-1600 West 6th Ave. Vancouver, B.C. V6J 1R3 Td. 224-6827 Fax 689-3€30 $ Q -R* $ 8�.±,F(C.wi F`4{i !#. o'ia �; h Damax Consultants Ltd. 103-1600 West 6th Ave. Vancouver, B.C. V6J 1R3 Td. 224-6827 Fax 689-3€30 112th Avenue 112th Avenue APPENDIX F 1 90 I Apr%711 N.7 rr Lane C/) Lane FUTURE ROAD (111th Avenue) CONTEXT PLAN C'D 00 z H OVERALL SITE PLAN JUNE... NAG CONSTRUCTION RIGHT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION 11 T z 0 L z 0 ce 11 111111 11111111111 I II I I I I I I ,6-,S S-,6 FRONT ELEVATION ,6-,S „S-6 ,.6-S „S-6 z 0 W RIGHT ELEVATION z O 2 FLOOR PLAN FLOOR AREA/PER UNIT= 400 SQ.FT z tuD 4- (,) • 4- O N 06 N ce LJ..I U (2, (/) 0 2 0 LCL NAG CONSTRUCTION 4^, 112th Avenue }aaaiS I1017Z 7o cL 0 DNIJVDSONV1 1NO2l3 0017Z 0 NVH213AO HJ21Od O1 NJVf13S w0 vim 3del, a w s � z E 0 g,ye 1i L ..:k ',',\ ,,__ • 8 3dVJSONV1 ifilii f iMe CI o it 71 Z U ;7- `^ p.� y EL 2600 20.37M ES. JAVA 4v I / DNIdVJSONV1 D 135 2'321 10'9 z16 N d16 Z9'L E N 9 ./ 9 L z9 L DNIdVJSUNV1 O of eN 73800"6Z 0 L 6 72 N COMMERCIAL - BLDG AUG. 8 2012 NAG CONSTRUCTION L C HLr 1 i • - C Lr 1 1 1 1 1 • - L C H 1 1 1 1 1 C Lr 1 1 1 1 1 - - .b/l l-,6 U J U CW 2 0 NAG CONSTRUCTION Lew\ 0 Q 0 nnel beam bolted on onto the c c c c -4 o c w= rn c v c • ai O O Q H v t N 4 tro 3 V _N t c Q ✓ E c V s O _ c 7, O V CD • O V EOO c N 3•°Y Till!! lig - • - 1 ,pb/l Z -LL ,bbl L-.6 • CAD Q W A COMMERCIAL - BLDG NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-1) N Q JUNE 26 2012 NAG CONSTRUCTION 1 CO J gra Sees N� 1'1114 e PROJECT TIT. ROW HOUSE DEVELOPMENT 11133-11385, 240 STREET, MAPLE RIDGE DRAWING TITLE PLANTING DESIGN/ LANDSCAPE PLAN ems, so 1 - .• u112 mai II s-• i atollwisp , . 10 as Lc) oemosmocrr 0 0000 ease it n DRAWN JL ON ElOf i # I ���NNNIII .Et µ' ..1 II .i �I 11 laII11♦ JI -IL Design Group Inc. Landscape Architecture + Urban Design 4370. Maple Street. Vancouver. BC Tel: 604-263-8613 1-866-277-9554 [mai. Piecso.howcw .see s I IelNA 4,1 i gill lis q 0 i0 I. a ail el ° Ir '.N -1E!31- 211 4111;? \\III r_s, e III 1 �M1 R 0.. @t' I 1.= iJI Ti' 000 li °J414 ti OS F. @ +<. Copyright reserved. This drawing and design is and at all times remains the exclusive property of JHL Design Group Incaand cannot be used without the landsape architect's written consent. AN iii __ OA a � °fl 1 °°°°° © ° ° ° ° ° ' ° °°1. aa 22 I 1 I � I I I I ., 1 ro co m1 GOA i .I 1 £I1 00 gyp, 00 illiill iiiir.se-aci ;III MEIINNIS 1 PO _ li a �— I, ---, 1 III tag, 1, 111+1t C:+ + i►+ i 1 ara I111111 sr Le let e" ai, et 411 lit II ' ere • Dale iiiiiI ad fi _ e I ft Oe4 ■ _ III 94 os,l. oh �+ Q III l 3c 4a,. o#� LN�. 00000n(,n( ; GI 0 Tom. 0000 r I/ % V/ eases 1D. et S 41J QIP Shd Ifi'll,l iffilltio _:raa 11S — 11 134'' sj p1�11,�. ,-, � ti� '•% %•':Caw n'rb4rYnoriatr Orep Aaars Groan" 1-M400c District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-089-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Second Reading Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 22309, 22319 and 22331 St. Anne Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received for a Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw (HRA Bylaw), which involves the relocation, restoration and adaptive re -use of an existing heritage house, known as the Turnock/Morse residence. This heritage house, located at 22309 St. Anne Avenue, will be relocated to a more prominent location on the site and this, in turn, will accommodate the construction of a four -storey multi -family apartment. The proposal includes adapting the Turnock/Morse residence from a single-family use into a two -unit duplex. In exchange for protecting the heritage value of the Turnock/Morse residence, the applicant is seeking to supersede the Off -Street Parking Bylaw requirements to allow for reduced parking standards and the Zoning Bylaw to allow for reduced building setbacks and increased density. Consistent with the previous HRA bylaws brought forward to Council, a five-year property tax exemption, to the municipal portion of property taxes, is requested by the applicant. To date, two HRA bylaws have been adopted in Maple Ridge and both received five-year property tax exemptions. The HRA Bylaw was granted First Reading on April 10, 2012, attached here to has been amended as follows: • Changing the completion date in the Agreement for the lot consolidation requirement from October 15, 2012 to December 15, 2012 (Section 1 Condition Precedent); • Adding members of the British Columbia Association of Heritage Professionals as recognized "Registered Professionals" in Section 5 of the Agreement; and • Housekeeping changes to renumber some of the sections in the Agreement. With these changes and the additional information required from the applicant being received, the application may proceed to Second Reading and Public Hearing. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 as amended, be given Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and 2. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading: i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure; ii. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement; iii. Road dedication as required; iv. Consolidation of the development site; v. Removal of buildings other than the Turnock/Morse residence; vi. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office which addresses the suitability of the site for the proposed development; vii. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office protecting the Visitor Parking; viii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance with the regulations. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Legal Description: Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc. Wayne Bissky Hiu Yang Lee Liu -Hsiang Hsieh Yu-Lun Chiang Lot: 9, D.L.: 398, Block: 5, Plan: 155; Lot: 10, D.L.: 398, Block: 5, Plan: 155; Lot: 11, D.L.: 398, Block: 5, Plan: 155 -2- OCP: Existing: Port Haney Multi -Family, Commercial and Mixed -Use Proposed: Port Haney Multi -Family, Commercial and Mixed -Use Zoning: Existing: RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Proposed: RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Surrounding Uses North: Use: Single -Family Residential Zone: RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation Port Haney Multi -Family, Commercial & Mixed -Use South: Use: Commercial & Single -Family Residential Zone: C-3 (Town Centre Commercial); RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Port Haney Multi -Family, Commercial & Mixed -Use East: Use: Single -Family Residential Zone: RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Port Haney Multi -Family, Commercial & Mixed -Use West: Use: Vacant Zone: RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Park Existing Use of Property: Single -Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single -Family Residential and Multi -Family Residential Site Area: 2,424 m2 Access: St. Anne Avenue and 223rd Street Servicing: Urban Companion Applications: Development Permit - Port Haney and Waterfront (for the form and character of the proposed apartment building) b) Project Description: Turnock Residence The Turnock Residence, located at 22309 St. Anne Avenue, was constructed by Joseph Dakin Turnock in 1938 and is listed in the Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory. In 1942, Joseph and his wife Hilda gave the house to their daughter Iris and her new husband Garnet Robert Morse as a wedding gift. At that time, Joseph converted the upper floor to a living unit for he and Hilda and they continued to live in the house, with Iris and Garnet, until Joseph completed construction of a new home on Fern Crescent. -3- The development proposal involves consolidating the Turnock/Morse site with the two adjacent sites on the east side, moving the existing heritage house closer to the corner of St. Anne Avenue and 223rd Street, and constructing a four -storey apartment building behind the heritage house. A Conservation Plan has thoroughly researched and documented the heritage value and character of the house to form the basis of guidelines for the preservation and restoration of the original form of the exterior and a rehabilitation of the interior of the heritage house. Recommendations have been provided on how to undertake this work, so that the heritage value of the building is protected throughout the process. The plan also contains the known historical details and architectural relevance of the site. This plan is attached as Schedule "C" to the HRA bylaw (see Appendix "B"). The restoration of the existing heritage house is intended to include interior modifications for two one -bedroom units, adapting the single-family use into a duplex. The four storey apartment is proposed to have a total of 66 one and two-bedroom units. Resident, heritage duplex and visitor parking is provided underground. Apartment Building The new four -storey building proposed in this application will qualify for the Town Centre Investment Incentives Program if the building permit is issued by the deadline date of December 30, 2013. A five-year heritage tax exemption is requested on the existing Turnock/Morse residence, for the municipal portion of taxes. The proposal is for a four -storey, 66 -unit apartment building, with underground parking. The HRA Bylaw provides for the RM -2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential District) zone, with variances noted elsewhere in this report, to be applied to regulate this apartment building. The design of the building will be subject to a development permit to be issued in conjunction with Final Reading. c) Planning Analysis: Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw The applicant is seeking to supersede the Zoning Bylaw and the Off -Street Parking Bylaw through the HRA Bylaw. Section 966 of the Local Government Act authorizes special powers to HRAs in that they may supersede many local municipal bylaws to enable unique opportunities for heritage conservation. If this development application did not include the conservation of a heritage resource, then a rezoning application for RM -2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential District) would be necessary to accommodate this proposal. The variations proposed for this project involve building setbacks that are significantly reduced from what would normally be permitted in an applicable zone and a slightly greater density. -4- The applicant is also proposing to provide fewer parking stalls than normally required and therefore, is seeking to supersede the Off -Street Parking Bylaw. The required number of parking stalls for the total of 68 units is 75, however, the applicant is only able to provide a total of 72 stalls for the development. Heritage Conservation Plan A Heritage Conservation Plan was completed for the Turnock/Morse residence, by Donald Luxton & Associates, who has undertaken a number of heritage projects in Maple Ridge over the years, including the Heritage Inventory where the subject residence is listed. The Plan documents the history, heritage value, architectural significance, conservation guidelines, and recommendations for the rehabilitation and preservation of the building's heritage value. This document serves as a valuable tool to guide the proposed work and the long-term maintenance of the building. It is attached to the HRA bylaw, as Schedule "C", and will aid in the long-term conservation of the heritage house and in the review of any future Heritage Alteration Permit Applications for the site. The Statement of Significance, located on page 15 of the Conservation Plan, states that the 1938 house is "valued as a picturesque example of a Cape Code cottage, a style that became increasingly popular in the two decades that followed the end of World War One." The Character Defining Elements listed on page 16 of the Plan are key physical features that contribute to the building's heritage value. The Character Defining Elements are: • location at the northwest corner of St. Anne Avenue and 223rd Street in the historic Port Haney neighbourhood of Maple Ridge; • continuous residential use; • residential form, scale and massing as expressed by its one and one-half storey height, side - gabled roofline, rectangular plan with projecting setback wing to the east, and offset front entry; • Period Revival "Cape Cod" details such as: clipped eaves; wide, random -width, cedar shingle siding with wide exposure to the weather; simple wooden trim; front and rear shed -roofed dormers; central red brick chimney; multi -paned wooden -sash windows including single and double fixed and double -hung assemblies; and inset shutter vents beside the fixed windows; • Interior features such as the living room fireplace with dark -red brick and wooden mantle, interior shutter vent doors, interior single panel doors and wrought iron balustrade. The Conservation Plan notes that the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada is serving as a guide for this proposal. Two key Guideline principles highlighted in the Plan for directing the design scheme are as follows: • Designing a new addition in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new; • Design for the new work may be contemporary or may reference design motifs from the historic place. In either case, it should be compatible in terms of mass, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and colour, yet be distinguishable from the historic place. -5- The proposed design of the new building is such that it is compatible with the heritage buildings, but the plans show that the two buildings will be distinct from each other through both building colour and design. The landscaped garden contributed to the heritage character and setting, therefore a number of these elements such as a trellis and original planting species are to be reinstated after construction is completed to harmonize the appearance of the heritage house within its new setting and to recall the original lush landscaping. Refer to Appendix C for more details. The conservation Plan notes that the conservation and the reuse of historic and existing structures supports the following sustainability strategies: • Reduction of solid waste disposal and the reduced impact on landfills; • Retention of embodied energy with the extended use or adaptive use of each existing heritage building (embodied energy is defined as the total expenditure of energy involved in the creation of the building and its constituent materials and upkeep over time.); • Conserving original historic materials that are significantly less consumptive of energy than many new replacement materials (often local and regional materials, e.g. timber, brick, concrete, plaster, can be preserved and reduce the carbon footprint of manufacturing and transporting new materials). Heritage Conservation Recommendations Various recommendations are made in the Heritage Conservation Plan with regards to the proposal and the restoration and protection of the building's heritage character and heritage value. These include: • Moving the house to the southwest corner is "an acceptable approach to rehabilitation within the context of the new development". • Preserving the roof character by introducing potential alterations to the roof structure at the rear, so they are not visible from the front facade. • Preservation of the original internal brick chimney that is a key Cape Code feature. • That a contractor trained in the repair of historic sash windows be retained to carry out the necessary restoration and preservation work. • Restore original front door location and reconstruct the original trellis feature. • Use historical building colours (identified from onsite sampling work). • When building is available for interior inspection, assess interior building features for condition and suitability of retention. • Use landscape materials that are based on those originally used at the site. Tax Exemption Bylaw In exchange for the long-term protection of the Turnock/Morse residence, a five-year tax exemption is requested for the existing heritage building only. Both duplex units will have a tax exemption. An exemption of the municipal portion of property taxes for protected heritage properties is permitted under Section 225(2)(b) of the Community Charter. The intent of the legislation is to encourage heritage conservation by mitigating the costs involved in preservation and restoration of the building's heritage value. Five year tax exemptions have been granted for the Miller Residence and -6- Billy Miner Pub HRA bylaws and one is also proposed (RZ/109/08) for the Beeton/Daykin HRA bylaw is at Third Reading. The municipal portion of property taxes for the Turnock/Morse residence for 2011 was $1,943.00. Official Community Plan: A number of policies in the Official Community Plan (OCP) apply to this proposal. These include policies in Chapter 4 Community Services and in the Town Centre Area Plan. In Chapter 4, the following OCP Policies apply with respect to heritage management: 4-43 The development application review process will include an opportunity to evaluate the overall impact of proposed development on the heritage characteristics and context of each historic community or neighbourhood. Conservation guidelines and standards should be prepared to aid in this evaluation and provide a basis from which recommendations can be made to Council. 4-44 Maple Ridge will endeavour to use tools available under Provincial legislation more effectively to strengthen heritage conservation in the District. Other planning tools will also be utilized where appropriate to establish a comprehensive approach to heritage management in the District. The conservation of the Turnock/Morse residence as well as insuring that the proposed apartment building is compatible with both the heritage building and the historical community has been achieved through the detailed analysis in the Conservation Plan forming part of the Heritage Revitalization Agreement that applies to this site. The Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada were used by the heritage professional preparing the Conservation Plan for the Turnock/Morse residence in accordance with these OCP policies. In the Town Centre Area Plan, the site is designated "Port Haney Multi -Family, Commercial and Mixed -Use" in the Town Centre Area Plan, which permits four -storey multi -family development, such as the one proposed. Area Plan policies that support the proposed application include: 3-34 Maple Ridge will continue to encourage the conservation and designation of heritage properties recognized as having heritage value. 3-35 Adaptive re -use of heritage properties is encouraged to enable the longevity of use and ongoing conservation of historical resources. 3-36 Parking is encouraged to be accessed from a rear lane or side -street, wherever feasible. -7- 3-38 Low-rise Multi -Family apartment, Commercial, and Mixed -Use in Port Haney should be a minimum of three (3) storeys and a maximum of four (4) storeys in height, with at least 90% of required parking provided underground. Development of a four -storey multi -family development on the subject sites would result in the adjacent single-family use site to the east being left to develop on its own. There is currently a four - storey mixed used building on the east side of this site. The development potential in Port Haney ranges from ground -oriented townhouse form of development to four -storey development. As such, the size and dimensions of the remainder lot would permit a RM -1 (townhouse residential) development, which is consistent with the Official Community Plan designation. 5-10 Laneways should have a maximum paved width of 6 metres. The laneway right-of-way is 10 metres and the additional width on the development side will be landscaped and maintained by the strata through a landscape covenant. Zoning Bylaw, Off -Street Parking & Loading Bylaw, and Variances: Adoption of HRA bylaws does not replace the existing zoning on a site and currently the three subject sites are zoned RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential). The subject development proposal is a close fit for the RM -2 (Medium Density Apartment) zone and it is intended that this zone will guide the requirements for the site with some setback variations and a slightly higher density. A Heritage Revitalization Agreement has the power to supersede the Zoning Bylaw and the variations to the Zoning Bylaw are identified in Schedule "F" to the HRA bylaw (Appendix "B"). The proposed setbacks are identified in the following table: Building Setbacks RM -2 Zone Requirements HRA Bylaw Proposal Front Yard 7.5m 3.6m Rear Yard 7.5m 4.2m Exterior Side Yard 7.5m 3.Om Interior Side Yard 7.5m 4.1m The density permitted under the RM -2 zone is a floor space ratio of 1.8. The applicant is seeking a floor space ratio of 1.817. In addition to superseding the RM -2 (Medium Density Apartment) zone for the specific use and design of the site, the applicant is seeking to supersede the Off -Street Parking Bylaw to reduce the parking standard from a required 75 stalls to a minimum of 72 stalls. The Town Centre Central Business District parking standards, which are the lowest in the municipality, were extended to the Port Haney area as part of the Town Centre Investment Incentives Program and these are the parking standards that would normally apply. -8- The majority of the parking is being provided in an underground parking area, including four visitor parking stalls. Of the three stalls located at grade, two will be allocated to the heritage house duplex. As the proposed HRA Bylaw varies use and density of use provisions, LGA Section 966 (8) requires a Public Hearing to be held. Development Permit and Heritage Alteration Permit The changes proposed to this site affect the existing heritage building and the construction of a new multi -family building. As such a Development Permit is required for the new four -storey residential building (pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan) to be processed concurrently with this HRA application. Apart from intensive residential development, development permits do not apply to single family houses. A development permit will apply to the proposed apartment and this HRA will apply to the heritage house with respect to their respective designs. To clarify this, a text amendment to the Official Community Plan, OCP Amending Bylaw No. 6907-2012, is currently at Third Reading, intended to waive the requirement of a Development Permit for existing heritage buildings in such circumstances, because any alterations to protected heritage buildings will be subject to a Heritage Alteration Permit. The subject site is located in the Port Haney & Waterfront precinct and as such, will be subject to the key guideline concepts for this precinct and the more general requirements of the Town Centre Development Permit Area Guidelines. Advisory Design Panel: The multiple residential component of this application was presented to the ADP on July 10, 2012. The applicant addressed the comments of the ADP as follows: Design Panel Comments Response Consider lane way trees (Street Trees along the lane) Trees along the lane are provided adjacent to North property Line on Site, as per the original plan. Consider providing screening between the refuse pick-up area and the patios Cedar hedging provided. Provide access from the surface parking to the 2nd heritage unit Sidewalk extended. Provide pedestrian access from parking spaces 41 & 42 to the entrance lobby Revised as requested. Consider including the space in the hallway, north of the elevator on upper floors, into the adjacent suite Revised as requested. Consider the heights of the window mullions on the north elevation Revised as requested. Consider reducing the overall amount of fencing and trellis by providing an accent at Fencing and trellis provided to highlight and personalize entry points, to define public/private -9- the main entrance of the apartment building space and to compliment heritage theme. Consider the design and proportions of the elevator tower Tower height has been reduced to its minimum height required for elevator. See revised elevations. Consider providing some alternate material to the vinyl siding Hardy board has been substituted for vinyl. Consider the window treatment on the south elevation Revised as requested. Consider provision of landscape grading plan in an effort to minimize the amount of retaining walls around patio and gardens Retaining walls have been limited to the South East area of the site. Consider additional continuous evergreen hedging between private patios and along lane hedge A continuous hedge would make the narrow space feel even more constrained. Openings allow light into this north -facing space and is consistent with CEPTED principles for safety Consider reducing the amount of surface parking and replace with green space/common amenity area Surface parking has been relocated to the underground parking as requested Development Information Meeting: A Development Information Meeting (DIM) was held by the applicant on Monday, May 7, 2012 at the CEED Centre Meeting Room. Four individuals attended. The applicant reports that comments were favorable towards the project. Some of the additional comments made were related to incorporating more trees at this and nearby sites to encourage birds, the degree of truck activity associated with construction (applicant to respond to individual directly), plans to construct of new sidewalks (to be provided by applicant in accordance with municipal standards), and making repairs to a fence shared by an adjacent property owner if its damaged during construction (applicant to respond to individual directly). d) Interdepartmental Implications: Engineering Department: Comments from the Engineering Department were provided to the applicant to resolve directly. Among the comments are the following: widening the south side of the lane; widening the east side of 223 Street to a collector standard, corner truncation; road resurfacing, sidewalk construction, street lighting and street tree planting; and cancelling an unnecessary sewer Statutory Right of Way. A servicing agreement and securities will be required prior to Final Approval. - 10 - Building Department: The comments provided from the Building Department are related to the location and width of the ramp to the underground parking, the location of garbage/recycling facilities, and spatial separation requirements under the Code. The architect has advised all these matters have been addressed. Parks & Leisure Services Department: The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the subdivision / consolidation is completed they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. The required street trees will be provided and secured through the development permit for the multi -family residential use. Fire Department: The comments provided from the Fire Department relate mainly to the proposed apartment building, that will be addressed at the building permit stage. e) School District Comments: None required. f) Intergovernmental Issues: There are no known intergovernmental issues related with this application. CONCLUSION: The Turnock/Morse HRA Bylaw is the fourth application to be brought forward for Council consideration, within the past two years, and the second for the historic Port Haney area. The proposed Turnock/Morse residence is one of Port Haney's few remaining heritage buildings and preserving this building will help preserve the memories of the past as new development occurs. It is anticipated that shifting the original use of the existing heritage resources in Port Haney to new adaptive uses is key to preserving these buildings over the long term. Additionally, the new four storey building being proposed is sympathetic to the heritage building being preserved and is the kind of new development and density that is encouraged for Port Haney in the Town Centre Area Plan. -11- It is recommended that Second Reading be given to Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw 6913-2012, and that application 2011-089-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing. "Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski" Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MCIP, RPP, MCAHP Planner "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by Kelly Swift" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B - Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw 6913-2012 Appendix C - Site Plan Appendix D - Rendering Appendix E - Landscape Plans - 12 - N 11768 Lo P 50600 coN F NORTH AVE. N A o N 41 c. °'44 N 11746 22326 -P XI OCD R ti 22347/51 cX co m I Rem P 51411 ' 39631 i 3 814 BCS 3442 S 44 11740 45 M N Reit a 155 50 Rem 117 AVE. Rema N N Rem 22266 C.) O N\32 N Rem 22318 N O) Cn 22328 Cs N 01 m N M N co N - N 11 1 31 29 155 28 11 73 9 27 1 22 P 21 155 20 11 1 f11710 'S- 1,/,/ Rem 5 Subject Properties Rem <9�A 6 96, sP Rem 7 N. N N 8 155 11 68 3 122309 co 0-)N 10 ,m.-- 11 co =N 12 M co 22351 Ca) LMS 2 749 17 155 14 Lf M N 22369/73 NW?1811 1 16 1169 17 P11527 ST. ANNE AVE. RP 53523 1 Rem 2 ' Rem C 11664 co M co M N o N N M N N CV N N *PPJ76 M N Rem 17 11654 co 22 21 20 19 18 11671 B a P 155 A11657 RP 6192 P 4 155 5 A 23 P 76188 N P 82887 A N M \ N N 11 MLO CO N N P 12 M N N 155 13 PARK 14 ti N N P 26464 00 N N 11641 ili CALLAGHAN AVE. EP 5976 CALLAGHAN AVE. / Pcl. \ .). 1163 j I I i L\•\, N Scale: 1:1,500 Ci _.f Pitt Mea•lows __ *+ "► 22309/19/31 St Anne Ave I ! a .yn fYf 'I�13r� I M �� i to �����'� SLS �y,�igcf4rei���a- CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF ,' 1,8 k�',� I. ', 1a I■� _ ! .y_ MAPLE RIDGE British CoEumbia MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT District of N. II _ Langley a _� �` Y1 ] ' " ,rmi=.: DATE: Sep 19, 2012 2011-089-DP BY: JV BASER Rr CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 6913-2012 A Bylaw to designate a property as a heritage property under Section 967 of the Local Government Act and to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement under Section 966 of the Local Government Act and to grant a Tax Exemption under Section 225 of the Community Charter WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge considers that the property located at 22309 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge, B.C. has heritage value and that certain portions of and buildings on the property should be designated as protected under section 967 of the Local Government Act; AND WHEREAS the District of Maple Ridge and Hiu Yang Lee, Liu -Hsiang Hsieh, and Yu-Lun Chiang wish to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement for the property; AND WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge wishes to exercise its discretion under section 225 of the Community Charter to exempt a portion of the property from municipal property taxation subject to the terms of an exemption agreement; AND WHEREAS the District of Maple Ridge has provided notice of a proposed tax exemption bylaw in accordance with section 227 of the Community Charter; NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge enacts as follows: Citation 1.1 This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw 6913-2012". Interpretation 2.1 In this Bylaw, the terms "heritage value", "heritage character" and "alter" have the corresponding meanings given to them in the Local Government Act. Heritage Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement 3.1 The District of Maple Ridge enters into a Heritage Revitalization and a Tax Exemption Agreement (the "Agreement") with the registered owners of the properties located at 22309, 22319, and 22331 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge and legally described as: PID: 011-539-178 Lot 9, Block 5, District Lot 398, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 155 PID: 011-539-216 Lot 10, Block 5, District Lot 398, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 155 PID: 011-539-259 Lot 11, Block 5, District Lot 398, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 155 (the "Property"). 3.2 The Mayor and Corporate Officer are authorized on behalf of the District of Maple Ridge Council to sign and seal the Agreement in the form attached as Appendix "1" to this Bylaw. 3.3 Subject to all of the terms and conditions set out in the Agreement, that portion of the Property on which is located the "Existing Heritage Building", as described in the Agreement, shall be exempt from District property taxation for a term of five (5) years effective from the date on which the Agreement comes into force. Heritage Designation 4.1 Council hereby designates that portion of the Property containing the "Existing Heritage Building", as described in the Agreement, as protected heritage property for the purposes of section 967 of the Local Government Act of British Columbia. Exemptions 5.1 The following actions may be undertaken in relation to the Existing Heritage Building without first obtaining a heritage alteration permit from the District: (a) non-structural renovations or alterations to the interior of the building or structure that do not affect any protected interior feature or fixture and do not alter the exterior appearance of the building or structure; and (b) non-structural normal repairs and maintenance that do not alter the exterior appearance of a building or structure. 5.2 For the purpose of section 5.1, "normal repairs" means the repair or replacement of elements, components or finishing materials of a building, structure or protected feature or fixture, with elements, components or finishing materials that are equivalent to those being replaced in terms of heritage character, material composition, colour, dimensions and quality. READ A FIRST TIME this 10th day of April, 2012. READ A SECOND TIME this day of , 2012 PUBLIC HEARING held this day of , 2012. READ A THIRD TIME this day of , 2012. ADOPTED this day of , 2012. PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER APPENDIX "1" - HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AND TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT dated for reference the day of , 2012 is BETWEEN: HIU YANG LEE 4668 I rm i n Street Burnaby, B.C. V5J 1X9 LIU-HSIANG HSIEH and YU-LUN CHIANG 24781 Kimola Drive Maple Ridge, B.C. V2W 0A6 (together, the "Owners") AND: THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE 11995 Haney Place Maple Ridge, British Columbia V2X 6A9 (the "District") WHEREAS: A. Hiu Yang Lee is the registered owner in fee simple of the land and all improvements located at 22309 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge, B.C. and legally described as: PID: 011-539-178 Lot 9 Block 5 District Lot 398 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 155 ("Lot 9"); B. Liu -Hsiang Hsieh is the registered owner in fee simple of the land and all improvements located at 22319 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge, B.C. and legally described as: PID: 011-539-216 Lot 10 Block 5 District Lot 398 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 155 ("Lot 10"); C. Yu-Lun Chiang is the registered owner in fee simple of the land and all improvements located at 22331 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge, B.C. and legally described as: PID: 011-539-259 Lot 11 Block 5 District Lot 398 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 155 ("Lot 11"); D. Together, Lot 9, Lot 10 and Lot 11 comprise the "Lands"; E. There is one principal building currently situated on Lot 9, as shown labeled on the sketch map attached as Schedule "A" to this Agreement (the "Existing Heritage Building"), and the District and the Owners agree that the Existing Heritage Building has heritage merit and should be conserved; F. The Owners intend to consolidate the Lands to create a single parcel, generally in accordance with the proposed development site plan attached as Schedule "B" (the "Proposed Site Plan"); H. The Owners intend to apply to the District for approval to construct a four -storey apartment building on the Lands, behind the Existing Heritage Building, as shown on the Proposed Site Plan; I. Section 966 of the Local Government Act authorizes a local government to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement with the owner of heritage property, and to allow variations of, and supplements to, the provisions of a bylaw or a permit issued under Part 26 or Part 27 of the Local Government Act; J. Section 225 of the Community Charter authorizes a local government to enter into an agreement with the owner of eligible heritage property that is to be exempt from municipal taxation, respecting the extent of the exemption and the conditions on which it is made; K. The Owners and the District have agreed to enter into this Heritage Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement setting out the terms and conditions by which the heritage value of the Existing Heritage Building is to be preserved and protected, in return for specified supplements and variances to District bylaws and the exemption of the Existing Heritage Building from District property taxation for a specified term; THIS AGREEMENT is evidence that in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) now paid by each party to the other and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt of which each party hereby acknowledges) the Owners and the District each covenant with the other as follows: Condition Precedent 1. This Agreement shall be subject to the satisfaction of the following condition precedent on or before the date stipulated: (a) on or before December 15, 2012 a subdivision plan that consolidates the Lands into a single fee -simple parcel has been deposited in the Land Title Office. This condition precedent is for the benefit of both the Owners and the District and it cannot be waived. In this Agreement, the defined term "Lands" shall mean the fee simple parcel into which the Lands are consolidated, unless expressly stated otherwise. The date on which this condition precedent is satisfied is referred to as the "Effective Date". Conservation of the Existing Heritage Buildings 2. The Owners shall, promptly following the Effective Date, commence and complete the restoration, renovation and conservation of the Existing Heritage Building (the "Work") in accordance with recommendations set out in the Conservation Plan attached as Schedule "C" to this Agreement (the "Conservation Plan"). 3. Prior to commencement of the Work, the Owners shall obtain from the District all necessary permits and licences, including a heritage alteration permit. 4. The Work shall be done at the Owners' sole expense in accordance with generally accepted engineering, architectural and heritage conservation practices. If any conflict or ambiguity arises in the interpretation of the Conservation Plan, the parties agree that the conflict or ambiguity shall be resolved in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, Second Edition, published by Parks Canada in 2010, or any future update to this edition. 5. The Owners shall, at their sole expense, engage a member of the British Columbia Association of Heritage Professionals, Architectural Institute of British Columbia or the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (the "Registered Professional") to oversee the Work and to perform the duties set out in section 6 of this Agreement. 6. The Owners shall cause the Registered Professional to: (a) prior to commencement of the Work, provide to the District an executed and sealed Confirmation of Commitment in the form attached as Schedule "D" to this Agreement; (b) erect on the Lands and keep erected throughout the course of the Work, a sign of sufficient size and visibility to effectively notify contractors and tradespersons entering onto the Lands that the Work involves protected heritage property and is being carried out for heritage conservation purposes; (c) throughout the course of the Work, effectively oversee the work of all contractors and tradespersons and inspect all materials leaving and arriving at the site to ensure that the Work is carried out in accordance with the Conservation Plans; (d) obtain the District's approval for any changes to the Work, including any amended permits that may be required; (e) upon substantial completion of the Work, provide to the District an executed and sealed Certification of Compliance in the form attached as Schedule "E" to this Agreement; and (f) notify the District within one (1) business day if the Registered Professional's engagement by the Owners is terminated for any reason. Timing of Restoration 7. The Owners shall commence and complete all actions required for the completion of the Work in accordance with this Agreement within 12 months following the Effective Date. Ongoing Maintenance 8. Following completion of the Work, the Owners shall, in perpetuity, maintain the Existing Heritage Building and the Lands in good repair in accordance with the maintenance standards set out in Maple Ridge Heritage Site Maintenance Standards Bylaw No. 6710- 2009. Damage to or Destruction of Existing Heritage Building 9. If the Existing Heritage Building is damaged, the Owners shall obtain a heritage alteration permit and any other necessary permits and licences and, in a timely manner, shall restore and repair the Existing Heritage Building to the same condition and appearance that existed before the damage occurred. 10. If, in the opinion of the District, the Existing Heritage Building is completely destroyed and the Owners wish to construct a replacement building on the Lands, such replacement building must be constructed in compliance with the District's Zoning Bylaw, in a style that is acceptable to the District and substantially similar to that of the destroyed Existing Heritage Building, after having obtained a heritage alteration permit and all other necessary permits and licences. 11. The Owners shall use their best efforts to commence and complete any repairs to the Existing Heritage Building, or the construction of any replica or replacement building, with reasonable dispatch. Variations to District's Zoning and Parking Bylaws 12. District of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 (the "Zoning Bylaw") is varied and supplemented in its application to the Lands and the Existing Heritage Building in the manner and to the extent provided in the table attached as Schedule "F" to this Agreement. 13. District of Maple Ridge Off -Street Parking & Loading Bylaw 4350-1990 (the "Parking Bylaw"), is varied and supplemented in its application to the Lands and the Existing Heritage Building in the manner and to the extent provided in the table attached as Schedule "G" to this Agreement. Heritage Designation 14. The Owners hereby irrevocably agree to the designation of that portion of the Lands containing the Existing Heritage Building as a municipal heritage site in accordance with section 967 of the Local Government Act, and release the District from any obligation to compensate the Owners in any form for any reduction in the market value of the Lands or that portion of the Lands that may result from the designation. Tax Exemption Conditions 15. The District hereby exempts from District property taxation, for five (5) years following the Effective Date, that portion of the Lands on which the Existing Heritage Building is located, as shown on the sketch map attached as Schedule "A", on the following conditions: (a) all items agreed to within this Agreement must be met; (b) any other fees and charges related to the Lands and the Existing Heritage Building due to the District of Maple Ridge are paid in full; (c) the Owners are not in contravention of any other District of Maple Ridge bylaw. 16. If any condition set out in section 15 above is not met to the satisfaction of the District, acting reasonably, then the Owners must pay to the District the full amount of tax exemptions received, plus interest, immediately upon written demand. Interpretation 17. In this Agreement, "Owners" shall mean the registered owners of the Lands or a subsequent registered owner of the Lands, as the context requires or permits. Conformity with District Bylaws 18. The Owners acknowledge and agree that, except as expressly varied by this Agreement, any development or use of the Lands, including any construction, restoration and repair of the Existing Heritage Building, must comply with all applicable bylaws of the District. Heritage Alteration Permits 19. Following completion of the Work in accordance with this Agreement, the Owners shall not alter the heritage character or the exterior appearance of the Existing Heritage Building, except as permitted by a heritage alteration permit issued by the District. Statutory Authority Retained 20. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit, impair, fetter or derogate from the statutory powers of the District, all of which powers may be exercised by the District from time to time and at any time to the fullest extent that the District is enabled. Indemnity 21. The Owners hereby release, indemnify and save the District, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents and assigns harmless from and against any and all actions, causes of action, losses, damages, costs, claims, debts and demands whatsoever by any person, arising out of or in any way due to the existence or effect of any of the restrictions or requirements in this Agreement, or the breach or non-performance by the Owners of any term or provision of this Agreement, or by reason of any work or action of the Owners in performance of their obligations under this Agreement or by reason of any wrongful act or omission, default, or negligence of the Owners. 22. In no case shall the District be liable or responsible in any way for: (a) any personal injury, death or consequential damage of any nature whatsoever, howsoever caused, that be suffered or sustained by the Owners or by any other person who may be on the Lands; or (b) any loss or damage of any nature whatsoever, howsoever caused to the Lands, or any improvements or personal property thereon belonging to the Owners or to any other person, arising directly or indirectly from compliance with the restrictions and requirements in this Agreement, wrongful or negligent failure or omission to comply with the restrictions and requirements in this Agreement or refusal, omission or failure of the District to enforce or require compliance by the Owners with the restrictions or requirements in this Agreement or with any other term, condition or provision of this Agreement. No Waiver 23. No restrictions, requirements or other provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to have been waived by the District unless a written waiver signed by an officer of the District has first been obtained, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no condoning, excusing or overlooking by the District on previous occasions of any default, nor any previous written waiver, shall be taken to operate as a waiver by the District of any subsequent default or in any way defeat or affect the rights and remedies of the District. Inspection 24. Upon request, the Owners shall advise or cause the Registered Professional to advise the District's Planning Department of the status of the Work, and, without limiting the District's power of inspection conferred by statute and in addition to such powers, the District shall be entitled at all reasonable times and from time to time to enter onto the Lands for the purpose of ensuring that the Owners are fully observing and performing all of the restrictions and requirements in this Agreement to be observed and performed by the Owners. Enforcement of Agreement 25. The Owners acknowledge that it is an offence under section 981(1)(c) of the Local Government Act to alter the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building in contravention of this Agreement, punishable by a fine of up to $50,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of up to 2 years, or both. 26. The Owners acknowledge that it is an offence under section 981(1)(b) of the Local Government Act to fail to comply with the requirements and conditions of any heritage alteration permit issued to the Owners pursuant to this Agreement and section 972 of the Local Government Act, punishable in the manner prescribed in the preceding section. 27. The Owners acknowledge that, if the Owners alter the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building in contravention of this Agreement, the District may apply to the B.C. Supreme Court for: (a) an order that the Owners restore the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building to its condition before the contravention; (b) an order that the Owners undertake compensatory conservation work on the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building; (c) an order requiring the Owners to take other measures specified by the Court to ameliorate the effects of the contravention; and (d) an order authorizing the District to perform any and all such work at the expense of the Owners. 28. The Owners acknowledge that, if the District undertakes work to satisfy the terms, requirements or conditions of any heritage alteration permit issued to the Owners pursuant to this Agreement upon the Owners' failure to do so, the District may add the cost of the work and any incidental expenses to the taxes payable with respect to the Lands, or may recover the cost from any security that the Owners have provided to the District to guarantee the performance of the terms, requirements or conditions of the permit, or both. 29. The Owners acknowledge that the District may file a notice on title to the Lands in the land title office if the terms and conditions of the Agreement have been contravened. 30. The District may notify the Owners in writing of any alleged breach of this Agreement to the Owners shall have the time specified in the notice to remedy the breach. In the event that the Owners fail to remedy the breach within the time specified, the District may enforce this Agreement by: (a) seeking an order for specific performance of this Agreement; (b) any other means specified in this Agreement; or (c) any means specified in the Community Charter or the Local Government Act, and the District's resort to any remedy for a breach of this Agreement does not limit its right to resort to any other remedy available at law or in equity. Headings 31. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement or any of its provisions. Appendices 32. All schedules to this Agreement are incorporated into and form part of this Agreement. Number and Gender 33. Whenever the singular or masculine or neuter is used in this Agreement, the same shall be construed to mean the plural or feminine or body corporate where the context so requires. Successors Bound 34. All restrictions, rights and liabilities herein imposed upon or given to the respective parties shall extend to and be binding upon their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. Severability 35. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the invalid portion shall be severed and the decision that it is invalid shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Owners and the District have executed this Agreement on the dates set out below. Signed, Sealed and Delivered by HIU YANG LEE in the presence of: Name Address Occupation Date Signed, Sealed and Delivered by LIU-HSIANG HSIEH in the presence of: Name Address Occupation Date HIU YANG LEE LIU-HSIANG HSIEH Signed, Sealed and Delivered by YU-LUN CHIANG in the presence of: Name Address Occupation Date The Corporate Seal of DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE was hereunto affixed in the presence of: Mayor: Corporate Officer: Date YU-LIN CHIANG C/S SCHEDULE "A" EXISTING HERITAGE BUILDING I-1 ,4,A1 4 Scale / inch 4 1 M'S i"S' TO CERTIFY Thar the:I...Odin:1 erectvd i3 7.ituat,),1 entirely within the botsndal.es of the zaid lot.lot is fre? faf rh site raqz_firameots oft 1 ."; f-v,r7"tr fTh rtA P1 1 E /7- 25 AS -4 4'44 ...) 4444.4 / 0 4 1 0 1 3.-_-1 r'-orfac,-.": CI3 3i3:`,131,3d 4 "3:1'75: — M3 1-n3ions shown on this certi:ficate are 4 (_-.1Pd. inspected C-ri rt,,a ,2,,y (31` to define tot boundcriaa 9 7 1 decimals thereof, and i 4 ,.- - .. _-__ , , ,,,- . E. ..:-., ..---.., --..r.-' !,--.Aen fa the outstle. 4. -if waH3,and czra, of -; ;,i.r.", %.,,' ,-.....:.2 '7. ,a,,,,ss-,,.,,A-7-",:s . 1 ..i S',..1' -'..,'E -:-";--RS 1 SCHEDULE "B" PROPOSED SITE PLAN FY n&,. ,,45 St Ann.,uu DP 13/Ju 4,Z 223rd Street V 0 22 O Aa � rn n .2i a Pm 2 °'. l :i r Sidewalk 37.228m Front Lot Lina ita 4{} 7n 9) V1 3mTI o m 00 0 eun logy pi BA a pig pp S -u m ka r a � .1 z 23z' 0. ?0 z ‘531 c, as Z_, m co CD xo Ramp Down 15% ro m N 0' Rear Lot Line 0 N pk i WAYNE STEPHEN BISSKY ARCHITECTURE & URBAN DESIGN INC. PLANNING INTERIOR DESIGN Site Plan Apartment Study ""'" 'w,.r,BUS. ac L.gl.wnnso S. she. A01 SCHEDULE "C" CONSERVATION PLAN TR\OCK/VORS R SIS \C 22309 SAINT ANNE AVENUE CONSERVATION PLAN JANUARY 2012 DONALD LUXTON ASSOCIATES iiNL,. 1030 - 470 Granville Street Vancouver BC 1 V6C 1V5 T 604 688 1216 1 F 604 683 7494 www.donaldluxton.com TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE 3 2.1 Historic Context 3 2.2 The Turnock and Morse Families 4 2.3 The Turnock / Morse Residence 6 2.4 The Cape Cod Style 11 3. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 15 4. CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 17 4.1 National Standards and Guidelines 17 4.2 General Conservation Strategy 18 4.3 Sustainability Strategy 20 4.4 Heritage Equivalencies and Exemptions 21 4.4.1 B.C. Building Code 22 4.4.2 Energy Efficiency Act 22 4.4.3 Homeowner Protection Act 22 5. CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 23 5.1 Site 23 5.2 Foundation 25 5.3 Roof 25 5.4 Chimney 26 5.5 Exterior Walls 26 5.6 Fenestration 27 5.6.1 Windows 27 5.6.2 Exterior Doors 32 5.7 Front Entry 32 5.8 Exterior Trellises 33 5.9 Exterior Colour Schedule 34 5.10 Interior Features 37 511 Landscape 38 6.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN 40 6.1 Maintenance Guidelines 40 6.1.1 Legal Protection and Permitting 40 6.1.2 Cleaning 40 6.1.3 Repairs and Replacement of Deteriorated Materials 40 6.1.4 Maintenance of Exteriors - Keeping The Water Out 41 6.2 Inspection Checklist 41 6.3 Maintenance Plan 43 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 45 APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SOURCES APPENDIX B: MORSE FAMILY TREE Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —1- 46 47 TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 1. INTRODUCTION Name of Historic Place: Turnock / Morse Residence Address: 22309 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge Original Owners: Joseph Dakin Turnock & Hilda Turnock Designer and Contractor: Joseph Dakin Turnock Date of Construction: 1938 Built in 1938, The Turnock / Morse Residence is an excellent example of an architectural style that is unique in the local area. Typical of Cape Cod / Colonial Revival residences of the 1930s, it features a side -gabled roof with clipped eaves. The windows are highly unusual, consisting mainly of fixed multi - paned sash with openable louvred panels to each side that mimic historic shutters. The conservation proposal involves the relocation of the house to the front corner of its lot, to accommodate a new multi -family residential building, whilst preserving and restoring heritage character -defining elements. Though the house has maintained a high degree of its original integrity, it has undergone several notable additions over its lifespan. The conservation work will involve the preservation and restoration of the original form of the exterior, and a rehabilitation of the interior. The conservation work for this project will be based on Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2010), which will guide the conservation of the heritage character -defining elements listed in the Statement of Significance. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —2— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE 2.1 HISTORIC CONTEXT The municipal history of Maple Ridge began with its incorporation on September 12, 1874. At this point the District was very sparsely settled; the assessment records of the next year list only 62 different property owners. Gradually, empty land was developed for farming and was served by ship traffic along the Fraser River. Construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway line began in 1882, opening up the area for further settlement. Thomas Haney, originally from Cape Breton, and later from Ontario, came to Maple Ridge in 1876. He had learned the brickmaking trade in the east, and had been part owner of a brickyard in Ontario. He searched both sides of the Fraser River for suitable clay to establish his own business, and bought District Lot 398, one hundred and sixty acres of prime waterfront land, which soon became known as Haney's Landing. Haney set up many of the early services in the area, including the waterworks, donated land for churches, and held public office. In 1882, Port Haney was officially registered; this was also the same year that the Town of Hammond was surveyed. Development of Port Haney proceeded rapidly after the coming of the railway, and the 1887 Mallandaine & Williams B.C. Directory lists brickmaking as its chief industry, mentioning also the salmon -freezing establishment that had been opened. It also states that Maple Ridge was the only rural municipality in British Columbia through which the Canadian Pacific Railway passed. The town plan for Port Haney was surveyed in 1889. Roads were still scarce, and Maple Ridge was not connected to New Westminster until 1913 with the construction of River Road and the Pitt River Bridge. By this time the commercial district of Port Haney was expanding up 224 Street. The opening of the Lougheed Highway In 1931 — a Depression -era make- work project that connected the Fraser Valley communities by road — finally provided good road access, and gradually businesses migrated away from the old part of Port Haney to the new business district. Over time, significant commercial and residential activity developed and Port Haney became a major transportation hub in the region. The completion of the Lougheed Highway signalled a northward shift in the location of Haney's commercial activity. A devastating fire in 1932 destroyed much of the existing business centre, hastening the shift of businesses up the hill. This marked the end of the dominance of the railway industry and the emergence of road -based transportation that allowed greater flexibility in land development and heralded new development throughout the Fraser Valley. The old townsite was therefore less desirable for commercial purposes, opening up residential opportunities in the Port Haney area, leading in the late 1930s to the construction of a number of houses such as the Turnock / Morse Residence. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —3— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 2.2 THE TURNOCK AND MORSE FAMILIES The original owners of the house, Joseph Dakin Turnock [1887-1974] and his wife, Hilda [nee Tipper, 1887-1971], were married in Folkestone, England in 1915. Their daughter, Iris, was born in England. The Turnock family emigrated from England to Canada in 1923. Joseph and Hilda Turnock at their later house, the "Lookout." [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Iris Turnock in England, 1922 [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —4— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN The family settled in Port Haney, and Joseph Turnock built this home in 1938. The original address was 2681 St Ann [note: this was the original spelling of the street name]. The Weekly Gazette of August 1, 1938 reported "Mr. and Mrs. J.D. Turnock are erecting a lovely new home on St. Ann, just across the corner from J. Nightingale. They expect to take up residence there some time in September." J.D. Turnock was a very handy builder, and acted as contractor for the house. In 1942, Iris was married to Garnet "Robert" Morse (1915-1987), who was a railway worker. Robert Morse was the son of David Garnet Morse (1883-1958), patriarch of the Morse family and the first fully practicing physician in Maple Ridge, and Bernice Louise Morse (nee Robertson, 1883-1954). Another of the Morse children was Hugh Morse, who married Belle Scott — later elected as Mayor of Maple Ridge. Their daughter, Kathy Morse, also later served as mayor. "MORSE — TURNOCK. A quiet wedding took place on Saturday evening, March 14, at the home of the officiating clergyman, Rev. E.V. Apps, Vancouver, when Iris Daken [sic] Turnock, only daughter of Mr. and Mrs. J.D. Turnock of Haney, became the bride of Garnet Robert Morse, elder son of Dr. and Mrs. G. Morse of Haney." Gazette [Haney, B.C.]; Friday, March 20, 1942, page 1. At the time of the marriage, this house was given to Iris and Robert by her parents. Joseph Turnock converted the upper floor of the house to living accommodation for himself and Hilda until he could complete another house, the "Lookout", on a one -acre lot. This later house still exists, just off Fern Crescent on the north side of 130 Avenue. The Morse family in front of the house with their two eldest children in 1944 [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —5— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Robert and Iris Morse raised their three children, Jo -Ann (born 1942), Richard (born 1944) and Sandra (now Alannah, born 1950) in this house. Over time, a number of additions at the rear expanded the living space. � F 1 ;.:r'• • r • Iris, Jo -Ann, Hilda Turnock and Richard, in 1961 [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] 2.3 THE TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE The Morse family has provided specific information about the house, its original layout and details of its construction, including many early photographs. Joseph Turnock designed and built the house in 1938. Originally, only the ground floor was completed, with the upper floor converted soon after for additional living space. The original roof was black / grey asphalt shingles. A coal-fired furnace originally heated the house. Robert Morse and his son shovelled the coal through a hopper window into the partial, three-quarter basement where the boiler was housed. Front Porch: The front porch was originally open with paired square columns on each side. The concrete front steps were painted red. The original front door was a solid single -panelled, unglazed door with a stained and varnished finish, with a small openable grill at eye level. There was also a screen door. There was a small multi -paned window, with a mail slot below, to the east side of the front door. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —6— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Interior: All the walls had a "vein" -like finish; this was a trowelled hard plaster finish, with the topcoat dragged across the lower, rather than smooth -finished. There was no flat drywall on any of the walls in the house. The heating registers stood out from the wall and had thumb tabs. Living Room: The living room originally opened off the front hall; the door has been added and is not original to the house. The windows would originally have had vents on both sides. There were two heating registers in the room. The curtains in the living room had very large red roses with small green leaves. The curtains fell to just below the windows. There was a built in book case on the right of the fireplace about 3 or 4 ft wide from the ceiling to the floor; Iris Morse had a small library there, mainly books by the author, Frank Yerby. There was originally a door between the living room and the dining room. Dining Room: There was originally no door to the outside from the dining room. The dining room and kitchen had red and yellow linoleum tile flooring. Kitchen: There was originally a door to the outside from the kitchen (now closed in) and a large, 4 -part window above the sink on the north wall. The brick chimney in the kitchen was always exposed. The kitchen had a wood stove. There was originally an icebox, and a man would deliver a huge block of ice whenever the other one melted; the water tray had to be emptied quite regularly. There were three built-in shelves behind the fridge that were about 12 inches deep, with a two-inch wooden finish around them. Up above the three built-in shelves was a pale green square plastic clock with rounded edges, black numbers and hands and a red second hand. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —7— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Rear Porch: The enclosed mudroom was originally an open porch. The glazed rear doors are not original to the house. The door from the kitchen had a glazed panel. There was a wringer washer in the enclosed porch at the rear. Master Bedroom: This room retains its original configuration, although the closet has been expanded. Office: This room was originally a bedroom. It was originally larger, as the bathroom has been expanded to the east. There was a heating register on the west wall. Bathroom: The original tub was a clawfoot cast iron tub, since replaced. The bathroom has now been expanded to the east and now takes up part of the original bedroom. There was a heating register on the east wall. k.,ts •,, eteneNnnson abee.n Co11ELn Joyner s.� 7-376 abfl p 'Q G 9 i rr'o 3'9 41111 Oiler mo /aeons. 944 r1 *Ciu°n r'r:.r 1 vrnrar float :r, keen 4 `YM aims (3} tockme7 dadrea# rapapst-64izs ) R7TG *Fri /2 i " . 73//W4 RI.Se! 1 Go"x 2'7' Liu�vd ?doom 13C" 9b CLAS. upper C'foor pa,/ ZZ 309 Se, Atne Undated upper floor plan, indicating enclosure of the west bedroom and a new bathroom. /1' Upper Floor: The wrought iron balustrade along the staircase is original. The stairs were wood, with a carpet runner. There was no door at the top of the stairs; the door was added later and is not original to the house. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —8— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Upper Floor Living Room: The windows in the front dormer were double -hung and all opened. There was a large 1940s tube radio in a curtained built-in alcove on the east wall of the dormer. Upper Floor Kitchen: The large picture window in the north dormer in the kitchen was divided into three large sections. The central picture window had two horizontal muntins, and was flanked by two smaller 4 -over -4 multi -paned double -hung wooden sash windows of the same height. • DEC 6i The window in the upper floor north dormer, 1961 [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Upper Floor West Bedroom: This was originally more open to the living room and had a partial wall running south of the chimney to screen it off. Upper Floor East Bedroom: This room was originally larger; the bathroom was added later. The window sash opened outwards, and was hinged at the top. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —9— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Structure at Rear: Joseph Turnock was a chess champion and he wanted to form a local chess club. He built the separate gable -roofed structure at the rear and did have a chess club there for a period of time. The family later knew this as the "rec room." It has been converted to use as a residence, and a loft bedroom added (with new windows in the gable ends). Other windows and doors have also been added. Left: Joseph Turnock. Right: Rear of house with separate structure at rear. [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Landscape and Yard: All the conifers and shrubs on the property were taken from crown land, including the hedges and trees. There was a large willow tree in the front yard, beside the walkway, and a chestnut tree. Cedar trees lined the lot, with laurel bushes at the front. When the sidewalk was built in front, it was angled to avoid the laurel hedge. A bamboo bush was located to the west. There were two constructed trellises, one on either side the house. One was located to the west side, with upright columns and cross -members based on the appearance of the front porch. This trellis was planted with purple wisteria. The second trellis was located to the east. A rose garden, with roses, peonies and rhododendrons, was located just to the east of the porch. Yellow wisteria, honeysuckle and lilacs were planted in the front yard. A vegetable garden was planted in the rear. There were also black currant bushes. There was a chicken coop at the back, where the family kept leghorns and bantams. A section in front about 10' by 5' had wooden posts and chicken wire, so the chickens could step out and walk around. A carport was attached at the rear of the "rec room." A trellis ran north on which grape vines were planted. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 10 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN • r AK:..1.SL yam,. r j l r• r .Nr r n. 'Z Iris Morse in front of the house with her son, Robert, in 1944 [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] 2.4 THE CAPE COD STYLE Cape Cod houses fall under the broad category of the Colonial Revival style. The first Cape Cod style homes were built by English colonists who came to America in the late 17th century. They modelled their homes after the half-timbered houses of England, but adapted the style to the stormy New England weather. Over the course of a few generations, a modest, 1 to 11/2 story house with wooden shutters emerged. In the 20th century, the Cape Cod was the most common form of one -storey or low scale Colonial Revival houses. As a form, it originated in the early 18th century and continued with few changes through the 1950s. These houses were built throughout the era when the Colonial Revival style was popular, but were most common in the 1920s through the 1940s. The "Cape Cod House" was named in 1800 by Timothy Dwight, president of Yale University. In his book, Travels in New England and New York, Dwight describes his visit to Cape Cod, where he saw houses that he felt were a "class." Dwight described them as having "one storey... covered on the sides, as well as the roofs, with pine shingles... the chimney is in the middle... and on each side of the door are two windows... the roof is straight. Under it are two chambers; and there are two larger, and two smaller windows in the gable end." Dwight described a "full Cape," made by doubling the small house unit or "half Cape" which would have been familiar to early English colonists like the Pilgrims. The "half Cape" could also be multiplied to make a "house -and -a -half" or "three-quarter Cape." Like the prototypical English houses, early Capes had two basic rooms, the hall and parlor. The hall, or Great Room, was used for daily living. The parlor was used as a master bedroom. Over time, the kitchen moved to the back of the house, often with pantries and small bedrooms at the rear corners. Over time, people added on to the houses, either doubling the half Cape or adding a wing to the rear. As people's need for space grew, dormers were cut into roofs to add more space, light and ventilation. "Shed" dormers ran almost the entire length of the houses, while "dog house" dormers were just the width of a window. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —11— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Many older houses had dormers added in the 1920s, when new ideas about privacy and health led people to create more bedrooms. Early Capes were heated by a massive central chimney with several fireplaces. The central chimney is a feature typical to New England, as it helped keep the heat in the house in the cold northern climate. Houses of similar shape were built in the south, but they almost always have chimneys on the outside walls to dissipate the heat in a hot climate. As people discovered new ways of heating houses with stoves and furnaces, the massive central chimney was no longer needed. New houses were built with smaller chimneys, and many old chimneys were replaced. Later houses were often more rectangular. Occasionally the house was turned sideways and the door placed on the short gable end to resemble popular Greek Revival houses. Ephraim Hawley House, Trumbull Connecticut, built 1670-90 [photo prior to 1881; Trumbull Historical Society]. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, spurred by the 1876 American War of Independence Centennial celebrations, a renewed interest in America's past inspired a variety of Colonial Revival styles. Traditional, Colonial -era Cape Cod houses had many of these features: • Steep roof with side gables • Small roof overhang • 1 or 11/2 stories • Made of wood and covered in wide clapboard or shingles • Large central chimney linked to fireplace in each room • Symmetrical appearance with door in center • Dormers for space, light, and ventilation • Multi -paned, double -hung windows • Shutters • minimal exterior ornamentation Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —12— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Hartford Residence, Bridgton, Maine. Reproduced from an original postcard published by the H. J. Burroughs Company, Portland, Maine, circa 1920s. Architects rediscovered the Cape Cod house in the 1920s, spurred by the American Sesquicentennial celebrations. During the 1930s, the popularity Colonial Revival and the Depression combined to create a desire for small, economical yet old-fashioned houses. This was also the time when Colonial Williamsburg in Virginia was being rescued, restored and widely publicized through the sponsorship of John D. Rockefeller. The Cape Cod house received national publicity through books like Houses for Homemakers by Boston architect Royal Barry Wills. After the Great Depression, Wills focused on designing small, 1,000 -square - foot Colonial Revival houses. Rather than reproducing traditional Cape Cod—style homes, Wills refigured the design to include modern amenities that addressed demands for increased privacy and technology, including bathrooms, kitchens, and garages. Royal Barry Wills became one of the most popular residential architects in America after World War Two because of his role in modernizing the Cape Cod for small homes in suburban developments throughout the USA, and promoting an appealing living option for middle-class families. These small, economical houses were mass-produced in suburban developments across the United States. Inexpensive and mass- produced, these 1,000 -square -foot houses filled a need for the rush of soldiers returning from the war. In the famous Levittown housing developments started in the 1950s, factories churned out as many as thirty 4 -bedroom Cape Cod houses in a single day. The Cape Cod style house remains popular, especially throughout the United States, and building plans are often available through plan books and house planning services. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —13— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN The Bernard Levey Family Poses in front of their 1948 Cape Cod Home [Bernard Hoffmann, for Life Magazine] Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 -14- TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 3. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Name of Historic Place: The Turnock / Morse Residence, 22309 St. Anne Avenue, Maple Ridge Date of Construction: 1938 Original Owners: Joseph Dakin Turnock & Hilda Turnock Description of Historic Place The Turnock / Morse Residence is a one and one-half storey, wood -frame Period Revival "Cape Cod" cottage located at the northwest corner of St. Anne Avenue and 223rd Street, in the historic Port Haney area of Maple Ridge. Built in 1938, the house reflects the picturesque traditions and vernacular revivals popular in domestic architecture at the time, and features side -gabled roofs with clipped eaves, shingle siding and multi -paned windows. Heritage Value of Historic Place The Turnock / Morse Residence is valued as a picturesque example of a Cape Cod cottage, a style that became increasingly popular in the two decades that followed the end of World War One. The use of various Colonial Revival styles had gained new popularity at the time of the American Sesquicentennial in 1926, when patriotism was at a fever pitch and architectural fashion favoured the use of traditional, Colonial models that reflected the modern ideals of economy and good design as well as an ongoing pride in past traditions. It was presumed at the time that a well-built house would display a traditional and readily -identifiable style as a hallmark of good taste. The austere economics of the time dictated that houses were generally modest in scale, and reflected the reality of families having to make do without domestic help. The Colonial Revival style — including this variation known as the Cape Cod cottage — experienced a surge in popularity during the 1930s, when both the Colonial Revival and the Depression combined to create a desire for small, economical, yet old-fashioned houses. Family houses often assumed a cottage appearance that provided a romantic ideal of traditional domesticity, hearkening back to the values and ideals of an earlier age and evoking feelings of pleasant and comfortable nostalgia. The Cape Cod house received national publicity through numerous pattern books, which were widely used by many homeowners as the basis for their residential construction. This residence is also significant for its association with the late 1930s development of the Port Haney neighbourhood of Maple Ridge. The early settlement of Port Haney was centred on the Fraser River, which provided the earliest mode of transportation prior to the development of roads through the area. Over time, significant commercial and residential activity developed and Port Haney became a major historic transportation hub in the region. Decline set in after the onset of the Great Depression. In 1931, the completion of the Lougheed Highway — a Depression -era make-work project that connected the Fraser Valley communities by road — signalled a shift in the location of Haney's commercial activity. A devastating fire in 1932 destroyed much of the existing business centre, hastening the shift of businesses up the hill. This marked the end of the dominance of the railway industry and the emergence of road -based transportation that allowed greater flexibility in land development and heralded new development throughout the Fraser Valley. The old townsite was therefore less desirable for commercial purposes, opening up residential opportunities in the Port Haney area. The original owners, Joseph Dakin Turnock [1887-1974] and his wife, Hilda [nee Tipper, 1887-1971], decided to settle in Port Haney at the time, but only lived briefly in this house before turning it over to their daughter, Iris, and Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —15— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN her husband, Garnet Robert Morse (1915-1987) — the son of Dr. David Garnet Morse, pioneering physician in Maple Ridge — who lived here with their family for many years. Character -Defining Elements Key elements that define the heritage character of the Turnock / Morse Residence include its: • location at the northwest corner of St. Anne Avenue and 223rd Street in the historic Port Haney neighbourhood of Maple Ridge; • continuous residential use; • residential form, scale and massing as expressed by its one and one-half storey height, side - gabled roofline, rectangular plan with projecting setback wing to the east, and offset front entry; • Period Revival "Cape Cod" details such as: clipped eaves; wide, random -width, cedar shingle siding with wide exposure to the weather; simple wooden trim; front and rear shed -roofed dormers; central red brick chimney; multi -paned wooden -sash windows including single and double fixed and double -hung assemblies; and inset shutter vents beside the fixed windows; • Interior features such as the living room fireplace with dark -red brick and wooden mantle, interior shutter vent doors, interior single panel doors and wrought iron balustrade. Aerial view of Port Haney in 1948 showing the Turnock / Morse Residence, centre left, within the context of Port Haney [Detail, Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P7068]. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —16— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 4. CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 4.1 NATIONAL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES The Parks Canada Standard and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2010) has been used to assess the conservation interventions at the subject property. Conservation is defined as safeguarding heritage elements of a historic place so as to retain its heritage value and character and can involve Preservation, Rehabilitation or Restoration. Under the Standards and Guidelines, it is proposed that interventions to the Turnock / Morse Residence will consist mainly of rehabilitation, with additional aspects of preservation and restoration as defined below: Preservation: the action or process of protecting, maintaining, and/or stabilizing the existing materials, form, and integrity of a historic place or of an individual component, while protecting its heritage value. Restoration: the action or process of accurately revealing, recovering or representing the state of a historic place or of an individual component, as it appeared at a particular period in its history, while protecting its heritage value. Rehabilitation: the action or process of making possible a continuing or compatible contemporary use of a historic place or an individual component, through repair, alterations, and/or additions, while protecting its heritage value. Interventions should be based upon the Standards outlined in the Standards and Guidelines, which are conservation principles of best practice. The following General Standards should be followed when carrying out any work to an historic property. Standards for All Conservation Projects 1. Conserve the heritage value of a historic place. Do not remove, replace, or substantially alter its intact or repairable character -defining elements. Do not move a part of a historic place if its current location is a character -defining element. 2. Conserve changes to a historic place, which over time, have become character -defining elements in their own right. 3. Conserve heritage value by adopting an approach calling for minimal intervention. 4. Recognize each historic place as a physical record of its time, place and use. Do not create a false sense of historical development by adding elements from other historic places or other properties or by combining features of the same property that never coexisted. 5. Find a use for a historic place that requires minimal or no change to its character -defining elements. 6. Protect and, if necessary, stabilize a historic place until any subsequent intervention is undertaken. Protect and preserve archaeological resources in place. Where there is potential for disturbance of archaeological resources, take mitigation measures to limit damage and loss of information. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —17— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 7. Evaluate the existing condition of character -defining element to determine the appropriate intervention needed. Use the gentlest means possible for any intervention. Respect heritage value when undertaking an intervention. 8. Maintain character -defining elements on an ongoing basis. Repair character -defining element by reinforcing the materials using recognized conservation methods. Replace in kind any extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character -defining elements, where there are surviving prototypes. 9. Make any intervention needed to preserve character -defining elements physically and visually compatible with the historic place and identifiable upon close inspection. Document any intervention for future reference. Additional Standards relating to Rehabilitation 10. Repair rather than replace character -defining elements. Where character -defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair, and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. Where there is insufficient physical evidence, make the form, material and detailing of the new elements compatible with the character of the historic place. 11. Conserve the heritage value and character -defining elements when creating any new additions to a historic place and any related new construction. Make the new work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place. 12. Create any new additions or related new construction so that the essential form and integrity of a historic place will not be impaired if the new work is removed in the future. Additional Standards relating to Restoration 13. Repair rather than replace character -defining elements from the restoration period. Where character -defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. 14. Replace missing features from the restoration period with new features whose forms, materials and detailing are based on sufficient physical, documentary and/or oral evidence. 4.2 GENERAL CONSERVATION STRATEGY Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc. has prepared the overall redevelopment scheme for the project. The Turnock / Morse Residence will be relocated of the to the southwest corner of the existing site; there will be a temporary relocation offsite while excavation occurs for parking. The conservation strategy is for an overall rehabilitation of the building, with the restoration of the original form of the house, preservation and restoration of character -defining elements, and rehabilitation of the rear elevation and the interior. The proposed residential use is consistent with the historic residential use of the building. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 18 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 11Rom Diriv w ee La Unknern ti,Y!'O , I,,Iemr WvoA Man Floor w ry AWL.. Hage MB* Lirec Yf 1 1- Entry S1 Beeman w � Exis ing Main FborTl , 7 Existing Upper FIS Piap Current configuration, with later additions, 2011 [Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc.] The Standards and Guidelines list recommendations for new additions to historic places. The proposed design scheme follows these principles: • Designing a new addition in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new. • Design for the new work may be contemporary or may reference design motifs from the historic place. In either case, it should be compatible in terms of mass, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and colour, yet be distinguishable from the historic place Any new additions at the rear will be physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic house and thus, the proposed development follows the best practice recommendations of the Standards and Guidelines. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 19 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN lane with access to underground parking _ ppdeStnen Friendly 'Meet the street' scale and landscaping _ 4 storey apartment as backdrop to heritage building Existing heritage house renovated & re-rocateo landscape visitor CeUrt & parking ilt llL�i ' Fir fll'I�ll11iiI1 `firililsI ? Proposed massing at rezoning, 2011 [Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc.] 4.3 SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY Sustainability is most commonly defined as "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (Common Future. The Bruntland Commission). The four -pillar model of sustainability identifies four interlinked dimensions: environmental, economic, social and cultural sustainability, the latter including the built heritage environment. Heritage conservation and sustainable development can go hand in hand with the mutual effort of all stakeholders. In a practical context, the conservation and re -use of historic and existing structures contribute to environmental sustainability by: • Reducing solid waste disposal (reduced impact on landfills and their expansions); • Saving embodied energy (defined as the total expenditure of energy involved in the creation of the building and its constituent materials); • Conserving historic materials that are significantly less consumptive of energy than many new replacement materials (often local and regional materials, e.g. timber, brick, concrete, plaster, can be preserved and reduce the carbon footprint of manufacturing and transporting new materials). Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 20 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Parks Canada has incorporated sustainability considerations in their Standards and Guidelines, balancing conservation principles and sustainability objectives: Both heritage conservation and sustainability aim to conserve. In the case of heritage buildings, this includes considering the inherent performance and durability of their character -defining assemblies, systems and materials, and the minimal interventions required to achieve the most effective sustainability improvements. The following considerations for energy efficiency in historic structures are recommended in the Standards and Guidelines and can be utilized at the subject property: General • Working with sustainability and conservation specialists to determine the most appropriate solution to sustainability requirements with the least impact on the character -defining elements and overall heritage value of the historic building. Envelope • Adding new features to meet sustainability requirements in a manner that respects the exterior form and minimizes impact on character -defining elements. • Exercising caution and foreseeing the potential effects of insulating the building envelope to avoid damaging changes, such as displacing the dew point and creating thermal bridges, or increasing the snow load. • Ensuring that structural, drainage and access requirements to improve the roof's energy efficiency can be met without damaging character -defining elements. Windows, Doors • Complying with energy efficiency objectives in upgrades to character -defining doors, windows and storefronts by installing weather-stripping, storm windows, interior shades and, if historically appropriate, blinds and awnings. The energy efficiency of the building envelope and systems as a whole should be considered. • Maintaining the building's inherent energy -conserving features in good operating condition, such as operable windows or louvred blinds for natural ventilation. • Installing interior storm windows where original windows are character -defining and exterior storms are inappropriate. 4.4 HERITAGE EQUIVALENCIES AND EXEMPTIONS The Turnock / Morse Residence is listed on the Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory and as a result of the continuing protection being negotiated as part of the project (through a Heritage Revitalization Agreement), the house will be eligible for heritage variances that will enable a higher degree of heritage conservation and retention of original material, including considerations available under the following provincial legislation. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —21— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 4.4.1 B.C. Building Code Building Code upgrading is the most important aspect of heritage building rehabilitation, as it ensures life safety and long-term protection for the resource. It is essential to consider heritage buildings on a case-by-case basis, as the blanket application of Code requirements does not recognize the individual requirements and inherent strengths of each building. Over the past few years, a number of equivalencies have been developed and adopted in the British Columbia Building Code that enable more sensitive and appropriate heritage building upgrades. For example, the use of sprinklers in a heritage structure helps to satisfy fire separation and exiting requirements. Given that Code compliance is such a significant factor in the conservation of heritage buildings, the most important consideration is to provide viable economic methods of achieving building upgrades. In addition to the equivalencies offered under the current Code, the District can also accept the report of a Building Code Engineer as to acceptable levels of code performance. 4.4.2 Energy Efficiency Act The Energy Efficiency Act (Energy Efficiency Standards Regulation) was amended in 2009 to include the following definition: "designated heritage building" means a building that is (b) protected through heritage designation or included in a community heritage register by a local government under the Local Government Act, Under this new definition, Energy Efficiency standards do not apply to windows, glazing products, door slabs or products installed in heritage buildings. This means that exemptions can be allowed to energy upgrading measures that would destroy heritage character -defining elements such as original windows and doors. These provisions do not preclude that heritage buildings must be made more energy efficient, but they do allow a more sensitive approach of alternate compliance to individual situations and a higher degree of retained integrity. Increased energy performance can be provided through non - intrusive methods such as attic insulation, improved mechanical systems, and storm windows. Please refer to Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada for further detail about "Energy Efficiency Considerations." 4.4.3 Homeowner Protection Act Amendments to the Homeowner Protection Act Regulation made in 2010 allow for exemptions for heritage sites from the need to fully conform to the BC Building Code under certain conditions, thus removing some of the barriers to compliance that previously conflicted with heritage conservation standards and guidelines. The changes comprised (1) an amendment to the Homeowner Protection Act Regulation, BC Reg. 29/99 that allows a warranty provider, in the case of a commercial to residential conversion, to exclude components of the building that have heritage value from the requirement for a warranty, and (2) clarification of the definition of 'substantial reconstruction.' The latter clarification explains that 75% or a home must be reconstructed for it to be considered a 'new home' under the Homeowner Protection Act, thus enabling single-family dwelling to multi -family and strata conversions without the Act now coming into play. The definition of a heritage building is consistent with that under the Energy Efficiency Act. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —22— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 5. CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS The following Section describes the materials, physical condition and recommended conservation strategy for the Turnock / Morse Residence. 5.1 SITE AND FORM The Turnock / Morse Residence is located at the corner of St. Anne Avenue and 223rd Street. Built in 1938 on a large rectangular lot, the house is well set back from the street frontage. A number of alterations have occurred at the rear of the house, connecting it to what was originally a separate structure to the rear. The second floor dormer to the north, which may have been added when Joseph Turnock renovated the upper floor, has been extended and a deck added to the rear, and the ground floor rear porch has been enclosed. The development of the site proposes the relocation of the historic structure to the southwest corner of the existing property and the construction of an L-shaped multi -family building to the rear and east side. The rear of the house will be restored to its original configuration, including the rear dormer. The design of the new building is sympathetic to the historic structure and respects the original design intent, the shape, massing and materials of the Turnock / Morse Residence. Aerial view of Port Haney in 1948 showing the Turnock / Morse Residence, centre [Detail, Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P7068]. The 1948 image above shows the early appearance of the rear of the Turnock / Morse Residence. The rear shed -roofed dormer is clearly visible, where it connects to the roof ridge. The "Rec Room" structure at the rear is connected to the main building by a gable -roofed structure. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —23— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN rtE •SURVEY PLAN OF BUILDING LOCATED ON LOT 9 BLOCit 5 OF D.L. 39c9 GP. 1 PLAN 155 N. i'V D, Scale 1 inch -3o feet ft cc ti ti ZANE ST. ANNE AVENUE THIS IS TO CERTIFY thatthe Building erected on th_ _nova lot Is situated entirely within the boundaries of the sold lot, The said rot is free of encroachments. Ir :,_ -,pf:es with the site requirements of thelulunicipality, Certified Correct as surveyed and inspected on thaj5day d ly 19 71 • 2,'.f_Le•Q�C.rfe,. B C.L.S. J.M.C. WADE & a,SSOCWES BC. LAND SURVEYORS tJS5'C,9 et \ APLE RIOsE NOTE — The dimensions shown on this certificate are not to be used todefine lotboundaries Distances ore infest and decimals thereof, and are tcken to the outside of wal1S,and are of necessity more or fess duet° uneven finish . 1971 survey showing the original building footprint and "Rec Room" at rear. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 -24- TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Conservation Recommendation: Rehabilitation The relocation of a historic building on an existing lot is an acceptable approach to rehabilitation within the context of new development. The relocation of the residence to the southwest will retain the streetscape appearance. The following Relocation Guidelines should be implemented for the relocation of the Turnock / Morse Residence: Conservation Recommendation: Relocation Guidelines • A relocation plan should be prepared prior to relocation that ensures that the least destructive method of relocation will be used. • Alterations to the historic structure proposed to further the relocation process should be evaluated in accordance with the Conservation Plan and reviewed by the Heritage Consultant. This may involve the salvage and reuse of historic material. • Only an experienced and qualified contractor shall undertake the physical relocation of the historic structure. • Preserve historic fabric of the exterior elevations including the wood -frame structure, wood sash windows and cedar shingles as much as possible. • While the structure is temporarily stored prior to final relocation, ensure that it is tightly secured from ingress and vandalism, including a secure perimeter fence. Post an appropriate sign stating heritage status. Consider security alarms and systems. • The final relative location to grade should match the original as closely as possible, taking into account applicable codes. • Provide utility installations for electricity, communication and other service connections underground if possible. All installations located above ground should be incorporated harmoniously into the design concept for the relocated structure. 5.2 FOUNDATION The foundation walls and slab are poured -in-place concrete. These will be demolished when the house is relocated. Appropriate concrete foundation materials will be used at the new site. Conservation Recommendation: Rehabilitation • A new foundation, on top of an underground garage, will be constructed. • The house should retain its general appearance relative to grade. 5.3 ROOF The original roof of the Turnock / Morse Residence consisted of a side -gabled roof with an east wing extension, with a small front shed -roofed dormer and a rear shed -roofed dormer hung off the ridge. Later alterations to the roof structure included the construction of additional living space in the attic on the north side. The original roof was black / grey asphalt shingles, likely in a three -tab configuration. The roof is presently covered with grey asphalt shingles with a raised profile. Condition • The roof appears to be in good condition. • The existing gutters and downspouts appear to be in functional condition. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —25— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Conservation Recommendation: Preservation & Rehabilitation The roof structure and roofing material is in good condition and the historic features of the roof design should be preserved. Proposed alterations to the roof structure include a redesign of the north elevation for functional reasons, to accommodate a new unit on the second floor. These interventions would not be visible from the front facade, but would be highly visible from the new building and should be carefully considered. • Later additions on the north elevation can be removed and the original roof shape reinstated as per archival photographs. • The roof structure will require reinforcement to meet current building codes. • If the roofing material is replaced, it should be a low -profile, three tab black/grey shingle. • Replace existing rainwater disposal system with new. 5.4 CHIMNEY The Turnock / Morse Residence retains its original internal brick chimney that is a feature of the Cape Cod style. The chimney should either be braced and relocated with the house, or documented and reconstructed at the new location. Condition The chimney appears to be in reasonable condition, but the mortar should be examined and tested. Conservation Recommendation: Preservation & Rehabilitation • Retain the existing chimney during relocation. • If retention is not possible, document the existing appearance and deconstruct. Salvage existing bricks and reconstruct the chimney once the house is relocated. 5.5 EXTERIOR WALLS The one and one-half storey structure has an east -west orientation, built in traditional wood -frame construction with shingle cladding on the ground floor, gable end walls and dormers. The front porch was originally open but has now been enclosed. Later alterations have included the enclosure of the rear porch and additions on the north side. Condition The condition of the exterior cladding appears to be generally good, with limited localized areas of deterioration. Conservation Recommendation: Preservation & Rehabilitation • Preserve the original wood -frame structure of the historic building with minimal disturbance of the walls to be retained. • Design structural or seismic upgrades so as to minimize the impact to the character -defining elements. • Additional insulation should be installed on the inside face of the exterior walls if required. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —26— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 5.6 FENESTRATION 5.6.1 Windows The windows are a unique feature of this house. They are highly inventive and unusual, with most window sash fixed in place and openable vents beside, disguised to give the appearance of traditional shutters. Typical of the Colonial Revival style, the windows are multi -paned. TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE Mark Qty. Width Height WINDOW SCHEDULE Operation Trim Accessories Treatment Comments W-01 1 3' 9" 2' 7" 4/8 double- hung True Remove Entry Porch 1 Unknown Unknown Fixed (assumed) True Restore multi -paned sash To east side of Entry (confirm if any other existing windows were originally located here) W-02 1 3' 6" 3' 8" Two 8- paned fixed units True Flanking louvred vent to west; original interior door. Louvred vent to east now covered over. Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Main Floor south W-03 1 3' 6" 3' 8" Two 8- paned fixed units True Flanking louvred vent to east; original interior door. Louvred vent to west now covered over. Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Main Floor south W-04 1 3' 6" 3' 8" Two 8- paned fixed units True Flanking louvred vent to north; original interior door. Louvred vent to south now covered over. Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Main Floor west W-05 1 2' 6" 3' 8" One 12- paned fixed unit True Flanking louvred vent to north; original interior door. Louvred vent to south now covered over. Retain in situ and restore Dining Room, Main Floor west W-06 1 3' 0" 1' 8" One 12- paned fixed unit True Remove Later Mud Room, Main Floor west Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —27— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN W-07 1 3' 0" 1' 8" One 12- paned fixed unit True Remove Later Mud Room, Main Floor west W-08 1 2' 8" 2' 8" Fixed Glass True Remove Addition, Main Floor north W-09 1 1' 4" 3' 0" 6/6 double- hung True Remove Addition, Main Floor west W-10 1 4' 0" 3' 0" Triple- assembly 8- paned fixed unit True Remove Addition, Main Floor west W-11 1 3' 0" 1' 8" Fixed Glass True Remove Addition, Main Floor east W-12 1 1' 4" 3' 0" Single hung True Remove Addition, Main Floor east W-13 1 2' 10" 3 10" One 12- paned fixed unit True Flanking louvred vents; original interior doors Retain in situ and restore Bedroom, Main Floor north W-14 1 2' 10" 3 10" One 12- paned fixed unit True Flanking louvred vents blocked in; no original interior doors Retain in situ and restore Bedroom, Main Floor east W-15 1 1' 8" 3' 10" One 12- paned fixed unit True Flanking louvred vents; no original interior doors. Retain in situ and restore Office, Main Floor east W-16 1 3' 6" 3' 8" One 12- paned fixed unit True Flanking louvred vent to east; original interior door. Louvred vent to west now covered over. Retain in situ and restore Office, Main Floor south W-17 1 1' 8" 3' 10" 4/4 double- hung True Obscure glazing Retain in situ and restore Bath, Main Floor east W-18 1 3' 9" 2' 7" 4/8 double- hung True Remove Entry Porch W-19 1 2' 5" 3' 9" 6/6 double- hung True Double- assembly with W-20 Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Second Floor south W-20 1 2' 5" 3' 9" 6/6 double- hung True Double- assembly with W-19 Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Second Floor south W-21 1 2' 5" 3' 9" 6/6 double- hung True Double- assembly with W-22 Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Second Floor south W-22 1 2' 5" 3' 9" 6/6 double- hung True Double- assembly with W-21 Retain in situ and restore Living Room, Second Floor south Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 - 28 - TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN W-23 1 2' 10" 3' 10" One 12- paned fixed unit True Flanking louvred vents; interior doors replaced Retain in situ and restore Bedroom #1, Second Floor west Three-part window assembly in north dormer True Restore Kitchen area, north dormer (confirm if any other existing windows were originally located here) W-24 1 2' 8" 2' 8" One 4- paned fixed unit True Remove Dining Room, Second Floor west W-25 1 2' 8" 2' 8" Fixed Glass True Remove Dining Room, Second Floor west W-26 1 2' 0" 1' 4" Single -hung True Remove Addition, Second Floor west W-27 1 2' 0" 1' 4" One 12- paned fixed unit True Remove Addition, Second Floor east W-28 1 3' 0" 4' 0" Double- assembly 4/4 double hung wooden sash True Appears to have been relocated from rear dormer. Re - use if possible Dining Room, Second Floor east W-29 1 2' 10" 3' 10" One 12- paned fixed unit; was hinged at the top and opened outwards. True Flanking louvred vents; interior doors replaced; south louver located in Bath Retain in situ Bedroom #2, Second Floor east Condition The original windows appear to be in good to good condition. A general lack of maintenance has allowed degradation in some localized areas. • The paint is deteriorating and peeling in some areas, exposing bare wood. • Paint preparation has been poor and paint has been applied over areas where paint was failing. • Environmental dirt has accumulated on horizontal surfaces such as the wooden sills. • Moisture retention is evident on the sills, resulting in biological growth. • Putty is missing in some areas. • The metal screens are deteriorated or missing. • Some of the window vents have been covered over on the inside. • A number of interior vent doors are missing. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 29 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Above: typical exterior appearance of fixed -pane windows with louvered vents beside, west side, 2011. Below: deterioration on east side sills, 2011 Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 - 30 - TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Typical appearance of window interior, in Living Room; vent to left side covered over, 2011. Conservation Recommendation: Preservation & Rehabilitation The original windows of the Turnock / Morse Residence have significant heritage value and should be preserved and restored. • A contractor trained in the repair of historic sash windows and with experience in working on heritage buildings should be retained to carry out the work. • Determine matching profiles and suitability of removed windows for salvage and reuse. • The windows should be protected during construction work or the sash removed from the site to a safe storage place or workshop. Existing glazing should be retained and cleaned, and re -puttied with glazier's putty as necessary. Weather-strip as required to improve thermal performance. Hung windows should be properly re -hung, including upper sash as required. • A close-up condition assessment should determine if rotten wood is extant. Remove deteriorated and rotten wood elements and replace to match existing in profile. Prepare wood surfaces for repainting. • The metal screening in the louvred vents has deteriorated and needs to be replaced. • Some of the interior vent doors have been replaced and replica new doors should be installed. • Any new windows should match the profile, materials and configuration of the existing windows. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —31— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 5.6.2 Exterior Doors The exterior doors have been replaced. Some evidence remains that indicates the appearance of the original front door, a solid single -panelled, unglazed door with a stained and varnished finish, with a small openable grill at eye level. There was also a screen door. There was a small multi -paned window, with a mail slot below, to the east side of the front door. The family remembers the doors as unpainted (stained and varnished finish) except for the back door off the kitchen, facing west, that opened onto a patio — that door had a glazed top section and was painted white. Conservation Recommendation: Restoration / Rehabilitation • Restore the main entry door at its original location. • Install new sympathetic doors for functional purposes, as required. 5.7 FRONT ENTRY The front facade, with the original appearance of the front entry trellis [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] The original front entry has been altered with the construction of a covered porch that has replaced the original trellis over the front entry. Conservation Recommendation: Restoration • Restore the main entry trellis at its original location. • Restore the original front door and side window as per the original appearance. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —32— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 111111.21k. s x Detail of the front entry trellis [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] 5.8 EXTERIOR TRELLISES Trellis added to the west side of the house courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —33— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN After the house was completed, other trellises were added to the exterior, the most prominent being the one to the west side of the house. Conservation Recommendation: Restoration / Rehabilitation • As enabled by the site and landscape plan, restore or reinterpret the trellis structures as required for functional purposes. 5.9 EXTERIOR COLOUR SCHEDULE The original colour scheme of the Turnock / Morse Residence was determined based on a microscopic colour analysis of paint samples removed from the architectural elements of the house. This examination revealed three different colour schemes for the house. The original was white with green trim. The second scheme (during the 19505) was a pale green. The existing blue body colour with white trim has been on the house likely since the alterations in the 1970s. The final colour treatment should relate both to the authenticity of visual appearance as well as appropriate historical interpretation. The house was originally painted in colours that closely reflected its Colonial Revival antecedents. White paint was not commonly available during the Colonial era, as it required the extensive use of expensive white lead as a main ingredient. White was generally not used in urban environments; white was generally seen in agricultural and industrial situations, and was generally a "whitewash" (water-based paint). Houses were generally painted in a range of pastel colours such as pale blue or green, or in ochre or oxblood colours. By the 1820s, there was growing American sympathy for the Greek War for Independence, and a renewed interest in Classicism led to an interest in antiquities and the white marble appearance of the ancient Greek temples. It became fashionable in New England in the 1840s to paint or repaint houses white, generally with a black -green colour used for trim and for shutters. This indicated good taste as well as affluence — given the high cost of lead, an all -white house was a sign of prosperity. As styles changed in the growing Eastern cities in the 1860s -70s and Victorian -era styles became popular, the use of white went out of fashion, as it was not suited for use in increasingly dirty urban environments where coal and wood fires, and unpaved streets, were the norm. During the time of the Period Revival styles of the post -World War One era, the newfound appreciation for Colonial Revival buldings led to a reintroduction of white as a common house colour. At the time, paints were still formulated with lead. This lead paint was generally mixed in bulk onsite with a combination of lead, linseed oil, binders and organic pigments, and was the equivalent of a gloss alkyd enamel. Given the changes over time in paint technology, what is currently considered "white" today does not exactly match the historic appearance of "white". White lead paint had a "warm white" appearance. Modern white paint is generally latex acrylic paint with chemical pigments and "blockers", which give it a slight bluish -white tint. It therefore has a "cool" tone as opposed to the "warm" tone of historic lead paint. This is a very subtle difference, but the use of modern white paint alters the historic appearance and results in a glaring look. The following colors were determined through onsite sampling and microscopic analysis. Samples of the original exterior colors were obtained from various protected locations. The samples were roughly matched onsite, than examined under a microscope under controlled conditions. Adjustments were made for 1) weathering and 2) drying -out of the emulsion over time. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —34— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN It is recommended that the Turnock / Morse Residence be painted in its original colour scheme, which reflects its historic roots and its original appearance. Iris Morse in front of the house with her son, Richard, in 1944 [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] SIDING "Winter White" OC -21 SHUTTERS FRONT STEPS "Vancouver Green" VC -18 "Pendrell Red" VC -29 These screen colours are approximate only; refer to paint chips for more accurate representation. All colours have been matched to Benjamin Moore Paints of the Benjamin Moore Historical Vancouver True Colours. Please note that samples of any colors matched to different paint company products should be verified with the heritage consultant before application. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 35 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN ORIGINAL LOCATION Shingle Siding ORIGINAL COLOUR Warm White: match to Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 PROPOSED COLOUR Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Door and Window Trim Warm White: match to Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Window Sash Warm White: match to Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Shutter Vents Match to Benjamin Moore True Colours "Vancouver Green" VC -20 Match to Benjamin Moore True Colours "Vancouver Green" VC -20 Doors Front door stained and varnished finish Front door stained and varnished finish Exterior Trellises Warm White: match to Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21 Front Stairs Match to Benjamin Moore True Colours "Pendrell Red" VC -29 Benjamin Moore True Colours "Pendrell Red" VC -29 Asphalt Roof Shingles Black/grey low -profile three -tab Black/grey low -profile three -tab PROPOSED COLOUR AND FINISH SCHEDULE Shingle Siding • Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21, acrylic latex soft gloss finish Door and Window Trim • Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21, acrylic latex semi -gloss finish Window Sash • Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21; acrylic latex high -gloss finish Shutter Vents • Benjamin Moore True Colours "Vancouver Green" VC -20, acrylic latex semi -gloss finish Doors • Front Door: Mid-range stain with clear gloss polyurethane finish • Rear Doors: Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21; acrylic latex high -gloss finish Exterior Trellises • Benjamin Moore "Winter White" OC -21, exterior solid stain Front Stairs • Benjamin Moore True Colours "Pendrell Red" VC -29; finish to be determined Asphalt Roof Shingles • Black/grey low -profile three -tab asphalt shingles Gutters and Downspouts • White or off-white factory finish, match to siding Conservation Recommendation: Restoration • Restore the original finish, hue and placement of applied colour. • Prepare all surfaces for repainting. Any damaged surfaces should be repaired and made good before painting occurs. All loose, flaking paint should be hand scraped, and bare patches sanded, and spot -primed as required. Retain any paint that is firmly adhered to the surface. Ensure that all surfaces to be painted are dry. • Power -washing of the exterior surfaces is not recommended. This can drive water into the surfaces, which can be trapped by paint if the building is not allowed to dry thoroughly. Washing, if required, should be undertaken with hose -pressure water and foaming brushes. Simple soap or detergent can be used but should be thoroughly rinsed off. If the building is washed there should be three days of non -rainy weather allowed after the washing to allow adequate drying before painting commences. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —36— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN • Scrape and sand painted surfaces only as deep as necessary to reach a sound base. Do not strip all previous paint except to repair base -material decay. • Paint all areas of exposed wood elements with primer. Select an appropriate primer for materials being painted (e.g. if latex paint is used over original oil paint, select an oil-based primer). • Confirm choice of exterior colours by testing small samples to determine final appearance. • Placement of the paint is crucial to restoring the heritage appearance of the building. The paint should be applied as "Architectural Wrap" or "trim wrap," so that the paint is applied around the edges of trim to give each trim piece its true visual dimension. 5.10 INTERIOR FEATURES Many of the original interior finishes have been altered or covered over. Some, such as the original wooden living room floor, may still be extant and should be further investigated. The following features are known to exist and should be retained if possible: • Staircase Balustrade: the wrought iron balustrade is original. • Living room fireplace: the original fireplace and mantle are extant. It is unknown if the bookshelves beside have survived. • Kitchen chimney: the bricked chimney in the kitchen was always exposed. • Interior vent shutter doors: the original cased vent doors are extant is several locations. Their casework should be replicated for the missing shutter doors. • Interior doors: several interior single -panel wooden doors with original hardware are extant and can be retained and reused. Any new doors should be sympathetic and compatible. Existing hardware should be retained if it can be rehabilitated. The family also remembers some of the doors in the Living and Dining Rooms had glass doorknobs. Living room fireplace, 2011. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —37— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 1.1 44 i Party in the Dining Room in 1961; Joseph and Hilda Turnock at centre right [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Condition The condition of interior features varies and will need to be individually assessed. Conservation Recommendation: Preservation & Rehabilitation • Once available for inspection, assess interior features for condition and suitability of retention and/or salvage and reuse. • Retain interior features as possible while allowing for compatible contemporary layout. 5.11 LANDSCAPE The original character of the Turnock / Morse Residence was highly dependent of its landscaped garden setting. This was augmented through the use of trellises that were appropriate to the style of the house. Lush plantings of vines, shrubs and trees at the front and a rear garden provided an appropriate setting for the house. The nature of the site will be altered through the construction of the new development. Once the Turnock / Morse Residence is relocated, there are a number of landscape elements that can be reinstated that will harmonize its appearance with the new setting and also recall its original landscaping. This can include the recreation of the trellises adjacent to the house, which could also inspire landscape elements throughout the new development. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 38 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN The plantings could be based on those originally used at the site, and could include: Vines • Purple wisteria (west side trellis) • Yellow wisteria • Honeysuckle • Grape vines Trees • Cedar • Willow • Horse Chestnut Shrubs and Hedges • Laurel • Bamboo • Lilacs • Black Currant Flower Beds • Roses • Peonies • Rhododendrons Conservation Recommendation: Rehabilitation • The landscape design for the setting of the house can recall the original lush planted garden setting appropriate to the architectural style. • The landscape elements of the new development can be inspired by the traditional garden elements of the Turnock / Morse Residence. Front yard of the house [courtesy Alannah Ashlie] Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 — 39 — TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN 6.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.1 MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES A maintenance schedule should be formulated that adheres to the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2010). Routine maintenance keeps water out of the building, which is the single most damaging element to a heritage building. Maintenance also prevents damage by sun, wind, snow, frost and all weather; prevents damage by insects and vermin; and aids in protecting all parts of the building against deterioration. The effort and expense expended on an aggressive maintenance will not only lead to a higher degree of preservation, but also potentially save large amounts of money otherwise required for later repairs. 6.1.1 Legal Protection and Permitting The Turnock / Morse Residence will be legally protected under Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw 6856-2011, which states: "Following completion of the Work, the Owners shall, in perpetuity, maintain the Existing Heritage Building and the Lands in good repair in accordance with the maintenance standards set out in Maple Ridge Heritage Site Maintenance Standards Bylaw No. 6710-2009." The authority for exterior repairs and maintenance will reside with the Strata Corporation. The following actions may be undertaken in relation to the Existing Heritage Building without first obtaining a heritage alteration permit from the District: (a) non-structural renovations or alterations to the interior of the building or structure that do not affect any protected interior feature or fixture and do not alter the exterior appearance of the building or structure; and (b) non-structural normal repairs and maintenance that do not alter the exterior appearance of a building or structure. Other more intensive activities will require the issuance of a Heritage Alteration Permit. 6.1.2 Cleaning Following the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, be mindful of the principle that recommends 'using the gentlest means possible'. Any cleaning procedures should be undertaken on a routine basis, and should be undertaken with non-destructive methods. Exterior materials should be regularly cleaned, using a soft, natural bristle brush, without water, to remove dirt and other material. If a more intense cleaning is required, this can be accomplished with warm water, mild detergent (such as Simple Green©) and a soft bristle brush. High-pressure washing or sandblasting, are not permitted. 6.1.3 Repairs and Replacement of Deteriorated Materials Interventions such as repairs and replacements must conform to the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. The building's character -defining elements — characteristics of the building that contribute to its heritage value such as materials, form, configuration, etc — are referenced in the Statement of Significance, and must be conserved. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —40— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN The following principals should be used to guide any interventions: • An approach of minimal intervention must be adopted - where intervention is carried out it is by the least intrusive and most gentle means possible. • Repair rather than replace character -defining elements. • Repair character -defining elements using recognized conservation methods. • Replace extensively deteriorated or missing parts of characterOdefining elements 'in kind'. • Make interventions physically and visually compatible with the historic place. 6.1.4 Maintenance of Exteriors - Keeping the Water Out Water, in all its forms and sources (rain, snow, frost, rising ground water, leaking pipes, back -splash, etc.) is the single most damaging element to historic buildings. Water supports all forms of biological decay such as rot, fungus, moss, lichen, termites, powder post beetle, other insects, etc. Keeping a building dry is the single best method of combatting biological decay. The most common place for water to enter a building is through the roof and/or the guttering and downspout systems. An apparent minor roof or clogged gutter leak that is ignored can introduce enough moisture to support biological decay in a building on a scale necessitating removal of walls and floors, and replacement of structural systems and services. Keeping roofs repaired or renewed and gutters frequently cleaned is a more cost-effective option. Evidence of a small interior leak should be viewed as a warning for a much larger and worrisome water damage problem elsewhere and should be fixed immediately. 6.2 INSPECTION CHECKLIST The following checklist considers a wide range of potential problems specific to the house such as water/moisture penetration; material deterioration; structural deterioration; site and environmental issues. This checklist should be filled out by maintenance personnel on an annual basis and stored in the Information File for the house. EXTERIOR INSPECTION SITE INSPECTION: • Is the lot well drained? • Do trees need pruning - are there dangerous dead limbs? • Do plants hold water against the structure? • Can shrub and tree roots damage the structure? • Are vines growing against historic material and causing damage? FOUNDATION: • Is there back -splashing from ground to structure? • Does water drain away from foundation? Puddles? • Is the moisture problem general or local? • Are there shrinkage cracks in the foundation? • Are there movement cracks in the foundation? • Is crack monitoring required? • Is uneven foundation settlement evident? Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —41— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN STRUCTURE: Wood Elements: • Are there moisture problems present? (Rising damp, rain penetration, condensation moisture from plants, water run-off from roof, sills, or ledges?) • Is wood in direct contact with the ground? • Is there insect or fungal attack present? Where and probable source? • Are there any other forms of biological attack? (Moss, birds, etc.) Where and probable source? • Is the wood surface damaged from UV radiation? (bleached surface, loose surface fibres) • Is the wood warped, cupped, twisted or split? Are there loose knots? • Are nails pulling loose or rusted? • Is there any staining of wood elements? Source? Condition of Exterior Paint Materials: • Paint shows: blistering, sagging or wrinkling, alligatoring, peeling. Cause? • Paint has the following stains: rust, bleeding knots, mildew, etc. Cause? • Paint cleanliness, especially at air vents? Windows: • Is there glass cracked or missing? • Has putty gone brittle and cracked? Fallen out? • Is there condensation or water damage to the paint and wood? • Are the openable sashes easy to operate? • Is the frame free from distortion? • Is the end grain properly sealed? • Do wood sills show weathering or deterioration? • Are window frames caulked at the siding? Is the caulking in good condition? Doors: • Do the doors create a good seal when closed? • Are the hinges sprung? In need of lubrication? • Do locks and latches work freely? • Are doorframes wicking up water? Where? Why? • Are door frames caulked at the siding? Is the caulking in good condition? • What is the condition of the sill? Gutters and Downspouts: • Are downspouts leaking? Clogged? Are there holes or corrosion? (Water against structure) • Are downspouts complete without any missing sections? Are they properly connected? • Are eaves clean? Do they show any sagging? • Is the water being effectively carried away from the downspout by a drainage system? Do downspouts drain completely away? Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —42— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Roof: • Is the leading edge of the roof wet? • Is there evidence of biological attack? (Fungus, moss, birds, insects) • Are the nails sound? Are there loose or missing shingles? • Are flashings well sealed? Are metal joints and seams sound? • Do the soffits show any signs of water damage? Insect or bird infestation? Entrances / Stairs: • Are steps safe? Handrails secure? • Attachment — are steps, etc. securely connected to the building? INTERIOR Interior Space: • Are the materials sound, or uneven, cracked, out of plumb or alignment; are there signs of settlement, old, or recent (bulging walls, long cracks, etc)? • Finishes: paints, stains, etc. — are they dirty, peeling, stained, cracked? • Are there any signs of water leakage or moisture damage? (Mould? Water -stains?) Concealed Spaces: • Is light visible through walls, to the outsider or to another space? • Are the ventilators for windowless spaces clear and functional? • Do pipes or exhausts pass through concealed spaces without leaks? • Infestations - are there signs of birds, bats, insects, rodents, past or present? 6.3 MAINTENANCE PLAN Daily • Observations noted during cleaning (cracks; damp, dripping pipes; malfunctioning hardware; etc.) to be noted in log book or building file • Usual cleaning, as required Weekly • Clean gutters during periods of heavy leaf fall • Clean air filters as necessary Monthly • Check all rainwater gutters, downspouts and perimeter drains • Lubricate any mechanical heating, pumps, etc, as required • Major issues entered into the log book Quarterly • Check roofs inside and outside including gutters, valleys, downspouts, perimeter drains, etc. and clean as required • Check doors for closing and locking. Clean light fixtures Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —43— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN Semi-annually • Semi-annual inspection and report with special focus on seasonal issues • Thorough cleaning of gutters and downspouts to cope with winter rains and summer storms • Check smoke detectors • Check condition of weather sealants (Fall) • Service mechanical units such as heating (Fall) • Clean the exterior using a soft bristle broom/brush Annually (Spring) • Inspect foundation for cracks, deterioration or loss of material. • Inspect windows for paint and glazing compound failure, wood decay and proper operation. • Complete annual inspection and report for Information File • Clean out of all perimeter drains and rainwater systems • Overhaul electric system; change light bulbs and tubes • Check all sprinkler systems • Check all fire extinguishers and ensure proper access • Touch up worn paint on the building's exterior • Oil all locks, hinges, etc. • Service mechanical units such as air conditioning/pumps etc. • Check for plant, insect or animal infestation • Routine cleaning, as required Five Year Cycle • A full inspection report by a heritage professional should be undertaken every five years comparing records from previous inspections and the original work, particularly monitoring structural movement and durability of utilities. • Repaint wooden sash windows every five to fifteen years. With proper maintenance, wood windows have the potential to last indefinitely. Ten Year Cycle • Check condition of roof every ten years after last replacement. Twenty Year Cycle • Confirm condition of roof and estimate effective lifespan. Replace when required. Storm Inspections (as required) • After any storm, inspection must occur for any damage. Gutters and roofs need to be checked and cleaned. Major Maintenance Work (as Required) • Thorough repainting, re -roofing, gutter, downspout and drain replacement; replacement of deteriorated building materials etc. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —44— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Turnock / Morse Residence Conservation Plan was undertaken by Donald Luxton & Associates in 2011-12. The project team consisted of Donald Luxton, Principal; with research by Megan Faulkner and R.J. McCulloch. We would also like to thank the following for their assistance: • Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc.: Wayne Bissky MRAIC Architect, and John Meunier, Architectural Technologist. • Lisa Zosiak, Planner, District of Maple Ridge. • Allanah Ashlie, granddaughter of the Turnocks, and other members of the Morse family for their generous assistance with memories of the house and family photographs. • Val Patenaude, Director, and Sandra Borger, Staff Researcher, Maple Ridge Museum & Archives, for additional research and genealogical information. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —45— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SOURCES NEWSPAPER REFERENCES • Weekly Gazette [Haney, B.C.]; August 1, 1938, page 1: "Mr. and Mrs. J.D. Turnock are erecting a lovely new home on St. Ann [note: this was the original spelling of the street name], just across the corner from J. Nightingale. They expect to take up residence there some time in September. • Gazette [Haney, B.C.]; Friday, March 20, 1942, page 1: "MORSE — TURNOCK. A quiet wedding took place on Saturday evening, March 14, at the home of the officiating clergyman, Rev. E.V. Apps, Vancouver, when Iris Daken [sic] Turnock, only daughter of Mr. and Mrs. J.D. Turnock of Haney, became the bride of Garnet Robert Morse, elder son of Dr. and Mrs. G. Morse of Haney." • Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Gazette; Thursday November 6, 1958, page 1: "Dr. D.G. Morse: He Saw Maple Ridge Grow. Largest Masonic funeral to be held in this district was for Dr. David Garner [sic] Morse, M.D., pioneer practitioner, who passed away in the Royal Columbian Hospital, New Westminster, on October 29th. [Details of service follow]." • Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Gazette; August 19, 1965, page 5: "Local Couple Mark Anniversary: Mr. and Mrs. J.D. Turnock of 23753 — 30th Road, Haney, marked the occasion of their 50th wedding anniversary by inviting a small number of close friends to a dinner party at their home. The couple, married in Folkestone, England in 1915 came to Canada in 1923 and have lived in Maple Ridge area for over thirty years. They have one daughter, Mrs. Robert Morse of Haney." VITAL EVENTS • Joseph Dakin Turnock; Vital Event Death Registration; Event Date: August 14, 1974; Age: 87; Gender: male; Event Place: Murrayville; Reg. Number: 1974-09-013195. • Hilda [Tipper] Turnock; Vital Event Death Registration; Event Date: September 25, 1971; Age: 84; Gender: female; Event Place: Murrayville; Reg. Number: 1971-09-014057. • David Garnet Morse; Vital Event Death Registration; Event Date: October 29, 1958; Age: 74; Gender: male; Event Place: New Westminster; Reg. Number: 1958-09-012222. • Bernice Louise Morse; Vital Event Death Registration; Event Date: April 28, 1954; Age: 70; Gender: female; Event Place: New Westminster; Reg. Number: 1954-09-005007. • David Garnet Morse and Bernice Louise Robertson; Vital Event Marriage Registration; Event Date: March 1, 1913; Event Place: Vancouver; Reg. Number: 1913-09-072682. • Garnet Robert Morse; Vital Event Death Registration; Event Date: March 28, 1987; Age: 72; Gender: male; Event Place: Maple Ridge; Reg. Number: 1987-09-005045. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE • A Field Guide To American Houses, by Virginia & Lee McAlester. • Cape Cod House Style [architecture.about.com]: History of the Cape Cod Style. • Pilgrim Hall Museum [http://www.pilgrimhall.org/cchse2.htm]. Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 —46— TURNOCK / MORSE RESIDENCE CONSERVATION PLAN APPENDIX B: MORSE FAMILY TREE 1. Dr. David Garnet Morse B. May 7, 1883 and D. October 29, 1958 M. March 1, 1913 to Bernice Louise Robertson (B. 21 Dec 1883 and D. 28 Apr 1954 ) 2. Dr. Hugh F. Morse B. March 1, 1919 and D. January 5, 2008 M. May 4, 1943 to Catherine Janett Belle Scott (B. November 17, 1920 and D. August 1, 1997) 3. Colleen Morse B. and D. M. to Nelson 4. Ben Nelson 3. Garnet Morse 4. Margot Belle Morse B. and D. 3. Kathleen "Kathy" Morse B. and D. 4. David Morse B. December 1984 2. Margot Morse B. 1920 and D. October 8, 1948 (died young b/c of leukemia) M. December 28, 1945 to Hugh Douglas Haig McTaggart 3. Robert William McTaggart (B. June 30, 1947) 2. Garnet Robert Morse B. 1915 and D. March 28, 1987 M. March 14, 1942 to Iris Daken Turnock 3. Jo -Ann Ellen (M. Bruce Harvey Atwood July 2, 1960) 3. Richard "Rickey" 3. Sandra (B. September 10, 1950) 3. Son (B. June 2, 1959) 2. Ellen Bernice Morse B. and D. M. 1939 to Wallace Lister 3. Ella Bernice 3. Sharen 3. Joe 3. Hugh Donald Luxton & Associates: January 2012 -47- SCHEDULE"D" CONFIRMATION OF COMMITMENT BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL This letter must be submitted before issuance of a Heritage Alteration Permit or a building permit. To: THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE (the authority having jurisdiction) Re: THE TURNOCK RESIDENCE Address Legal Description The undersigned has retained as a coordinating registered professional with experience in heritage conservation to coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered professionals required1 for this heritage project. The coordinating registered professional shall coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered professional required for the project in order to ascertain that the design will substantially comply with the Turnock Residence Conservation Plan, the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, the B.C. Building Code, and other applicable enactments respecting safety, not including the construction safety aspects. For this project, field reviews are defined as those reviews of the work: a) at a project site of a development to which a Heritage Alteration Permit relates, and b) at fabrication location where building components are made that will replace deteriorated materials identified as character -defining elements for this project. That a registered professional in his or her professional discretion considers necessary to ascertain whether the work substantially complies in all material respects with the plans and supporting documents prepared by the registered professional and with the Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012, for which the Heritage Alteration Permit is issued. The owners and the coordinating registered professional have read the Turnock Residence Conservation Plan and the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. The owners and the coordinating registered professional each acknowledge their responsibility to notify the addressee of this letter of the date the coordinating registered professional ceases to be retained by the owners before the date that the coordinating registered professional ceases to be retained or, if that is not possible, then as soon as possible. The coordinating registered professional acknowledges the responsibility to notify the addressee of this letter of the date a registered professional ceases to be retained before the date the registered professional ceases to be retained or, if that is not possible, then as soon as possible. It is the responsibility of the coordinating registered professional to ascertain which registered professionals are required. The owners and the coordinating registered professional understand that where the coordinating registered professional or a registered professional ceases to be retained at any time during construction, work on the above project will cease until such time as: a) a new coordinating registered professional or registered professional, as the case may be, is retained, and b) a new letter in the form set out in Schedule C in the Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012, is completed by the authority having jurisdiction. The undersigned coordinating registered professional certifies that he or she is a registered professional as defined in the British Columbia Building Code, who also has experience with heritage conservation projects and agrees to coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered professionals required for the project as outlined in the attached plans and specifications. Coordinating Registered Professional Owner Name (Please Print) Name (Please Print) Address Address Phone (Professional's Seal and Signature) Date Name of Agent or Signing Office (if applicable) Date Owner's or Owners appointed agent's signature (if owner is a corporation the signature of a signing officer must be given here. If the signature is that of the agent, a copy of the document that appoints the agent must be attached.) (if the coordinating registered professional is a member of a firm, please complete the following) I am a member of the firm and I sign this letter on behalf of the firm. SCHEDULE "E" CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE This letter must be submitted after substantial completion of the project but prior to final inspection by the authority having jurisdiction. TO: THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE (the authority having jurisdiction) RE: Discipline (e.g. Architectural, Engineering etc.) (Print) Name of Project (Print) Address of Project (Print) Legal Description of Project (Print) (Each registered professional shall complete the following: Name (Print) Address (Print) Phone I hereby give assurance that: Professional's Seal and Signature Date a) I have fulfilled my obligations for field review as outlined in Section 6 of the Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 and the attached Schedule D, Confirmation of Commitment by Owners. b) I am a registered professional as defined in the British Columbia Building Code. (if the registered professional is a member of a firm, complete the following:) I am a member of the firm and I sign this letter on behalf of the firm. SCHEDULE "F" ZONING BYLAW NO. 3510-1985 VARIANCES AND SUPPLEMENTS PERMITTED THROUGH HERITAGE DESIGNATION AND REVITALIZATION AGREEMENT BYLAW NO. 6913-2012 The variances identified in this Schedule "F" to the Heritage Designation and Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 apply to an only to those lands within the District of Maple ridge described below and any and all buildings, structure, and other development thereon: The RM -2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential District) zone regulations shall apply to the Lands identified in the Agreement to which this Schedule is attached, with the following permitted exceptions: • Part 6 Residential Zones, 604: ■ 5) DENSITY 1. The maximum floor space ratio shall be 1.817 except that the following shall not be included as floor area for the purpose of computing the floor space ratio: a) Any portion of a basement or cellar or other common area containing heating, laundry, recreational or storage facilities; b) Amenity areas, swimming pools and open sundecks; c) Any portion of a storey used for mechanical or electrical service room; d) Balconies; e) Common stairwells and common corridors. • 6) SITING, shall be amended as follows: • The minimum setbacks from property line, shall be: • 3.3m front yard; • 4.3m rear yard; • 3.Om exterior side yard; • 4.1m interior side yard. • 8) OTHER REGULATIONS shall be amended to permit assigned parking stalls for the use of residents residing within the heritage house units within the surface parking lot. SCHEDULE"G" OFF-STREET PARKING BYLAW NO. 4350-1990 VARIANCES AND SUPPLEMENTS PERMITTED THROUGH HERITAGE DESIGNATION AND REVITALIZATION AGREEMENT BYLAW NO. 6913-2012 The variances identified in this Schedule "G" to the Heritage Designation and Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 apply to an only to those lands within the District of Maple ridge described below and any and all buildings, structure, and other development thereon: The driveway aisle that provides access from laneway into and out of the underground parking is required to be a minimum of 6.Om in width. The minimum number of parking stalls required for the Lands identified in the Agreement to which this Schedule is attached will be 72. At least four of the 72 parking stalls will be retained for the use of visitors. A maximum of 6 stalls are permitted to be designed for small cars (see Off -Street Parking Bylaw Part IV, Off -Street Parking Design, 4.1(a)(i)(b)). READ a first time the day of , A.D. 20 . READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 . PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 . READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 . APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 . RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER FY nNi..1105 St An.e Lots DP 13/Ju 4,Z 223rd Street a W 1tn -u Sidewalk 37.228m Front Lot Lina —I 1-1-1 3 Bn .w..1- 0 A un Iol PJBA epig 1 91 'co W 3 -n m 00 0 N N .s. s' a -1 3 w 3 0 O 3 r0 I O V1 3m o m 03 0 Ramp Down 15% L 4t) 2d1Arn Rear Lot Line [ D N f f ! ir a WAYNE STEPHEN BISSKY ARCHITECTURE & URBAN DESIGN INC. NANNING INTERIOR DESIGN ta: t."... .n, Site Plan Apartment Study �4.�.4 S.. N.. Aa, ww.BUR. ec �„ ..a.�..�.......o..am.�o...•,......a .. .4 mow. 6 • • i 11.1 z Ig 3N11 101 dV3zi wnueadoaa 6 NMgp cleft 1 SAINT ANNE AVENUE HHRH YHiH Hak` HaIIaa A ....fl 2,,,13 Fcl 133a1S QMEZZ Af YM3fIIS MAPLE RIDGE District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: DVP/040/09 FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C o W SUBJECT: Development Variance Permit 10125 248 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A Development Variance Permit application has been received in support of subdivision application SD/040/09. The subdivision application is for phase one of a two phase development. The first phase contains 71 R-1 (Residential District) lots and the second phase contains 29 R-1 (Residential District) lots and 8 RS -lb (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) lots for a total of 108 lots. The proposed variances are applicable to both phases. The purpose of the Development Variance Permit is to vary the height of the proposed R-1 (Residential District) single family homes from 9 to 11 metres, to vary the road right-of-way from 18 metres to 15 metres on 100 A and 101 B Avenues and 247 B Street; and to vary the carriage way from 8.6 to 7.3 metres on 247 B Street. RECOMMENDATION: That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DVP/040/09 respecting the property located at 10125 248 Street. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context Applicant: Owner: Damax Consultants Ltd. Braynor Financial Corp Legal Description: Lot A, Section 3, Township 12, Plan BCP46878 OCP: Existing: Urban Residential Zoning: Existing: R-1 (Residential District), RS -lb (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Surrounding Uses: North: South: Use: Single -Family Residential Zone: SRS (Special Urban Residential) Designation: Low Medium Density Residential Use: Single -Family Residential Zone: RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Designation: Urban Reserve East: West: Use: Single -Family Residential Zone: A-2 (Upland Agricultural), RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Designation: Agricultural, Urban Reserve Use: Park Zone: RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Designation: Agricultural Existing Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Single -Family Residential Site Area: 8.3 hectares (20.5 acres) Access: 101 Avenue Servicing: Urban Standard Lot Size: 372 - 1926m2 Previous Applications: RZ/040/09, SD/073/08, DP/087/05 b) Requested Variances: 1. To vary the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 Section 601 C (11) (b) maximum height requirement from 9 metres to 11 metres for R-1 (Residential District) zoned lots. 2. To vary the Subdivision and Development Services Bylaw No. 4800-1993, Schedule C, Section 3.5 Roads, SD -R1 Urban Local Street to reduce the required road right-of-way width of 18.0 metres and road carriageway width of 8.6 metres. The applicant is proposing road right-of-ways widths of 15 metres on 100 A and 101 B Avenues and 247 B Street; and to reduce the road carriageway width from 8.6 metres to 7.3 metres on 247B Street. c) Project Description: The applicant proposes to subdivide the subject site into 108 single-family lots over two phases. The first phase, under application SD/040/09, contains 71 R-1 (Residential District) lots. A subdivision application for the remaining lots will be made in the future. Eight RS -1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) zoned lots are proposed along the north property line to create a transition in lot size with the properties to the north of the site. The remaining 29 single-family lots in the second phase will be R-1 (Residential District) lots. The development will be accessed from 101 Avenue on the west side of the site. An emergency vehicle access is provided from 248 Street. Two landscaped parkettes will be featured in the 247B Street right-of-way to create an attractive vegetated space within the subdivision. -2 d) Planning Analysis: The applicant has requested a height variance from 9 to 11 metres for the R-1 (Residential District) lots to facilitate steeper, more esthetically pleasing roof lines. The height relaxation is consistent with similar recent single family home developments in the surrounding Albion Area. The applicant has demonstrated that this variance will allow them to achieve a high design standard that has been established within the Albion Area. As a result, the requested height variance is supported by the Planning Department. e) Interdepartmental Implications: Additionally, the applicant has requested a road right-of-way variance from 18 to 15 metres for specific portions of two of the three roads running east -west through the development site (100 A and 101 B Avenue) and 247 B Street. The right-of-way relaxations are in locations where lots front the road on only one side. The reduced right-of-way will still facilitate parking on both sides of the street and two-way traffic, as the carriage way in these locations will not be reduced. Sidewalk will be located on one side of the road only as a result of this variance. Lastly, the applicant has requested a reduced carriage way on 247 B Street from 8.6 to 7.3 metres to allow a parkette median within the road right-of-way at two locations within the street. The road right-of-way in these locations has been designed to 41.4 metres, allowing for one 7.3 metre carriage way on either side of the parkette. Street parking will be restricted in these areas to one side of the road to allow sufficient unimpeded two way vehicular traffic on the narrower carriage way width. The road right-of-way and carriage way width relaxations at various locations of the development site are consistent with previous road designs in the Silver Valley Eco -Cluster areas. For example, similar variances were approved for subdivision application 2011 -052 -SD ("Hampstead" development by Portrait Homes). The Engineering and Fire Departments have reviewed the proposed variances to ensure that they meet safety, access and servicing requirements; and are in support of the road design. On -street parking will not be permitted along the north and south 247 B loops due to the reduced carriage way width. f) Citizen Implications: As required in Maple Ridge Development Procedures By-law No. 5879-1999, notice of Council consideration of a resolution to issue a Development Variance Permit was mailed to all owners and tenants in occupation of all parcels abutting or adjacent to the subject site. The notification letter included an outline of requested variances, municipal contact details, and meeting date information. g) Alternatives: If the height variance request is not permitted, the applicant would be required to revise their single- family home design to comply with the maximum height allowed in the R-1 (Residential District) zone. The roof pitches of the homes would likely be reduced. If the road right-of-way and carriage way reductions are not permitted, the applicant would be required to revise their subdivision layout to comply with the minimum right-of-way and carriage way widths. -3 CONCLUSION: The development variance request for building height will allow for a more esthetically pleasing roof lines and steeper roof pitches. The height relaxation is consistent with similar single family home developments in the surrounding Albion Area. Similarly, the road right-of-way and carriage way width relaxations at various locations of the development site are consistent with previous road designs in the Silver Valley Eco -Cluster areas. Therefore, it is recommended that Development Variance Permit DVP/040/09 be approved. "Original signed by Amelia Bowden" Prepared by: Amelia Bowden Planning Technician "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer AB/dp The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject map Appendix B - Phase 1 and 2 subdivision plan showing road variances Appendix C - Road cross sections Appendix D - Typical building elevations for R-1 (Residential District) zoned lots -4 Section 3 Township 12 24720 vel pit a 0 „ 0 m 2 7 y. O N ti R r 6 N 5 " N 4 N 3 N 2 N 1 N 2 n BCP 17387 Provincial gravel pit EPP 9830 P 29 247 10180 29 A PAR KN P1208 Re m 16 10104 Subject Property BCP 33649 PARK J A 10125 BCP 46878 PARK BCP 46878 P 36818 30 10076 1004 0 PARK BCP 46878 PARKN P1208 Rem 17 ..................... 1114.11.40044 100 AVE. o N 2466 0 2467 0 w 2470 6 N 24726 P 16340 10 P 16 340 N N 9 Lo\i, N Scale: 1:2,500 Ci �..f Pitt Mea•�ows ___ *¢ 1"x S 10125-248 St ii. hi yn fYf 3 a M EL ��___,Iipr—‘11117igCf4rlr.i j'' CORPORATION OF '— THE DISTRICT OF =EAmLS � :�'�-ik°,y�l- ! �', *ire �a-+ LI _ ! .y.., MAPLE RIDGE Britisdl Calumba MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT District of �I �7f:� Langley i Y1, 10-7 • 12-- DATE: Sep 25, 2012 VP/040/09 BY: JV -- „FRASER _Le- 9-17s PI .111 $i al al in nr snr I 1 7 4 SI a al •_ 4 —4. Q1 a; l41 Ial of 1 r yy •ifr3 1"...si s I I kal4paleal a• -•I al !a[ 13j • del1:1 I k 41 N a; =4 ~ -1 1 al 81 tz o tot, AMIE. .241 .sC T•41' 8 , tot $ p A0"17- 1If.11-Y1. rr,sa� 3 err Loot.4 447 ce 5AT1. mit: Fi1cx34)• 0 Ye -o• prapcpt eco v%J•( Ae-- Loors ( fl� Damax Consultants Ltd. 103.1600 West 6th Ave. Vancouver, B.C.176J 1R3 Tel. 224-6827 Fax 60-3M °°-2v►2. i. P ??AL 6c) c (c .�- CrAS 47% c 4 �' war 114 #1AfLE RIDGE Jarn .%aai_ District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012 -005 -DP FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Development Permit 20528 Lougheed Highway PURPOSE: A development permit application has been received for the above noted property to permit the existing 646.6 m2 (6,960 ft2) building to be extended by 516.6 m2 (5,561 ft2) and the exterior to be fully renovated. The total floor area of the proposed building will be 1,163.2 m2 (12,521 ft2). This application is subject the Commercial Development Permit Area Guidelines as outlined in the 2006 Official Community Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2012 -005 -DP respecting the property located at 20528 Lougheed Highway. BACKGROUND: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Spire Development Corporation (Shauna Steven) Mageta Holdings Ltd., Inc. No. BC0933972 Legal Description: Lot 1 Except: Part subdivided by Plan LMP20045; District Lot 222 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 72179 OCP: Existing: Commercial Proposed: Commercial Zoning: Existing: CS -1 (Service Commercial) Proposed: C-2 (Community Commercial) Surrounding Uses North: South: Use: Commercial Zone: CS -1 (Service Commercial), RS -1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation Commercial Use: Residential (south of abutting lane) Zone: R-1 (Urban Residential) Designation: Urban Residential East: West: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing: Companion Applications: b) Project Description: Commercial CD -1-92 (Comprehensive Development Zone for medically -related uses) Commercial Commercial CS -1 (Service Commercial) Commercial Commercial Commercial 0.327 ha. (0.8 acre) Lougheed Highway and lane behind Full Urban 2012-005-RZ The subject site is located on the south side of Lougheed Highway, across from Triple Tree Nurseryland. The parcel is 0.327 ha. (0.8 acre) in size and has access in the front to Lougheed Highway and in the rear access off a lane from 118 Avenue. The applicant proposes to convert and extend the existing commercial building, occupied in the past by auto -service uses and a restaurant. The existing building is approximately 646.6 m2 (6,960 ft2). With the proposed addition of about 516.6 m2 (5,561 ft2), the total floor area of the proposed building will be 1,163.2 m2 (12,521 ft2). Parking is provided in two areas. In front, there will be approximately 37 parking spaces, two of which will be handicapped spaces. To the rear with lane access, will be 12 spaces intended to be for staff. Access to the front parking area is by way of an existing driveway through the lands to the east (20580 Lougheed Highway) as part of a previous development application for those lands. The access is secured by way of a new easement, with the District as a third party. c) Planning Analysis: Multi -Family Development Permit Area: A Commercial Development Permit is required for all new development on land designated Commercial on Schedule B of the Official Community Plan. The purpose of the Commercial Development Permit is to foster attractive commercial areas, which is compatible with adjacent development and enhances the unique character of the community. The Key Guideline Concepts are as follows: 1. Avoid conflicts with adjacent uses through sound attenuation, appropriate lighting, landscaping, traffic calming and the transition of building massing to fit with adjacent development. Staff Comment: The majority, if not all the activity related to patients / customers activity, delivery activity and garbage / recycling collection will be located in the front parking lot area. There will be landscaping along the frontage including landscaping to conceal the garbage enclosure, and at the west side of the property. The parking at the rear will have landscaping along the rear building wall for the full width of the building, as well as landscaped islands between some of the spaces to soften the parking area and building wall when viewed from the -2- residential dwelling to the south. The east commercial wall will have vines to partially conceal this blank wall. 2. Encourage a pedestrian scale through providing outdoor amenities, minimizing the visual impact of parking areas, creating landmarks and visual interest along street fronts. Staff Comment: The building will have a more prominent entrance incorporated into the facade closest to Lougheed Highway. Pedestrians may access the site from the proposed sidewalk along Lougheed Highway by way of an identifiable walkway through the parking lot. A concrete sidewalk is provided along the commercial building to permit access to the entrances for each unit. A walkway along the east side of the building will allow for access to the staff parking along the lane. A locked gate will prevent people from walking through the property from the lane area. 3. Promote sustainable development with multimodal transportation circulation, and low impact building design. Staff Comment: The project promotes sustainability by reusing, adapting and expanding an existing building. The design promotes good circulation for pedestrian and bicycle movement through the site by utilizing a sidewalk along the building face in front of all the tenants. 4. Respect the need for private areas in mixed use development and adjacent residential areas. Staff Comment: A landscaped pedestrian area has been provided where the new east wing extends from the original building. Landscaping along the south building face and between some of the parking spaces for the parking off the lane has been provided to improve the interface with the residential area south of the lane. 5. The form and treatment of new buildings should reflect the desired character and pattern of development in the area by incorporating appropriate architectural styles, features, materials, proportions and building articulation. Staff Comment: The intent of the design is to upgrade the building to provide a more contemporary look and sensibility, and give it more character. To that end, the building is to be finished in smooth stucco for a cleaner look; the heavy canopy is to be replaced by a long, continuous canopy that is, more streamlined, and with a pronounced leading edge to accentuate a sense of lightness, and two contemporary roof features to be located over the main entry. d) Advisory Design Panel: The plans, design drawings and landscape plans submitted in support of the development permit application were reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel at the June 12, 2012 meeting. The Advisory Design Panel is in support of the general concept as submitted. The applicant satisfactorily addressed all the identified concerns as noted in the resolution quoted below: The application be supported and the following concerns be addressed as the design develops and submitted to Planning staff for follow up: • Consider providing more detail on the face of the fascia of the decorative roof. (Additional detail to be provided at building permit stage.) -3- • Provide details of signage on the East Elevation. (Individually mounted channel letters, illuminated from below.) • Provide civil drawings which explain the treatment along lane and Lougheed Highway. (Resolved and reflected in the Rezoning Servicing plan.) • Consider any improvements to the lane, in particular tree planting on the south side of the lane. (Trees, shrubs and groundcover landscaping, including landscaping islands between some parking spaces provided.) • Consider on-site storm -infiltration into the planting in the north of the parking lot. (Existing grades to remain; applicant proposes to have the parking area drain to catch basin at east property line.) • Clarification of parking wheel stops requirements. (Sidewalk north of new addition increased in width.) • Consider reducing patron or visitor parking to establish a pedestrian access to the building. (Revised parking row to allow 4'-1" access to entry plaza behind vehicles.) • Consider as much of a landscape planting provision around the garbage enclosure including additional trees. (The garbage enclosure has been relocated to the front parking lot and is enclosed within a landscape island.) • Consider the addition of planting against the south and east walls. (Additional plantings provided.) • Consider addition of lighting on the south side of the building. (Details at building permit stage with electrical engineer. Security lighting for staff parking as well as motion sensor lights for after hours to be considered.) • Clarify that there is a low evergreen hedge on the North, East and West edges of the parking lot. (Provided for in landscaping plans.) • Provide sufficient soil depth for trees in the parking lot. (Increased width of landscape islands to facilitate soil depth.) • Consider a different location for the garbage enclosure (not at the entrance of the parking lot). (Garbage relocated to front parking lot. Decorative gates to be used.) • Consider providing a parapet screen around the roof top to screen the roof -top units. (Rooftop screen detail added to drawing.) • Consider providing a parking lot organization coordinated with the neighbor next door to provide a functional solution. (Proposed circulation has been coordinated with neighbor and is shown on the drawings; secured through new mutual access easement.) e) 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, including municipal street trees, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Development Permit. Based on an estimated landscape cost of $20,000.00, the security will be $20,000.00. -4- CONCLUSION: As the development proposal complies with the Commercial Development Permit Area Guidelines of the Official Community Plan for form and character, it is recommended that 2012/005/DP be given favourable consideration. "Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski" Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MCIP, RPP, MCAHP Planner "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by Kelly Swift" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B - Architectural Plan Appendix C - Landscaping Plan -5- 1 BCP 1643 \ 1- v) P 9801 P 76445 P 64073 75 o Pcl. 'One' LMP 46838 M O N c 0 N / / i /. 119 AVE.co P 87086 1 0 N _ — ' SUBJECT PROPERTY CO LMP 25177 N A o 1 V N 2 LOUGHEES N *LMP 36563 1 CO N O N Rem. 1 O N P 78869Lo D `V o o P 8E291 P 69662 P 72179 2 0 N a 1 P 10201 LMP 1703 PLAN) 8C P 9031 71 (LEASE P 25 P 1395L RemC O 1 N P 77800 2 N 3 ry 4 N Rem 1 Rem 2 N Rem 3 N 34567N LMP 2004¢ I 2 Lo P75414 o NWS 2959 N 1 P 754 N NWS2 Lo "::::.1 N 20452 N 3 WALNUT CR. 20498 17 V o N O co 4 20473 2049216 N >>8q 3 ow 0) 20445 20459 01 r co 15 II::P75414 20484 a P 80213 NWS 3136 co 0 N 20478 NWS 3141 14 zp4j2 1 N N ,D 13 o Q Rem "D" N SCALE 1:2,000 Cit Mea Pitt owsr' - p$r � }` f j c �o 20528 LOUGHEED HWY i'" ie -8 - . im i�At CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF '� '' �-� :to. MAPLE RIDGE MAPLE RIDGE District of �' ^�°� ,� British CoLumhia PLANNING DEPARTMENT --;---- ��� Langley `FBAs C_✓ May 7, 2012 FILE: 2012-005-RZ BY: PC �DATE: ER R. \\ a CD iva) z0 2 2 20528 Loughheed Highway Maple Ridge, BC. O N_ N N_ 0 N 2 U) 0 f0 M >— C9 W W (2 V 0 J !;4 (9 z_ 0 J (0 J u Z O Zy w O V uw o --zoo3 0 H LL¢7OmJ a zaw¢a V U 0a 0U ' HU--�Z- 4°mos°� 4 II II W l�auaQli O Fl 0 F 0 N U (9699L) VMNIVM 301M.1 N 91 w r O (.6L'L99) 00908 08!)90 dwd ('w 80'90) LL> LL> (0989) 9 w $ Q J a N N m aV n .N.. ,.,2 ..91L / ..HIL 0-.L / ..WL S-.9 00 E.5` O¢w OOm pN Hd? 3Z �y H 0 3 0 z A E w 11 U T U CD 2 co Q) o E lU Nis) Q 20 O CN O N_ N 0 Z U a) O d / ..8// n -.l / 0 2 1111111111 ,8/L i L 0 r / Z/ 0 8 0 / ..8/L / 0 7 LO • O Z O N_ N N_ O N f6 a) O rn f0 E .9/L S -.PZ ..9/L P.L Ow O 111111111111 / l S-.9 §x b-.9 North Elevation SC: 1/8" = 1'-0" MATERIALS LEGEND - Elevations WOOD FACIA AND SOFFIT ALUCABOND ALUMINIUM PANEL FLUSH MOUNTED LIGHT CLOSURE ALUMINUM CHANNEL LETTERS NEW CONTINUOUS CANOPY FURRED DOWN DRY -STACKED CULTURED STONE rrr^ Z Q w . • Q Q 0 w Q2 U O w O O 0`r' U • O coin O • H E 2 U W W • z 0< O • <0 0U 1- • 22 2 c 0 -D -W U O D ZDZ0 co co SMOOTH -FACE CONCRETE BLOCK (Existing) O M 4 O • N E X2 W 0• O co U- p w c � CO I-9 HI W O z2 O — cod O METAL DOOR AND FRAME (Existing) METAL DOOR AND FRAME (New) STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF (new roof feature) ecD0 PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING 0 w N_ p 0 z W c 00 W � • W W =z �- < p U < 0 Jp O Z_ > J > m2 O p2 LLI Z < INTERMEDIATE POSTS (Anodized Aluminum) 2 z_ p LLI 0 z p U W J < O f w W E Jp D Q O co • er w 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO a) 0 z M 0 N O O Z U a) O 0 a) co U c1) O I I co 0 (1) MATERIALS LEGEND - Elevations WOOD FACIA AND SOFFIT ALUCABOND ALUMINIUM PANEL FLUSH MOUNTED LIGHT CLOSURE ALUMINUM CHANNEL LETTERS NEW CONTINUOUS CANOPY FURRED DOWN DRY -STACKED CULTURED STONE 1- Z Q W . • Q Q 0 w Q2 U O LL O O Q In U • O co O • H E 2 U W W • z0 0Q O Q0 0U 1— • 22 2 c 0-0 w - U O DOZDZO Iii m - co - SMOOTH -FACE CONCRETE BLOCK (Existing) M 4 IY 0 E X2 W 0 •E O co U .E" D � m c w O z O — cod O METAL DOOR AND FRAME (Existing) METAL DOOR AND FRAME (New) 00 PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING 0 w N_ 0 0 z W m▪ w 2 • cc▪ W Lu = z H Q O U Lu N Q 0 Jp O Z_ J > m2 O O - W J Z Q INTERMEDIATE POSTS (Anodized Aluminum) STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF (new roof feature) 2 z_ J 0 W N_ 0 0 z O U W O • Q Luw Jp 00 Z D Q O U • w. w0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N_ N_ g 0 z M O O O Z U a) O /•L 0 a) a) co U (1) G tV E E ..91L WL0 0 ✓ West Elevation I I co ..OIL 0- O CO 0 z G) W U T U C U 2 co • E E co N Q 20 O CN O N_ N N_ O N f6 N 0 f0 0) WW1 to • 3 0) O Z Q co6 co 00 co CO Cl) W U 0 0 C CU• U .J c.) m m O L N O Z a) U T U C U 2 co E E N co N Q 20 O coCN O N_ N N_ O N f6 N O f0 LOW ORNAN (1 . mann MATE POLE POLE LOUGHEED HWy STREET TREES C#rM *Rdfs APPENDIX C SEASONAL SHRUB AND FLOWER BED NORTH OARBA HEDGE (A "High) PATIENT/VISITOR PARKING 37 STALLS PEDESTR WALKWAY ■ PFWEIMGY ' LOS f-1. SHALL CAR :QR Y PROPOSED -449" NEWRY 111.n T OF ACCESS EASEMENT ACCESS EASEMENT UNIT 110 MEDICAL CLINIC 5,493 s.f. STAFF ONLY 2r4• PROPOSED DRIVE AISLE (EXISTING PROPOSED PROPOSED RELOCATED PARKING (S• EXISTING BUILDING APPROX. UNE OF CANOPY T OVER IA+T !!p p-c.wf TIU a 1. UNIT %4G \MCRYST I.= T.i RELOCATED AS SHOWN) �YINE (on Wr9 ara STAFF PARKING 12 STALLS RESIDENTIAL LOTS LAN E TREES (Smdi HEDL7IRG Tram) LOCIOD GATE STAFF GR&Y PROPOSED RELOCATED PARKING EXISTING EASEMENT BOUNDARY E M REFER TO STRUCTURAL J M W y W o2S o LLpCL 2w0 maQ, N co W WZO �=Z H 0 0 W W W< N 2 0 w o F O O m Z2 00 C7 Z 2 E w HLk wI 0 00 w 2J H ? W Lit 2 a0 n E a a m rsi o Ea r r 1 `+ I u- re H III mm2 CC Ftli L J r [w6' 4] .0-.9 END ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION GARBAGE ENCLOSURE MAPI.i F nc,F ['cep Allots Grams? xe,'gh4o District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: SD/040/09 FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012 Upper Jackson Enhanced Landscape Maintenance 10125 248 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The developer of the property located at 10125 248 Street has made a formal petition (Appendix "E"), per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), requesting the District provide a Local Area Service Bylaw specific to those properties to be created by subdivision. The service is for enhanced landscape maintenance of two parkettes, three landscape areas, and the emergency access area within the development. The bylaw would require the future property owners of each the 108 lots to pay an annual fee as a Local Service Tax for enhanced landscape maintenance areas within the development. Subdivision is proposed to occur in two phases and the Upper Jackson Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012 will apply to both phases. Similar Local Area Service bylaws have been established in other parts of Albion and in Silver Valley. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That a Local Area Service, as formally petitioned by the developer of the lands referred to as 'Upper Jackson', and per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), be authorized for the enhanced landscape maintenance costs to be levied on the benefitting properties to be created by subdivision of the land; and further 2. That Upper Jackson Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012 be given First, Second and Third Readings. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: The subject site was rezoned in December 2010 and is designated Urban Residential within the Urban Area Boundary. Subdivision of the site is proposed over two phases. The first phase contains 71 R-1 (Residential District) lots under application SD/040/09; and the second phase not currently under application will contain 29 R-1 (Residential District) lots and 8 RS -lb (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) lots for a total of 108 lots over both phases. The Upper Jackson Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012 will apply to both phases. Within the development, two looped roads are proposed and each will contain a planted landscape boulevard referred to as a parkette, as shown on Schedule "A" of Appendix "B", and on the attached landscape plan (Appendix "C"). Parkettes are incorporated into the development plan as focal points in the subdivision. The road width and on -street parking requirements for this site were carefully considered to meet the site specific conditions, and the Engineering and Fire Departments requirements. The applicant has requested a variance for reduced road right-of-ways and carriageway widths under DVP/040/09. b) Desired Outcomes: A Local Area Service Bylaw is required for the enhanced landscape maintenance of two parkettes, three landscape areas, and the emergency access area within the development in order for subdivision approval of Phase 1 under application SD/040/09. The developer has made a formal petition, per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), requesting the District provide a Local Area Service Bylaw, specific to those properties to be created by the subdivision of both Phase 1 and 2. The developer of the site will be responsible for the enhanced landscaped areas installation costs and maintenance costs, ensuring 100% survival, for the first five years after completion of planting. The costs for ongoing maintenance in subsequent years will then be provided by the 108 property owners after subdivision. The cost recovery method will be through the collection of 100% of the enhanced landscaping maintenance costs as a Local Service Tax. c) Upper Jackson Enhanced Landscape Area Requirements: The enhanced landscape maintenance areas include two parkettes located within the road right-of- ways, three landscape areas at street corners to provide visual interest, and some enhancement to the emergency access road. These areas are identified on the Bylaw Map (Schedule "B" of Appendix "B"). The planting concept for these landscape areas is for enhanced natural areas that will be planted with a variety of native trees and shrubs. A low post and rail fencing will surround the pa rkettes. The planting plan for the enhanced landscape planting areas was prepared by M2 Landscape Architects and is attached as Appendix "C". The recommended procedures and frequencies for maintenance is Level 5 - Background and Natural Area, under the BC Landscape Standard. This standard is for preservation of natural conditions, with weeds and debris removed as necessary. The standard includes maintaining areas to preserve natural plantings in a more -or -less natural condition. M2 Landscape Architects have provided an estimate for the yearly maintenance of $1540.00 per year after the developer's initial five year maintenance period, attached as Appendix "D". It is anticipated that nine additional lots will be added to the Upper Jackson Local Area Service Area once remnant land from the adjacent parcel to the west is consolidated with a portion of the subject site at some point in the near future. For this reason, and because maintenance costs may change over time, it is recommended that the proposed Upper Jackson Local Area Service Bylaw 6948-2012 be reviewed every three years once responsibility passes from the developer to the residents. d) Citizen Implications: The estimated cost of the petitioned service will be $14.26 per year for each residential lot of the 108 lots in the Upper Jackson Local Area Service. The Local Area Service Bylaw will establish an annual charge based on a per lot basis for the 108 lots within the benefitting area. It is anticipated that this charge will start in 2018, after the completion of the five year maintenance period required from the developer. Potential buyers prior to 2018 will be advised of the future charge through a notation on the Property Tax Information Sheet. Once the charge comes into effect, the cost will be included in the property tax. -2- e) Interdepartmental Implications: Operations Department: The enhanced landscaping maintenance requirements for the enhanced landscape planting areas in this development are in excess of the funded base level of maintenance provided throughout Maple Ridge, and therefore would be unfunded by the District. Local Area Service bylaws have been established in several other areas in the District, including Maple Crest, the Kanaka Business Park, the Formosa Plateau development in Silver Valley, and most recently, the Hampstead development by Portrait Homes in Silver Valley. Finance Department: The Property Tax section of the Finance Department will impose the cost of this service as a levy and place the notation on the tax roll of the benefitting property owners, anticipated to be in 2018. CONCLUSION: It is recommended that the formal petition by the developer for a Local Area Service be authorized by Council for the enhanced landscape maintenance costs to be levied on the benefitting properties to be created by subdivision of the land; and that First, Second and Third Readings be given to Upper Jackson Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012. "Original signed by Amelia Bowden" Prepared by: Amelia Bowden Planning Technician "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning "Original signed by Frank Quinn" Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer AB/ dp The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject map Appendix B - Local Area Service Bylaw 6948-2012 Appendix C - Landscape plan for enhanced planting areas Appendix D - Cost estimate for yearly maintenance prepared by M2 Landscape Architects Appendix E - Petition for Local Area Service Bylaw -3- Section 3 Township 12 24720 vel pit a 0 „ 0 m 2 7 y. O N ti R r 6 N 5 " N 4 N 3 N 2 N 1 N m n BCP 17387 Provincial gravel pit EPP 9830 P 29 247 10180 29 A PAR KN P1208 Re m 16 10104 Subject Property BCP 33649 PARK J A 10125 BCP 46878 PARK BCP 46878 P 36818 30 10076 1004 0 PARK BCP 46878 PARKN P1208 Rem 17 ..................... 1114.11444044 100 AVE. N 2466 0 2467 0 w 2470 6 N 24726 c, P 16340 10 o 0 N P 16 340 N 9 Lo\i, Scale: 1:2,500 Ci ..f Pitt Mea•�ows _ *¢ 1"x S i 10125-248 St I 11 yn fYf 3 .::71 EL LS �aigCf4rlr.i Illlli CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF �' ' t `,. � �MT 1 , k°,lj Y VR J � LI _ i .y ...: � �N MAPLE RIDGE Br.tish Cclumhia MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT District of �I �7t�. Langley i Y1, 10-7 Jr�=� DATE: Sep 25, 2012 VP/040/09 BY: JV „FRASER CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE LOCAL AREA SERVICE Bylaw No. 6948-2012 A Bylaw to authorize a municipal service to maintain enhanced landscape areas; to define the benefitting lands; and to establish that the cost of the municipal service shall be borne by the owners of real property within such defined area. WHEREAS, Council has been petitioned to provide a municipal service pursuant to Division 5, Section 210 of the Community Charter S.B.C. 2003, c.26 (the "Community Charter"); AND WHEREAS the Municipal Clerk has certified that the petition received for the municipal services does constitute a sufficient and valid petition; AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to proceed with the works; AND WHEREAS the "Maple Ridge Local Area Service Policy", as amended, provides that the cost of providing a municipal service shall be recoverable from each of the existing parcels of land and all future lots created by subdivision of the parcels, specifically: Lot A Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP46878 that will benefit from the service. 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 "Upper Jackson Local Area Service Bylaw No. 6948-2012". 2. The contents of Schedules ""A", "B" and "C" attached hereto are hereby declared to be made an integral part of this Bylaw. 3. The Local Area Service of the District for the benefit of which the enhanced landscape areas are to be maintained as a municipal service are defined as the hatched areas on the attached Schedule "A". 4. The recommended procedures and frequencies for maintenance and Annual Charges are described on the attached Schedule "B". 5. The enhanced landscape area planting plan "Landscape Plan LAS Area", drawing L7, dated May 14, 2012, by M2 Landscape Architects; is attached as Schedule "C". 6. This bylaw shall take effect as of the date of adoption hereof. READ a first time the day of , A.D. 20. READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20. READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20. RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20. PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 1 / \Ore , 102 A AVE. J 7 I‘ill 1 / S T. 1/4 / w N I \ ) \ • 100 AVE. t VADLI Bylaw No. R 6948-2012 DG= LOCAL AR=A S=RV C = BYLAW Enhanced Landscape Areas 1 Original Lot Boundary L\ N SCALE 1:3,000 Schedule "A" MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE LOCAL AREA SERVICE BYLAW NO. 6948-2012 SCHEDULE "B" Class of Work: The establishment, maintenance and replacement of parkette areas, secondary landscape areas and emergency access areas as indicated by bold outline on Schedule "A" are to be be maintained as per the recommended procedures and frequencies for maintenance "Level 5 - Background & Natural Areas" of the BC Landscape Standard. (BC Society of Landscape Architects and BC Landscape & Nursery Association). Annual Charge: The Annual Charge is based on a per lot basis for each of the 108 lots created by the subdivision of: Lot A Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP46878 of $14.26 starting in 2018. The charges established under this Bylaw shall be specifically charged against the parcels benefitting from the work, payable by a per lot basis levied year by year. The Annual Charge Adjustment: The annual charge will be reviewed every three years by the Operations Department, and adjusted accordingly to reflect any change in maintenance requirements or costs, and to reflect any increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Vancouver, BC for the immediately preceding year commencing with 2018, as provided by Statistics Canada. Schedule "C" to Bylaw 6948-2012 un 01 CN co Ls 00 Li- N LANDSCAPE AflCHITECTtIE ffiaffiaffiffia tl g AVd a H Lr H N) 1S L MblMFT _r -4 F) IU X .Ael, M}�i91. �£r' h FILM -F h�C15�1F> 6Z fiL6Lktfa_e: +��SLtfblcr a F1stFtfn � 9btif�A]a_c,s + _ ilk Yat'ftrP N ffi m rFrF.7F wt>vo', sf�eF�s,�ognw'!o4i" _!,611-1f6a1aA1 .. oetMFiF. D..11.,..n.e1 1a SXSG.t-�oait'-E �a®(d c= �a_fnYF3.W., t r.... 16081 LAS Maintenence Schedules 100 Ave and 248th Street, Maple Ridge M2 #: 12-049 *use Level 5 Background Standards 2012-09-21 / -1 FREQUENCY 1 �\ °\ /) #2@ oo \\/ E�C \\\ =E E§£ % & k )7 as o _, 0' /(f ° 0-> % o # /)/o \ § k \kk\J/ $ ; # IN \ > - co> $ E �_�§ ) Q 7= a §] �\oo[ / § my )k a \ _ 7" %: I]§ 0 _ \ a c k� E§ ]� \ ®« \ E� E0 - % / •3 7 _0 ®% ®w )E /$ ®0 7\ k§ � e a= §] %o !— • ») . lc < k0 o ƒ 2 2) <. 2 $>. � a § 7 = %@ U) 0Q C• - 7 m \\a%R ) _ \ 7 \ [ j o = G 7 o CU f2 \0 co 0) 0o = E -0 \E 4 u) -0 '- - [ q /b Total hours: 14 hours Monitoring and Maintenance; Year 6 and after; for maintenance of landscaped common areas only SCHEDULE - estimated fee $100.00 per hour 0 iiiZ0_< > 0 z 0 i n § a �_ . \ .- 4_ \ a %_ . § a- %_ Lo 0 < / z \ .cu)Lo ® < 2 ƒ < ± < = . / ct m E < TABLE 3: Year 6 and after 'PROCEDURE 'GENERAL: Inspection Litter Removal Reportin Soil Testing 11111- 11111 - TREES/ SHRUBS: / co/ !iitIU *use Level 5 Background Standards 2012-09-21 / -1 LAS Maintenence Schedules 100 Ave and 248th Street, Maple Ridge M2 #: 12-049 Monitoring and Maintenance; Year 6 and after; For maintenance of landscaped common areas at Level 5 BCLNA Landscape Standard Maintenance Level This will be the total LAS maintenance amount that is split between the 108 houses for maintenance of these areas. c 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 ER 0 Q 0 0 ci 0 0 0 Q 0 0 ci 0 0 d 0 ci yr 0 Q 0 0 ci c-1 L!1 L(1 fB 0 0 10% Contingency Sub -Total + Contingency year 6 and onward: additional visits S v E v Monitoring/Maintenance 2012-09-21 666921 BC Ltd. 24750 102A Avenue Maple Ridge, BC V2W 401 September 20, 2012 Mayor and Council District of Maple Ridge 11995 Haney Place Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9 RE: PETITION FOR LOCAL AREA SERVICES ("LAS") REGARDING LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE FOR PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AT 10125 248 STREET, MAPLE RIDGE , B.C. Reference: SD/040/09 (LAS) The service is for enhanced landscape maintenance of two parkettes, side street buffering and an emergency access located within the road right of way. The planting concept is for enhanced natural areas that will be planted with a variety of native trees and shrubs. The estimated annual maintenance cost of the park areas within the entire subdivision, for the first five years, is $8,615 or approximately $82 per lot. After the fifth year, landscape maintenance costs can be reduced to $15 per lot, as the vegetation will be established. Cost recovery method for 100% of the annual maintenance cost would be by way of a local services tax within the property tax system. As a petitioner will be paying for the first five year maintenance, cost recover from the homeowners should commence in year six from the date of installation. 666921 BC Ltd. forwards this petition to the District of Maple Ridge for approval by Mayor and Council. Sincerely yours, (#.7/?/1''''' Harry Redmond (666921 BC Ltd.) 'MAPLE RILIVE 9nrhh'_'a.aeu1 J:rr• aai: District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012 -074 -AL FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Non-farm use Application 23613 124 Avenue & 12349 237 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A notice of intent to pursue gravel extraction was forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission on behalf of the property owner of the subject properties referred to above. In response, the Commission ordered that a non-farm use application be submitted to the District of Maple Ridge for this purpose. Non-farm use applications are governed within Sections 30, 19, and 21 of the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision And Procedure Regulation. In accordance with this regulation, the District of Maple Ridge is required, upon receipt of the application, to decide by resolution whether or not to authorize forwarding the application to the Agricultural Land Commission. Section 21 of the Regulation establishes a 60 day time limit for the local government decision making process. This application proposes to extract 400,000 cubic meters from the subject site over a 3 year period. Should this application be forwarded and approved by the Commission, a number of other municipal and senior agency processes will have to be addressed. These processes include bylaw amendments and permits. Some of these amendments will trigger the requirement for a Public Hearing. As this application is contrary to the objectives stated in the Official Community Plan, the recommendation is to deny forwarding it to the Agricultural Land Commission. RECOMMENDATION: That non-farm use application 2012 -074 -AL not be authorized to proceed to the Agricultural Land Commission. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Donada Industries Dave Telep Owner: Donada Industries Ltd Rae -Glenn International Development Inc. Legal Description: Section: 21, Township: 12 OCP: Existing: Agricultural Proposed: No change Zoning: Existing: RS -3 (One Family Rural Residential) Proposed: No change Surrounding Uses North: South: East: West: Use: Zone: Designation Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing: b) Project Description: Suburban Residential RS -2 One Family Suburban Residential Estate Suburban Residential Rural Residential RS -3 One Family Rural Residential Agricultural 5 properties, Rural Residential and Suburban Residential RS -3 One Family Rural Residential and RS -2 One Family Suburban Residential Agricultural and Estate Suburban 6 properties, Rural Residential and Suburban Residential RS -3 One Family Rural Residential and RS -2 One Family Suburban Residential Agricultural and Suburban Residential Rural Residential Gravel Removal 15.2 Hectares (37.6 acres) 124th Avenue On-site servicing This proposal is to extract 400,000 cubic meters of gravel from the subject property over a 3 year period. The proposal states that the intended route for gravel removal would be via 124 Ave and west to 232 St. Because the application pertains to properties located within the Agricultural Land Reserve a Notice of Intent to pursue a gravel extraction operation was forwarded by the applicant directly to the Agricultural Land Commission. The Commission directed that a non-farm use application be made to the District of Maple Ridge. Under the Agricultural Land Commission Act, Council is now required to decide whether to forward or not to forward the application back to the Commission. If this authorization is not granted, the application proceeds no further. The applicant is then entitled to a portion of the original application fee. If this non-farm use application is authorized to proceed to the Commission, and subsequently approved, a required series of subsequent applications will be required in order to realize this proposal. These are summarized below. The required municipal process includes: o Amending the Official Community Plan; a Public Hearing will be required. o Amending the Soil Removal Bylaw. o Issuance of a Soil Removal Permit. o A Rezoning or Temporary Industrial Permit if processing or storage takes place on site. -2- The Ministry of Mines will require a mining permit. On-site improvements to realize this proposal include upgrades to an existing creek crossing. Upon project completion, top soil would be placed to enhance agricultural uses. The Coho Creek area would also be enhanced. c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan The Maple Ridge Official Community Plan acknowledges that the District has rich gravel deposits and notes that the business of gravel mining needs to be balanced with environmental, stormwater management, and traffic safety requirements. Policy 6-53 of the Official Community Plan states the following: The gravel reserves in the Rural Resource area at the north end of 256th Street will be considered for use prior to development of the industrial potential. However, before any additional gravel extraction traffic occurs, beyond historic levels, alternative access needs to be developed to prevent increased impacts on the residential character of the neighbourhood. This policy notes the potential conflicts between gravel extraction and residential neighbourhoods, and the need to manage those conflicts. It is implied that gravel extraction is best suited to an industrial context, as reiterated in Policy 6-52 as follows: Rural Resource Industrial lands are located in the northern portion of the community and provide for a range of general industrial, heavy industrial and high impact resource based industrial uses following the removal of gravel resources on these lands. Figure 3 of the Official Community Plan indicates the general location of potential gravel resources, and the subject property is not indicated as one of these. Beyond these sites as indicated, the policies of the Official Community do not identify additional sites or a process whereby additional sites may be identified. Based on this information, in order to remove gravel from the subject properties, an amendment to the Official Community Plan would be required which would trigger a Public Hearing. This application proposes to introduce this use into a primarily rural and suburban residential context. On this basis, it is contrary to the policy objectives of the Official Community Plan, and therefore such an amendment would likely not be supported. All of the properties indicated on Figure 3 of the Official Community Plan are also designated for this purpose in the Maple Ridge Soil Removal Bylaw. Some anecdotal commentary suggests that the area around the subject sites were historically used as gravel pits prior to 1960. However, these properties, located to the north and to the north east of the subject site, are now developed for residential purposes. No properties in this area are currently designated for gravel extraction either in the Official Community Plan or in the Maple Ridge Soil Removal Bylaw. Maple Ridge Soil Removal Bylaw Gravel is considered to be soil under the Soil Removal Bylaw. The Bylaw establishes thresholds, regulations, and for the removal of soils from properties, and designates properties that may operate as commercial gravel pits. The bylaw also establishes permitted days and hours of operation. In -3- general, the removal of gravel must only take place with permits and on designated properties. The following exceptions apply: • Where the annual amount removed is not for commercial purposes and does not exceed 100 cubic meters. • For approved construction sites where the removal is necessary for the completion of the project. • Where no approval and permit pursuant to the Mines Act is required. • For bona fide business purposes by a florist, nurseryman or farmer. • For the installation and maintenance of utilities or the construction of roads or other public works within the public rights-of-way or registered easements. The bylaw also specifies annual amounts that may be removed from designated commercial sites. These sites and permitted amounts are attached as Appendix C. It should be noted that these designated areas were established following years of public discussion, open houses, community meetings, and public hearings. The subject properties are not designated sites. In reviewing this proposal in light of the Soil Removal Bylaw, it is clear that an amendment would be required due to the quantities involved and the commercial nature of the proposed operation. Council would need to decide whether to amend the Soil Removal Bylaw to designate these properties. An amendment to this Bylaw would not formally require a public consultation process. However, it is assumed that such a process would be established prior to consideration of an amendment of this significance. Based on the location of the subject site and the non -compatibility of the proposed gravel extraction within the neighbourhood an amendment of the Soil Removal Bylaw would not be recommended. Soil Removal Permit Should the Soil Removal Bylaw be amended then the applicant would be required to apply for a soil removal permit. Mines Act Permit In British Columbia, sand, gravel and quarry operators are required to hold a valid Mines Act permit. Rezoning or Temporary Industrial Use Permit If the applicant wishes to store or process the gravel then a rezoning or temporary industrial use application would be required. Both of these require Public Hearings. d) Intergovernmental Issues: Agricultural Land Commission In accordance with the regulations of the Agricultural Land Commission, the applicant initially pursued this proposal through the process outlined in Section 5 of the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision And Procedure Regulation. This section directs the notification requirements for specified non-farm uses, as follows: 5 (1) The removal of soil and placement of fill are exempt from the requirement to file an application under section 20 of the Act as long as the requirements in subsections (2), (3) and (4) are met and the removal or placement is for one or more of the following uses: (a) aggregate extraction if the total volume of material removed is more than 500 m3; (2) The owner must notify the commission and the applicable local government or treaty first nation government of the owner's intent to remove soil or place fill for the uses described in -4- subsection (1) at least 60 days before engaging in the intended use by filing with the commission a notice in a form acceptable to the commission. (4) The owner must comply with the restrictions on the use and the terms and conditions for the conduct of that use of agricultural land ordered by the chief executive officer under section 20 (5) of the Act provided that order is made within 30 days of a notice under subsection (2) or within 45 days of an amended notice under subsection (3). Upon receipt of the notice of intent, the applicant was informed by Commission Chair Richard Bullock that a non-farm use would be required, as follows: "Given the significance of this project, should you wish to pursue gravel extraction, I am ordering that an application for non-farm use be submitted pursuant to section 20(3) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act(ALCA). Please note that non-farm use applications are to be submitted to local government, in this case District of Maple Ridge." The Commission was authorized but not required to take this measure. Their approach now requires that the District is directly involved in the decision making process. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources This Provincial agency regulates the approval, development and reclamation of all mines in B.C. under the authority of the Mines Act and its associated regulations, and all other applicable federal and provincial laws. Before any aggregate operation can commence, a Mines Act permit must be obtained from the Ministry, and appropriate reclamation security must be paid in full. Prior to approving such a use, the Ministry application notes that Agricultural Land Commission approval is required, and municipal approval for soil removal may be required. Based on Ministry thresholds, a project of this magnitude will also trigger the need for an application to the Environmental Assessment Office. e) Environmental Implications: As noted above, this proposal will require an Environmental Assessment. For on-site improvements, the applicant notes the need to upgrade the existing creek crossing in order to allow trucks to traverse the site. A loss of riparian habitat will result. Securities must be posted for the restoration of this area upon project completion. f) Citizen/Customer Implications This proposal has generated considerable interest and concern among those living in the area. The extraction of 400,000 cubic meters of gravel equates to approximately 40,000 loaded trucks, or a total of 80,000 trips to and from the site. The Soil Removal Bylaw would permit such an operation to operate 6 days a week (not Sundays), and 14 hours a day (from 7 am until 9 pm). In practice, however, commercial gravel operator rely on contracts to receiving sites and this results in intense truck movement over short periods of time rather than a steady progression of trucks. For example, a contract for the supply of 20,000 cubic meters of gravel could result in 4,000 truck trips (total in and out of the site) over a two week period. This traffic equates to about 24 to 36 trips per hour (total in and out). This use is not compatible with the existing residential development in the area. g) Financial Implications Under the Soil Removal Bylaw designated sites are required to pay $0.50 per cubic meter removed. The removal of 400,000 cubic meters would translate into a total payment of $200,000 to the -5- District. Provincial legislation permits collection of the fees to address potential damage to roads and infrastructure caused by gravel trucks. h) Interdepartmental Implications: The Engineering Department would be involved in this proposal and would be responsible for assessing appropriate securities to cover the costs of potential damage to municipal infrastructure that could arise from this operation. i) Alternatives: Based on the considerations as outlined in this report, the recommendation is to not forward this application to the Agricultural Land Commission for a final decision. As the land is within the Agricultural Land Reserve, Council may wish to forward the application to the Commission for the Agricultural Land Commission to decide. Should the Agricultural Land Commission approve this application, the District's required processes would be triggered. CONCLUSION: This non farm use application pertains to a gravel removal proposal. This application is contrary to the objectives stated in the Official Community Plan. The recommendation is therefore to deny forwarding it to the Agricultural Land Commission. Prepared by: Diana Hall Planner Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B - Proposal as outlined by applicant Appendix C - Designated Properties in Soil Removal Bylaw. Appendix D - Potential Gravel sites identified in Official Community Plan -6- SUBJECT PROPERTIES / I j 1 {I ., . 126 AVE — sir Y Y ►, / ' IL 1.... ` -124A1LE-- . ., I Fk I N f 123 AVE I I f ,Lii,. No SCALE 1:4,000 Cit'•.f Pitt MeaFows_, , e r 23613 124 AVENUE & 12439 237 STREET it , i r do � ID• CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF '�'-�le 'I'", o '' i� • - �t� �, District of ' ' + I �� MAPLE RIDGE British Columbia MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Langley f MJ DATE: Jul 13, 2012 FILE: 2012-074AL BY: PC FRASER ��41 9 B 31'9 0.4174 no P 65342 38 ,45.4 1777 ( 0-3 n N) -34.3 ri 40-4 39. 45, 5r(' 5L3, P 293 5, RP 48145 123 .4„*'- .� RW 53787 r 102 1 P L0 L...) July 13, 2012 District of Maple Ridge 11995 Haney Place Maple Ridge, BC \'2X 6A9 Attention: Mr. Chuck Goddard TPLEPIEIONE : 6041- 4-67-3871 22718 LOU G-Ent-MAY MAPLE FiliDGE, a ,�\2X2V Dear Chuck.: Re: Proposed Gravel Extraction site„ 236th Street/124th Avenue, Maple Ridge On beha If of ourselves and Rae -Glenn Industrial Development and Furl Bremner, please find enclosed the following: 1. Completed notice of intent and aLp LatIo r0 remove soil ft:trin and a cheque for $600 for fees. 2. Consent form and title searches 3. Area context map 4. An aerial photograph of the site showing test pit locations and a typical cross section 5. Summary of test log pits prepared hy Valley Geolechnical Engineering Sen,ices Ltd. The intent would he to remove gravel from .the area north of the Collo Creek, with dissects the site. There is little to no topsoil in this aica which is underlain with gravel as shown on the Valley Geotechnical Ltd.'s test nits- - Gravel removal would be via 124th Avenue and west to 232 Street, We estimate there is about 400,000 cubic meters of gravel that could he removed. We expect this to he over a 2-3 year period. 'To remove the gravel the existing driveway across Collo Creek would have to he widened and upgraded. This would include; a temporary loss of riparian habitat. A gravel driveway would then extend southwards as shown on the attached sketch. 'The north area, upon completion of gravel removal, would be reclitimed and topsoil placed to allow for agricultural use. The creek area and lands to the south would he restored .to their existing condition. If permission was granted to remove gravel we expect that suitable securities would he required, both by the Commission and the District, to ensure that the remedial .works would be completed to everyone's satisfaction. We trust the above is in order. Yours very truly-, Telep Donada.Indu.tries Ltd. cc, AIX, Rae -Glenn industrial 'Development tie Earl Bremer SOIL REMOVAL BYLAW NO. 6398 - 2006 SCHEDULE A Pursuant to S.6, the commercial removal of soil for sale is permitted on the following lands in the annual quantities set out: Legal Description of Lands Annual Quantitv 1. District Lot 5326, Group 1, and N.W.D. except parts subdivided by Plan 77454, Plan 85044 and Plan LMP 13975. Parcel C, (Exp. Plan 7858) North West Quarter Section 26, Township 12 except part shown on Highway Plan 51582 and part subdivided by Plan 65044, NWD 50,000 cubic metres 2. Parcel A, (Reference Plan 3015) of the 50,000 cubic metres South West Quarter of Section 25, Township 12, Except Parcel One (Reference Plan 17316) N.W.D. 3. Lot 1, District Lot 5326, Group 1, NWD, Plan LMP 13975 200,000 cubic metres 4. Lot 1, South East Quarter, Section 10,, Limits Not Applicable Township 12, Plan 12923, N.W.D. Lot 2, South East Quarter, Section 10, Townsh). 12, Plan 12923. N.W.D. rr O;m ��5 o �Z M N . X (��G� O 2 AVE 128 ____ys_y-c- AVE N N N L is 1-1 �_ ' r N g DNEY TRUNK RD ■ j— I t71 1. I o e N �e oa Gee 112 AVE ` 4a 112 AVE 7t n 01 4it` A G m anaka Crea L N if111 `` =1111. The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge mims A makes no guarantee regarding the accuracy o 102E \ N 1 I 1oc or present status of the information shown on this map. i. N Scale: 1:43,000 Cit' •f Pitt Mea aows'; Designated Lands Under Soil Removal Bylaw � �. Ic Nam _ 1 11 r i1. I.o agisiL i `�Ivffra1 ate- ""�'' 'S w CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF i al4 L 1 ; , gym. =- =+r ti r I _ _ �`' � I o MAPLE RIDGE MAPLE RIDGE > District of _�7 j British Columbia PLANNING DEPARTMENT Langley �� _1 DATE: Sep 20, 2012 FILE: 6398-2006 BY: DT FRASER 13,____,--- �� 110iSSN 4.0 I s6 Z (} / CA 0 / 2 ® \ ALBION WASTE TRANSFER STATION / RECYCLING DEPOT A•■1 0®8® MAPLE RI❑GE Dr it t...1 CutariL,, Dreg Roots Crear2r I-eig its TO: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council Committee of the Whole FROM: Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Disbursements for the month ended August 31, 2012 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 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 August 31, 2012 now be approved". GENERAL $ 17,518,398 PAYROLL $ 1,687,017 PURCHASE CARD $ 112,080 $ 19,317,495 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. c) Business Plan / Financial Implications: Highlights of larger items included in Financial Plan or Council Resolution • G.V. Water District - water consumption May 30 - Jun 26/12 • Keywest Asphalt - 232 Street road improvements • The municipality acts as the collection agency for other levels agencies. The following collections were remitted in August. 1. BC Assessment Authority 2. G.V. Sewerage & Drainage 3. G.V. Regional District 4. South Coast BC Transportation d) Policy Implications: $ 542,925 $ 337,769 of government or $ 896,645 $ 5,458,351 $ 833,729 $ 5,500,420 Approval of the disbursements by Council is in keeping with corporate governance practice. CONCLUSIONS: The disbursements for the month ended August 31, 2012 have been reviewed and are in order. Prepared by: G'Ann Rygg Accounting Clerk II Approved by: Trevor Thompson, BBA, CGA Manager of Financial Planning Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA GM - Corporate & Financial Services Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer gmr VENDOR NAME 946235 BC Ltd A T & H Industries Inc Accent Glass Ltd Anderson & Thompson Art.Site BC Assessment Authority BC Hydro BC SPCA Brook Pooni Associates Inc CUPE Local 622 Chevron Canada Ltd City Of Pitt Meadows Columbia Bitulithic Ltd Commercial Solutions Inc Corix Water Products Crown Contracting Limited Delcan Corporation Downtown Maple Ridge Business Equity Valuation & Consulting Exp Services Inc First West Credit Union GP Rollo & Associates Ltd GMG Homes Ltd Gr Vanc Sewerage & Drainage Greater Vanc Water District Greater Vancouver Regional Dis Hapa Collaborative Imperial Paving Jack 4 Trade Keywest Asphalt Ltd Manulife Financial CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS - AUGUST 2012 DESCRIPTION OF PAYMENT Roadside mowing Gravel & dump fees Glass services: Bylaws Davidson caretaker house Fire Department Hammond Community Centre Hammond Stadium Leisure Centre Municipal Hall Rental Properties RCM P Tower Whonnock Lake Centre Security refund Public art project 224 St & Lougheed Hwy 2012 requisition Electricity Contract payment June District Lands - Town Centre Dues - pay periods 12/15, 12/16 & 12/17 Gasoline & Diesel fuel Police Services cost share adjustment Parks & Leisure cost share adjustment Parks & Leisure cost share insurance Pitt Meadows Rec. Centre Telus charges Duraphalt Firefighters' turnout gear Waterworks supplies Pedestrian signal at 240 St. & Hill Ave. Pedestrian signal at 224 St & 121 Ave 232 St. bridge over North Alouette River 50% BIA funding Abernethy Way - 210 500m E Blackstock 128 Avenue Highway widening predesign Property tax overpayment refund Commercial Industrial Strategy Security refund 2012 requisition Transfer station waste disposal Water consumption May 30 - June 26/12 2012 requisition Mosquito control program Landscape architectural services - Cedar Park Landscape architectural services - Deer Fern Park Roadworks Lions Park play surface Memorial Peace Park Drainage Volker Park play surface 232 Street road improvements Employee benefits premiums 93 80 192 42 142 248 119 322 1,525 81 22,116 7,827 7,741 68,474 1,587 36,414 7,312 5,458,351 1,692 833,729 2,306 8,181 7,722 8,733 3,241 12,315 AMOUNT 18,563 27,112 24,960 123,724 24,640 896,645 114,656 27,527 18,058 36,356 90,994 85,629 18,970 18,909 23,932 43,726 19,106 97,256 58,380 26,795 32,827 20,715 37,521 5,460,043 542,925 836,035 15,903 26,451 24,289 337,769 133,033 Maple Ridge & PM Arts Council Maridge Properties Ltd Matcon Civil Constructors Inc McEachern Harris & Brown Medical Services Plan Municipal Pension Plan BC Newlands Lawn & Garden Mainten Paul Bunyan Tree Services Plan Group Inc Raincity Janitorial Sery Ltd Receiver General For Canada Remdal Painting & Restoration RG Arenas (Maple Ridge) Ltd RGH Pacific Emergency Services Ridge Meadows Recycling Society South Coast BC Transportation Suttle Recreation Inc Telus Total Energy Systems Ltd Urban Systems Warrington PCI Management Arts Centre contract payment Aug Program revenue July Public Art Management Agreement Security refund Grant Hill development Security refund Employee medical & health premiums Employee benefits premiums Grass cutting Roadside overhead brushing Tree removal at various locations RCMP communication cable upgrade Janitorial services: Firehalls Library Municipal Hall Operations Randy Herman Building RCMP South Bonson Community Centre Employer/Employee remit PP12/16 & PP12/17 RCMP cell block mattresses Painting & pressure washing: Davidson Pool caretaker house Library Maple Ridge fairground Municipal Hall Pitt Meadows Family Rec. Centre Randy Herman Building Ice rental July Curling rink operating expenses June Emergency Traffic Pre-Empt Monthly contract for recycling Aug Weekly recycling Litter pick-up contract Solar cone subsidy program Depot mechanical truck dock leveler 2012 requisition Core Park playground equipment Telephone services July & August Maintenance: Hammond Community Centre Leisure Centre Library Municipal Hall Operations Pitt Meadows Family Rec. Centre Pitt Meadows Heritage Hall Randy Herman Building RCM P South Bonson Community Centre Traffic calming policy Transportation master plan Advance for Tower common costs Tower expenses July 48,007 6,105 7,500 12,382 4,194 6,637 6,423 3,264 3,150 4,638 3,320 4,223 670,930 1,885 2,890 12,219 5,575 765 238 207 57,359 2,195 104,180 358 1,848 5,689 5,764 1,882 4,879 585 4,384 218 -49 729 10,738 347 3,377 8,999 9,275 60,000 14,955 61,612 74,696 61,337 32,796 33,560 357,326 20,059 16,576 18,291 31,655 672,815 21,894 59,554 21,605 117,839 5,500,420 17,345 16,621 27,089 18,274 74,955 Wilco Civil Inc Young, Anderson - Barristers Deer Fern Park construction Cedar Park construction Professional fees June 8,633 35,064 43,697 20,148 Disbursements In Excess $15,000 16,583,610 Disbursements Under $15,000 934,788 Total Payee Disbursements 17,518,398 Payroll PP12/16 & PP12/17 1,687,017 Purchase Cards - Payment 112,080 Total Disbursements August 2012 19,317,495 GMR \\mr.corp\docs\Fin\05-Finance\1630-Accts-Payable\01-General\AP Disbursements\2012\[Monthly_Council_Report_2012.xlsx]AUG'12 -40 MAPLE RIDGE 9riF Ih Gciumh'u District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 1, 2012 and Members of Council FILE NO: CDPR-0640-30 FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW SUBJECT: Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre - Phase 1 Hatchery Component EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Kanaka Education + Environmental Partnership Society (KEEPS) is seeking financial support to rebuild the Bell -Irving Hatchery and complete the Kanaka Watershed Stewardship Centre. On March 27, 2012, Council heard a presentation from KEEPS and, Mr. Gaetan Royer, Manager, Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks, Metro Vancouver in support of this project. KEEPS is actively fundraising to complete the Stewardship Centre and has secured substantial financial contributions from various agencies to rebuild the hatchery (phase 1). They are now seeking a commitment from the District of Maple Ridge in the amount of $30,000. RECOMMENDATION: That an amount of $30,000 to the Pacific Parklands Foundation to put towards the Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre - Phase 1, Hatchery Component be approved. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: KEEPS and Metro Vancouver presented information to Council in March of this year on a proposed design for Kanaka Centre which will replace the Bell Irving Hatchery. On September 5, 2012 the hatchery was demolished as it had aged beyond repair after providing thirty years of service. Following the Spring presentation, the District received further communication from Metro Vancouver Parks in July advising that the detailed design for Phase 1 of the new hatchery was completed and that fundraising commitments were confirmed from Metro Vancouver, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Pacific Salmon Foundation and KEEPS with its fundraiser, Pacific Parklands Foundation. In that correspondence, Metro Vancouver Parks has asked the District to contribute $30,000 toward this project and in further discussions, asked that any donation be directed to the Pacific the Parklands Foundation which is a fundraising arm of Metro Vancouver Regional Parks. If approved, this financial contribution will bring KEEPS to the $250,000 fundraising target required to begin construction of Phase 1 of the Kanaka Centre Project which includes the hatchery component. b) Desired Outcome: To assist KEEPS in achieving its goal of building the new hatchery and enabling them to continue to offer the environmental programs and services that will protect our watershed. c) Strategic Alignment: This project addresses Council's environmental strategic alignment to lead in preserving and enhancing the community's quality of life, air, water and land. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: The Stewardship Centre and hatchery provide outdoor recreation and volunteer opportunities for all ages. KEEPS has a strong partnership with School District No. 42 to provide youth, in particular, with opportunities to learn about and contribute to the betterment of our environment. The centre also draws visitors from all over the world. e) Business Plan/Financial Implications: Funding in the amount of $30,000 is available to allocate from Gaming Revenue for capital improvements. f) Policy Implications: The use of Gaming Revenue fits the guidelines set in the Gaming Revenue Policy as it is one- time in nature and is or assists with a capital investment which benefits the community. g) Alternatives: An alternative is to decline participation in this project. The implication of this alternative would be a delay in construction of the project until fundraising targets can be met. CONCLUSIONS: The work conducted by KEEPS and its partners has been of great value to the District of Maple Ridge and the region. They have demonstrated the capacity to attract volunteers, obtain funding and to keep their programs and centre operating for the past three decades. If approved, this financial commitment will assist KEEPS in achieving their budget of $250,000 which will enable construction of the new hatchery and the ongoing provision of related programs and services. Prepared by: Kelly Swift, General Manager, Community Development, Parks & Recreation Services Reviewed by: Trevor Thompson, BBA, CGA Manager of Financial Planning Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer ks:ik References: KEEPS Brochure Presentation to Maple Ridge Council, March 27, 2012-09-23 http_://mapleridge. mediasite.com/Med iasite/SilverlightPlayer/Default.aspx?peid=1f92d26523a741b39560d4ba86a14cce1d\ Letter from Metro Vancouver 2012-07-06 Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Tel. 604 432-6350 Fax 604 432-6296 July 6, 2012 File: AD -04 -01 -PE Mr, Jim Rule, Chief Administrative Officer District of Maple Ridge 11995 Haney Place Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9 Dear Mr. Rule: Re: Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre — Phase 1, Hatchery Component As you know, detailed design for Phase 1 of the Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre, the new hatchery, is completed. We are preparing the tender documents now. I am pleased to advise that fundraising for Phase 1 has made great progress since our March 27, 2012 presentation to Council. Contributions are confirmed from Metro Vancouver ($75k), Department of Fisheries and Oceans ($45k), the Pacific Salmon Foundation ($50k), and Kanaka Education and Environmental Partnership Society (KEEPS) with its fund raiser, Pacific Parklands Foundation, ($50k). A commitment of $30,000 from the District of Maple Ridge would achieve our budget target of $250,000 and allow construction to start this summer. To facilitate the District's co tribution Metro Vancouver could receive the funds in two payments of $15,000 each in 2013 and ,2 4. In addition, Metro Vancouver backs any over expenditure. The Kanaka Creek (Bell -Irving) Hatchery has supported twenty-five years of successful fish culture, public programming and community stewardship. The partners in the Kanaka Creek Stewardship Centre, an expanded facility to grow public engagement opportunities, appreciate the District's active involvement in this important regional and community initiative. I look forward to your confirmation of this financial arrangement. Yours truly, Gaetan Royer, Manager Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks GR/WD/dk cc: Dave Smith, Co -Chair, Kanaka Creek Education and Environmental Partnership Society (KEEPS) Wendy DaDalt, Parks East Area Manager 6326750 11450 - 256th St. Maple Ridge, B.C. V2W 1F11 Hello we are The Kanaka Education + Environmental Partnership Society (KEEPS) and we are seeking in kind and financial support towards the rebuild of Bell -Irving Hatchery and completion of the Kanaka Watershed Stewardship Center. The spirit of the Kanaka resonates as the Creek tumbles and flows downstream to the mighty Fraser. Over 360,000 annual visitors help celebrate the magnificence and splendor of Kanaka Creek Regional Park. Metro Vancouver has partnered with Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and KEEPS around the Bell -Irving Hatchery to sustain the creek's productivity, salmon species, resident stock populations and raise public awareness of environmental issues. Incorporated in 1998, KEEPS has taken community stewardship to the next level, primarily by way of providing structured grade specific environmental education programs to over 30,000 participants since 2002. A number of our "graduates" have gone on to pursue careers in the environmental field. In addition to our school programs, we also conduct annual community outreach events and celebrations such as the spring Goodbye Chums salmon fry release, Rivers Day, the October Return of the Salmon event, Salmon in the Classroom Program. Some students even arrive by canoe to participate in our Environmental Education program. The Bell -Irving Hatchery has contributed 7,369,030 salmonids to Kanaka Creek and also sent salmon fry to 7 other watersheds annually since its conversion from a former animal barn in 1983. As programming expanded in Kanaka Creek Regional Park, the hatchery became a headquarters for educational and outreach work in addition to its role as a productive hatchery. The success of the educational and salmon enhancement programs over the years finds the facility too outdated and problematic to properly accommodate current operations and is structurally inadequate for expansion. Kanaka Centre will be a place for a diversity of people, interests, and expertise to meet, share insights, and make connections, through workshops, research and working together to accomplish shared objectives. The ongoing benefits will also be realized in broad-based public awareness and overall improved stewardship of Kanaka Creek Watershed. The cumulative value gained through direct experience, research, and programs will be widely shared with the aim of benefiting the understanding and efforts of stewardship and fish production throughout the Lower Mainland and beyond. Kanaka Centre will be a venue to conduct workshops, seminars, meetings and events and to continue existing salmon enhancement activities and interpretive programs. Programming goals include: • Environmental education, outdoor recreation, health and wellness and nature appreciation, especially of local ecological and geological features utilizing KCRP, Kanaka Creek and its tributaries, Blue Mountain Provincial Forest, and District of Maple Ridge parks and trails. • Expansion of the naturalization and habitat restoration projects through hands-on student and volunteer engagement. • Rearing of salmonids for stocking creeks throughout Metro Vancouver, and for use by schools for in -class education. • Watershed research designed and overseen by professional researchers and academics involving students at all levels. • Interpretation of salmon biology and survival, recreational fishing, habitat and land use relationships, including engaging developers, landowners, and the resource sectors in adopting best practices related to streams and habitat protection. • Showcase the green technologies embodied in Kanaka Centre as a model for homeowners and those in the construction and development industries. • Lead and demonstrate citizen engagement, the building of social capital, and grass roots stewardship in the Kanaka Creek Watershed and Kanaka Creek Regional Park. Specifically, we are seeking commitments and support from local businesses, organizations and individuals that will help us achieve this goal. Although we presently have a considerable financial contribution already in place, additional assistance from the community will be required in order to complete the project. Tax receipts are available. So we are asking for some of your time, services, supplies, funds or donations in kind, in order to help us achieve our Bell — Irving Hatchery Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre facility. Please view our website to see more about KEEPS -- www.keeps.orq We thank you for your consideration, we look forward to sharing the Kanaka dream. Sincerely Yours, Dave Smith, KEEPS Chair Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre Kanaka Creek Regional Park, Maple Ridge, B.C. j .., a new Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre (Kanaka Centre): a centre of education, stewardship, community engagement and research for the entire Kanaka Creek Watershed, anchored by a new salmon rearing facility. The Kanaka Centre will provide a base of operation to continue promoting watershed stewardship and grassroots engagement as well as deliver environmental education, and outreach activities. Building on current success, education and habitat restoration projects and salmon Aging Belt-h-ving Hatchery rearing activities, hands-on experiences will continue to be provided. The Kanaka Centre will be a place for a diversity of people, interests and expertise to meet and share insights and make connections through workshops, research and working together to accomplish shared objectives. The ongoing benefits will also be realized in broad-based public awareness and overall improved stewardship of the Kanaka Creek Watershed. The benefits gained through direct experiences will be widely shared and directly touch thousands of children and adults throughout the Lower Mainland. New v ~pad-fienv The Kanaka Centre concept evolved through shared interests and collaborative activities of three organizations working together to manage fish production, education programming and watershed stewardship in Kanaka Creek Regional Park (KCRP) - the Kanaka Education and Environmental Partnership Society (KEEPS), Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and Metro Vancouver. The working relationship established by these three is an extraordinary example of collaboration between government agencies and a grassroots organization. They have been working together at this site for decades and have built a remarkable community and education focused program that is bursting at the seams and needs a new home. They will continue working together through fund-raising and construction to opening day and into the future operating an exciting education, fish production and watershed stewardship centre. Pro' The existing programs are attracting some 10,000 participants (students, group tours, events, volunteers) per year and are growing. The Kanaka Centre will be a venue to conduct additional workshops, seminars, meetings and events and to continue existing salmon enhancement activities and interpretive programs. Programming goals include: • Environmental education, outdoor recreation, health and wellness and nature appreciation, especially of local ecological and geological features utilizing KCRP, Kanaka Creek and its tributaries, Blue Mountain Provincial Forest, and District of Maple Ridge parks and trails; • Expansion of the naturalization and habitat restoration projects through hands-on student and volunteer engagement; • Rearing of salmonids for stocking creeks throughout Metro Vancouver, and for "Salmonids in the Classroom". Almost 8 million fish have been released from the hatchery to date; • Watershed research involving students at all levels. designed and overseen by professional researchers and academics; • Interpretation of salmon biology and survival, recreational fishing, habitat and land use relationships including engaging developers, landowners, and the resource sectors in adopting best practices related to streams and habitat protection; • Showcasing the green technologies embodied in Kanaka Centre as a model for homeowners and those in the construction and development industries; • Leading and demonstrating citizen engagement, the building of social capital, and grass roots stewardship. oPt,oreildlittefr For thousands of years Kanaka Creek has attracted people to its marshland, forests, fish laden pools, sandstone canyons and waterfalls and continues to draw and inspire visitors. In 2010, the Park welcomed 362,000 visitors. The Bell -Irving Hatchery has served for nearly 30 years as an attraction to the Park, an educational facility, a meeting place, an event location, and an office, as well as a highly productive hatchery. Public appreciation of watershed stewardship, environmental education, and the outdoor spaces protected within the Park has steadily increased n�f sn • } nn? �.►�"' •�� .. demands on the current facility. The hatchery facility is a limiting factor to public programs and has aged beyond repair. The Kanaka Centre responds to increased public interest and anticipates the future by providing: • Expanded and flexible space for educational and interpretative programming; local exhibits and events; and visitor reception; • A demonstration of environmental solutions, sustainable and efficient building and landscape technologies that could be used by residents, business owners, and community and regional planners; • A place of social capacity building and community engagement for groups to meet, network, and collaborate on the gamut of watershed stewardship issues and activities — engaging developers, landowners, and the resource sector in adopting best practices related to streams and habitat protection. • 1s. 4 rs�'h'SG `k . r is • Guided experiences of the watershed and enhanced connections to the Park for rapidly expanding local and Lower Mainland populations; • A facility that reflects its natural setting and complements the activities and vision; • Expanded discovery and learning for children, youth and schools on ecological health, fish culture, habitat enhancement and stream and forest ecology. The proposed Kanaka Centre is designed for hands-on education where students can participate in egg takes, conduct water quality testing, survey stream invertebrates and restore habitat with interpreters. The Kanaka Centre is intended as an immersive and highly engaging place with a strong connection to the natural environment. Two buildings connected by a pedestrian walkway will be built on the site of the existing Bell -Irving Hatchery. The lower building (Hatchery) will have open-air workspace around the hatchery troughs, sheltered from the wind and rain. Its interior space will house the incubation, wet storage rooms and a versatile workshop. The upper building (Stewardship Building) will be mostly enclosed, containing a flex -space classroom with outdoor porch, meeting room, exhibits, dry storage and office space for KEEPS, the Hatchery staff and Metro Vancouver park interpreters. The buildings will be visually interesting, with large windows providing natural light and views, encouraging visitors to discover the surrounding nature that awaits. Future expansion and many site enhancements can be accommodated within this design. The Kanaka Centre is designed to be as green as possible, minimizing impacts to the environment and demonstrating practical solutions for rainwater management, energy conservation, use of natural light and modeling environmental best practices for development. Native plants and creek access will be integrated along with viewing and picnic areas, an outdoor classroom, constructed wetlands, compost, and sustainable grey and black water treatment. N.., Yo,n _o.. . L hR.nt He. G7erd Pdh. 5% Grade. ....tivornal Accost .w Yu hn -o.fox.,.ornL, ns.hts/ YW� Future Roof 78 HOt y7bQ/TOPOfsba A. 763 n, Pdb/ WmC Moor Gob /PO/NY 77Am ConerooelOnraRqpronan. Li. SPoco G® War Roorn Glos Tertacm Grovol hal 7Vm Picic rs+ Mx.h..r Moir WC Rad Una/ none d.bewer Meleollhp ROdn AbQA LAIOR� ,( Stewardship Building 7a Proposed Hatchery Re -Build (2012) Proposed Watershed Stewardship Centre li Fo uri,dL - Partners - 114,0e..411 metriCt6o MOM Fisheries and Oceans Peches et Oceans 'Z Vancouver tn _ F _ J , Canada Canada S uppartiny, Pa rtnerk Pacific Parklands FOUNDATION An estimated $1.3 million will be needed to complete the Kanaka Centre ready for move -in. Metro Vancouver has made a $500,000 commitment to the project and the Pacific Salmon Foundation has committed $50,000 toward the immediate replacement of the Bell -Irving Hatchery building. The next steps include final design and working drawings for the Stewardship Building. Construction can begin once our fund-raising targets have been met. �V PACIFIC SALMON VoxuAi.. add your name to this list!