HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-02 Committee of the Whole Agenda and Reports.pdfCity of Maple Ridge
Note: If required, there will be a 15-minute break at 3:00 p.m.
Chair: Acting Mayor
1.DELEGATIONS/STAFF PRESENTATIONS – (10 minutes each)
1:00 p.m.
1.1 Festivals Update and Preview
•Kathryn Baird, Festivals and Volunteer Coordinate
•Yvonne Chu, Arts and Community Connections
2.PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council
Agenda:
1101 2016-040-RZ, 12080 228 Street, RS-1 to R-3
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 7237-2016 to rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to RS-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit future
subdivision into 3 single family residential lots be given first reading and that
the applicant provide further information as described on Schedule B of the
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information
required for an Intensive Residential Development Permit and a Subdivision
application.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
May 2, 2016
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. The meeting is live
streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge.
Note: Owners and/or Agents of Development Applications may be permitted
to speak to their applications with a time limit of 10 minutes.
Committee of the Whole Agenda
May 2, 2016
Page 2 of 4
1102 2015-275-RZ, 23227 Dogwood Avenue, Temporary Use Permit
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015 to permit a temporary
parking lot to serve the existing Black Sheep Pub be given second reading and
be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1103 2015-361-RZ, Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment, “1 km rule” for Wine Stores in
Grocery Stores
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 7190-2015 establishing a 1 kilometre distance rule for
all future alcohol beverage retailers in Maple Ridge be given second reading
and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1104 2014-054-SD, 23590 Dogwood Avenue, Local Area Service Bylaw
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that a Local Area Service
Bylaw be authorized for enhanced landscape maintenance costs and that
Dogwood Ridge Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7246-2016 be given first,
second and third readings.
1105 2011-002-RZ, 25608 Bosonworth Avenue, Final One Year Extension
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that a final one year extension
be granted for rezoning application 2011-002-RZ to rezone from A-2 (Upland
Agricultural) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to allow for future
subdivision into 3 lots.
1106 2012-102-RZ, 25638 112 Avenue, Final One Year Extension
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that a final one year extension
be granted for rezoning application 2012-102-RZ to rezone from RS-3 (One
Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to allow
for future subdivision into 4 lots and create 1 remnant RS-3 (One
Family Rural Residential) lot.
Committee of the Whole Agenda
May 2, 2016
Page 3 of 4
1107 Award of Contract ITT-EN16-23: 128 Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and
Drainage Improvements (216 Street to 224 Street)
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that Contract ITT-EN16-23,
128 Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and Drainage Improvements (216 Street to
224 Street) be awarded to B & B Contracting (2012) Ltd., that a construction
contingency be approved, that the ISL Engineering and Land Services Ltd.
contract for Engineering Design Services from 128 Avenue (Abernethy Way)
from 210 Street to 224 Street be amended, that the Financial Plan be
amended and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the
contracts.
1108 North and South Alouette Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis Phase 2
- Technical Investigations Completion Final Report
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that the “North and South
Alouette Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis Phase 2 - Technical
Investigations Completion Final Report” be endorsed.
3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131
4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES
1151 Award of Contract, 2016/2017 Mowing Services
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 recommending that the Option “B” proposal
for mowing services for 2016 from Horizon Landscape Contractors be
approved.
5. ADMINISTRATION
1171 Joint Airport Mediation Next Steps Strategy
Staff report dated May 2, 2016 providing information on joint meetings
between the City of Maple Ridge and the City of Pitt Meadows with respect to
the airport and Parks and Recreation Services.
6. CORRESPONDENCE
1181
Committee of the Whole Agenda
May 2, 2016
Page 4 of 4
7. OTHER ISSUES
1191
8. ADJOURNMENT
9. COMMUNITY FORUM
Checked by:________________ Date: ________________
COMMUNITY FORUM
The Community Forum provides the public with an opportunity to speak with
Council on items that are of concern to them, with the exception of Public Hearing
by-laws that have not yet reached conclusion.
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.
Council will not tolerate any derogatory remarks directed at Council or staff
members.
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
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-040-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First reading
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7237-2016
12080 228 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property, located at 12080 228 Street, from
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit future
subdivision into 3 single family residential lots. To proceed further with this application additional
information is required as outlined below. Due to its location within the Town Centre, this application
is exempt from the Community Amenity Contribution Program.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7237-2016 be given first reading; and
That the applicant provides further information as described on Schedule B of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999, along with the information required for an Intensive Residential
Development Permit and a Subdivision application.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Applicant: Baljinder Sidhu
Owner: Baljinder Sidhu
Legal Description: Lot: 302, Section 20, Township 12, New Westminster District
Plan 44858
OCP:
Existing: Single Family Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Proposed: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Single Family Residential
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Ground Oriented Multi-Family
1101
- 2 -
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Single Family Residential
West: Use: Multi-family Residential
Zone: RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
Designation: Low Rise Apartment
Existing Use of Property: Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Residential
Site Area: 0.104 HA. (0.25 acres)
Access: 228 Street
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
b)Site Characteristics:
The subject property is approximately 0.104 ha. (0.25 acres) in size, is generally flat, and is bound by
single family residential properties to the north, east and south, with 228 Street and a condominium
complex to the west (see Appendix A and B).
c)Project Description:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit future subdivision into three lots
and a lane in the back. The proposed lots will be a minimum of 286 m2 and the lane is proposed to
be 6.9m wide on this property, leaving 0.6m to be integrated into the lane during development of the
adjacent property 12081 Greenwell Street.
A temporary Statutory Right-of-Way will be required to get registered over the proposed middle lot, to
establish temporary access to the rear lane, until such time an adjacent property is developing and
providing access. This proposal is consistent with the other development applications in the block,
and aligns with the concept plan envisioned for this block.
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official
Community Plan (OCP) 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, OCP designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for
further development permits.
d) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The subject property is designated Single Family Residential in the Town Centre Area Plan, Section
10.4 of the OCP. This designation provides options for increasing density and choice of housing
form, while retaining the single-family character in established neighbourhood blocks. The R-3
(Special Amenity Residential District) zone is compatible with this designation. Furthermore, the
current proposal is consistent with the following policies of the Town Centre Area Plan:
Policy 3-17 To enable some densification in areas designated for Single-Family Residential,
Maple Ridge will consider:
a.A Detached Garden Suite, subject to consistency with the Maple Ridge
Detached Garden Suites policy;
- 3 -
b. A Secondary Suite within a principle single-family use dwelling, subject to
consistency with the existing Maple Ridge Secondary Suite Bylaws.
c. Lot size of 213 m2 to 370m2 is permitted, where vehicle access is from a
rear lane only…
Policy 5-9 Maple Ridge will encourage the retention of laneways and the creation of new
laneways should be considered, where appropriate and feasible.
The proposal as submitted complies with the intent of the OCP.
Community Amenity Contribution Program:
On March 14, 2016, Council approved the Community Amenity Contribution Program Policy. As
stated in Section 3 of the policy, properties within the Town Centre Area Plan boundaries are exempt
from the CAC Program (except where Council applies the provisions of Section 8 of the policy, where
applications seeking an extension under Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, may be
subject to the city-wide community amenity contribution program at the discretion of Council).
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 12080 228 Street from RS-1
(One Family Urban Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit future
subdivision into three lots and a lane in the back. The minimum lot size for the current RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential) zone is 668m2, and the minimum lot size for the proposed R-3 (Special
Amenity Residential District) zone is 213 m2. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed
zone will require a Development Variance Permit application.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.8 of the OCP, an Intensive Residential Development Permit application is
required to ensure the current proposal provides emphasis on high standards in aesthetics and
quality of the built environment, while protecting important qualities of the natural environment.
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) Fire Department;
c) Building Department;
d) School District;
e) Utility companies; and
f) Canada Post.
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. This evaluation will take
place between first and second reading.
- 4 -
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);
2.An Intensive Residential Development Permit Application; and
3.A Subdivision Application.
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 OCP, therefore, it is recommended that
Council grant first reading subject to additional information being provided and assessed prior to
second reading.
The proposed layout has 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 City of Maple Ridge’s Approving Officer.
“Original signed by Therese Melser”_______________
Prepared by: Therese Melser
Planning Technician
“Original signed by Christine Carter”________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter”______________for_
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”____________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7237-2016
Appendix D – Proposed Subdivision Plan
DATE: Feb 22, 2016
2016-040-RZ
BY: JV
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
´
Scale: 1:1,500
12080 228 Street
2011 ImageLegend
Indefinite Creek
River Centreline
Major Rivers & Lakes
APPENDIX A
DATE: Feb 22, 2016
2016-040-RZ
BY: JV
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
´
Scale: 1:1,500
12080 228 Street
2011 Image
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011
Legend
Indefinite Creek
Major Rivers & Lakes
APPENDIX B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7237-2016
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 City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7237-2016."
2.That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 302 Section 20 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 44858
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1671 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District).
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 , 20
READ a second time the day of , 20
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20
READ a third time the day of , 20
ADOPTED, the day of , 20
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
PURDEY AVE.228 ST.PURDEY AVE.228 ST.12094
/9212128
12120
12040
22745/4712154
12109
12105
12141
12155
12050
12065
12147
12091
12151
12115 12135
12140
12105
12121
12125
12065/75/85/95
12131
12092
12139
12053
2289012078
12080
2288112120
22773/872288812145
12095
12130
12143
12070
12090
12037
12157
12041
12055
12110
228072283912150
228702288012112
12087
12064
12041 2288212160
12103
2287112081 2287212115
12140N 50' 5
250
240
3
339
300
E 1/2 A244
237
337
Rem.
320
331
18
238
245
340
Rem. N 130' of 2 318
A
301
N 1/2 6
242
299
319
B
Rem. 5
332
316
401
228
402 251
315
260
S 1/2 6
2
Rem. W1/2 A17
1
261
326
338
317
246
1
295
336
3021
1
235
A
226
337
247
Rem. 2
B
241
B
A
249
262
296
236
227
327
327
239 248
252
S 1/2 7
Rem.
297
225
338
N70' N130' of 2
2
294
243 P 44292P 44292P 11644P 44292
*PP083LMP 6030P 44858
*PP091P 17221P 46282EP 12239P 47804
*PP090
LMP 4065
P 68638
P 44858LMP 1505
P 56987
BCS 3189
P 62211
LMP 26553P 44858
P 51371P 8333P 52750
P 67081
P 77489P 11845P 77596P 52578P 52578R
W
8
0
2
4
3
EP 44294228 ST.GREENWELL ST.SCALE 1:1,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
7237-20161671
APPENDIX D
- 1 -
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-275-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015
23227 Dogwood Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Temporary Use Permit application has been received for the subject property, located at 23227
Dogwood Avenue, to permit a temporary parking lot to serve the existing Black Sheep Pub, located to
the south of the subject property. Council granted first reading and considered the early
consultation requirements for the Official Community Plan (OCP) Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015,
on October 27, 2015.
A text amendment to Appendix D - Temporary Use Permits of the Official Community Plan (OCP) is
proposed to allow a temporary parking lot on the subject property.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1)That, in accordance with Section 475 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. 7176-2015, as amended in the Council report dated May 2, 2016, on the municipal
website and requiring that the applicant host a Development Information Meeting (DIM), and
Council considers it unnecessary to provide any further consultation opportunities, except by way
of holding a Public Hearing on the bylaw;
2)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015, as amended in the Council report
dated May 2, 2016, be considered in conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste
Management Plan;
3)That it be confirmed that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015, as amended
in the Council report dated May 2, 2016, is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and
Waste Management Plan;
4)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015, as amended in the Council report
dated May 2, 2016, be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
5)That the following terms and condition be met prior to final reading:
i)Amendment to Official Community Plan Appendix D – Temporary Use Permits, to add the
subject property to the list of properties; and
ii)A refundable security equivalent to 100% of the estimated landscape cost will be provided
to ensure satisfactory provision of landscaping and retaining wall with acoustical barrier, in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Temporary Use Permit.
1102
- 2 -
DISCUSSION:
1)Background Context:
Applicant: David Ho
Owner: Beta Enterprises Ltd.
Legal Description: Lot 1, Section 28, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan LMP46534,
Except: Plan BCP39158
OCP:
Existing: Commercial
Proposed: Commercial, Temporary Off-Street Parking Use
Zoning:
Existing: C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial)
Proposed: C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Estate Suburban Residential
South: Use: Pub and Liquor Store
Zone: CS-1 (Service Commercial)
Designation: Commercial and Estate Suburban Residential
East: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Estate Suburban Residential
West: Use: Residential (Strata)
Zone: RG-2 (Residential Strata) and RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential)
Designation: Estate Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of Property: Temporary Off-Street Parking Use
Access: Dogwood Avenue
Site Area: 1758 m² (0.43 acres)
Servicing: Urban
2)Site Characteristics:
The subject property is approximately 1758 m² (0.4 acres), and is located on the north-east corner of
232 Street and Dogwood Avenue. It is bordered to the north, east, southeast and southwest by
single family residential developments and the Black Sheep Pub is located to the south (see
Appendices A and B).
3)Project Description:
The subject property had an approved development permit (2012-062-DP) issued on July 11, 2014,
which proposed a mixed-use commercial and residential development that would consist of five
commercial units on the main level, and five rental housing units on the second storey. A text
- 3 -
amendment to the C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) zone was required to allow for the increased
density. However, as substantial construction did not commence within 18 months of approval, this
development permit has expired.
The applicant is now proposing to amend Appendix D - Temporary Use Permits of the Official
Community Plan (OCP) to allow a Temporary Use Permit for off-street parking on the subject property
(see Appendix C). This will provide approximately 58 parking spaces for the Black Sheep Pub ,
located at 12968 232 Street, for up to six years, or until such a time that the owner decides to
redevelop the subject property.
Perimeter landscaping and the acoustical barrier walls proposed under the previously approved
development permit (2012-062-DP) will be provided as a condition of this Temporary Use Permit
(see Appendices D and E). As per Section 497 of the Local Government Act, the Temporary Use
Permit is valid for a period of three years, and can be renewed only once for another period of three
years.
4) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
An OCP amendment is required to add the subject property into Appendix D – Temporary Use
Permits of the OCP. Appendix D of the OCP states the following:
1. Lands in the District may be designated to permit temporary uses if a condition or circumstance
exists that warrants the use for a short period of time but does not warrant a change of land use
designation or zoning of the property.
2. Council has the authority by resolution to issue Temporary Use Permits to allow temporary uses
on specific properties. Council may specify conditions for the temporary use.
3. Designated Temporary Use Permit areas will require guidelines that specify the general
conditions regarding the issuance of permits, the use of the land, and the date the use is to
terminate.
4. As a condition of issuing the permit, Council may require applicants or owners to remove
buildings, to restore the property to a specific condition when the use ends, and to post a
security bond. A permit may be issued for a period of up to three years, and may be renewed
only once.
5. Council may issue Temporary Use Permits to allow:
a) temporary commercial uses, i.e., temporary parking areas; and
b) temporary industrial uses, i.e. soil screening.
6. A Temporary Use Permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of Section 920.2 of the
Local Government Act.
The main difference between rezoning and temporary use permits is the duration of time that the
use is permitted on the property, and the removal and restoration requirements. Under the previous
Rezoning and Development Permit applications, a text amendment was approved to allow off-street
parking for 18 parking spaces for the Black Sheep Pub as a principal use on the subject property;
however these parking spaces were going to be provided in an underground parkade once the
development was constructed. This Temporary Use Permit would temporarily allow the off-street
surface parking as a principal use over the entire property, without a principal building on the
property.
- 4 -
In addition to the Temporary Use Permit for the subject property, amendments to Appendix D of the
OCP are also proposed to add “other temporary uses” under the section that allows Council to issue
Temporary Use Permits, as currently Council may only issue Temporary Use Permits for commercial
or industrial uses, which reflected the Local Government Act language of the day. Other
amendments are of a housekeeping nature and change the Local Government Act reference and
reflect that Maple Ridge is now a City rather than a District.
The bylaw has been amended to add the Permit Area Number “5”, to be in sequential numeric order
within Appendix D of the OCP.
5)Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting was held at 23347 128 Avenue, Yennadon Elementary School,
on March 17, 2016. Six neighbours attended the meeting and supported the temporary parking lot
to help relieve parking congestion along Dogwood Avenue. One letter of support was received from
the public.
6)Interdepartmental Implications:
The Engineering Department has indicated that a Building Permit will be required for the onsite
works which will include a storm sewer connection. Securities for offsite works have already been
collected with the previous rezoning application.
7)Traffic Impact:
The temporary parking lot is intended to alleviate the parking concerns along Dogwood Avenue. The
temporary parking lot could be in use for a potential maximum of up to six years, should the
applicant receive an extension through Council after the first three years for the Temporary Use
Permit. When the subject property redevelops, a covenant is in place to provide 18 parking spaces
for the Black Sheep Pub, located at 12968 232 Street.
8)School District No. 42 Comments:
Pursuant to Section 476 of the Local Government Act, consultation with School District No. 42 is
required at the time of preparing or amending the OCP. A referral was sent to School District No. 42
on November 13, 2015 and no response has been received to date.
9)Local Government Act:
An amendment to the OCP requires the local government to consult with any affected parties and to
adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section 477 of the Local
Government Act. The amendment required for this application, to amend Appendix D - Temporary
Use Permits of the Official Community Plan (OCP) is proposed to allow a Temporary Use Permit on
the subject property, is considered to be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional
consultation beyond existing procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional
District, the Council of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the
Federal and Provincial Governments.
- 5 -
The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste
Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have no impact.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that second reading be given to OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015, and that
application 2015-275-CU be forwarded to Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Michelle Baski”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Michelle Baski, AScT, MA
Planner 1
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015
Appendix D – Site Plan
Appendix E – Proposed Retaining Wall with Acoustical Barrier
DATE: Sep 3, 2015
FILE: 2015-275-CU
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
23227 DOGWOOD AVENUE
DOGWOOD AVE
232 STLegend
!(Ponds
\\Wetlands
GPS Creek Centrelines
Streams & Rivers (Topographic)
Feature Type
Indefinite Creek Centreline
Ditch Centreline
River Centreline
Rivers & Lakes (Topographic)
Feature Type
Lake/Reservoir
River
Major Rivers & Lakes
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Sep 3, 2015
FILE: 2015-275-CU
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
City of Maple Ridge´
Scale: 1:2,000
23227 DOGWOOD AVENUE
(2011 IMAGERY)
DOGWOOD AVE
232 STAPPENDIX B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7176-2015
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE , the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7176-2015."
2.Appendix D. TEMPORARY USE PERMITS, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMITS is amended as
follows:
i.Subsection 1. is amended by replacing the word “District” with the word
“City”
ii.Subsection 5. is amended by adding item c) in correct numerical order:
c)other temporary uses
iii.Subsection 6. is amended by replacing “Section 920.2” with “Section 492”
iv. Subsection 7. Is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
7. The following section lists areas designated for Temporary Uses and
describes the purpose of the use. The described purpose and the
specified general conditions for issuing a Permit for the declared
areas are described as part of the Temporary Use Permit.
3.Appendix D. TEMPORARY USE PERMITS, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended
by the addition of the following, in sequential numeric order:
“Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area Location No.5
Purpose:
To permit temporary off-street parking use with 58 parking spaces for the Black Sheep Pub,
located at 12968 232 Street.
Location:
Those parcels or tracts of land shown on Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area No. 5 map,
and known and described as:
Lot 1 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP46534
EXCEPT: Plan BCP39158”
APPENDIX C
is hereby designated to permit a temporary commercial use for off-street parking, for a
three-year period, effective upon adoption of this bylaw.
4. Appendix D. TEMPORARY USE PERMITS, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended
by the addition of the attached Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area Location No. 5 map,
in sequential numeric order.
5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014, as amended, is hereby
amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 27th day of October, 2015.
READ A SECOND TIME the day of , 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of , 20 .
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 20 .
ADOPTED the day of , 20 .
___________________________________ _____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
DATE: Apr 7, 2016 BY: DT
12892
1296823227 2324223298 23299233032322312854 23199/2331123100
233532315112885 2324123240232642328712888 2317712899
12912 23327231
0
0 23228232452325723236232622321423265232712328023302129 AVE.232 ST.231 ST.232 ST.130 AVE.SL 1
A
P 14790
W 1/2 4*LMP6904NWS 2746
SK 12238
P 20593
E
*PP131P 6337
F
P 58062
21 22
5
L
SL 17
33
P 25708
LMP 46534
2
P 26004
1
C
P 75590
Rem A
G
P 20593
I
P 15594
K
O
2
M
1
SL 2
CP
1
P 15594
P 14790
J
N
P 10938
P 6488P 77424
2
6
Rem. C
3
P 10938
P 77424
BCP 38954
D
P
A
3
P 15594
P 15594
232 ST.DOGWOOD AVE.
Scale: 1:2,000
TEMPORARY COMMERCIAL
USE PERMIT AREA
Location No. 5
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P.L 57.92m ( 190.03 ft.)P.L 30.50m ( 100.07 ft.)TOTAL 58 STALLS AT GRADETOP OF 6 FT. HIGHPRECAST CONCRETE FENCEAND WOOD FENCEON CONC. RETAINING WALLELEV. @ 19.78mTOP OF 6 FT. HIGH WOOD FENCE@ 19.79m58'-0" [17.68 M]42'-1" [12.83 M]TIER 2 TIER 1
EA1.2DA1.2DA1.2190'-0" [57.91 M]ALUMN. GUARDRAILRETAINING WALL
NEW LET DOWNTIER 2TIER 1T.O FIN. GRADE 17.65MSTREET TREES ASPER LANDSCAPEDRAWINGS232 STREET DOGWOOD AVE.EXIST. BRICKCOLUMNSEXIST. DRIVEWAYASPHALTPAVING246844525048545658403836461012`1416182022242628303234425'-0" [1.52 M]100'-1" [30.50 M]
5'-0" [1.53 M]TOP OF 5 FT. HIGHPRECAST CONC.FENCEON CONC. RETAIN. WALLELEV. @ 19.47m42" HIGH MIN.ALUMN. GUARDRAILANCHORED ON TOP OFCONC. RETAIN. WALLELEV. @ 18.15m152'-2" [46.38 M]APPENDIX D
INTERIOR SIDE P.LEXISTING FINISHED GRADEBEYONDEXISTING GRADE ONADJOINING EAST PROPERTYEXTERIOR P.L6'-0" HIGH PRECAST CONCRETEFENCED-D-TIER 2 LEVEL CONCRETE RETAINING WALLFINISHED GRADE BEYOND@ 17.65T.O TIER 2 RETAIN. WALL 17.09T.O TIER 1 RETAIN. WALL 17.95T.O FENCE 19.785'-0" HIGH PRECAST CONCRETEFENCE ON RETAINING WALLMAX. RETAIN. WALLHT. PERMITTED42'-1" [12.83 M]100'-1" [30.51 M]58'-0" [17.68 M]T.O FENCE 19.47M42" HIGH MIN. ALUMN.GUARDRAIL ANCHOREDON TOP OF CONC. RETAININGWALL WITH POSTS AT 48" O.CMAX.FINISHED GRADE BEHINDRETAIN. WALLEXISTING GRADEBEYONDEXISTING GRADE ONADJOINING NORTH PROPERTYCONCRETE RETAINING WALLAS PER STRUCT.INTERIOR P.LEXTERIOR P.LE-E-NEW WOOD FENCE BEYOND TO BE 6'-0" HIGHC/W WOOD POSTS SPACED 6'-0" O.CT.O TIER 2 RETAIN. WALL 17.09T.O TIER 1 RETAIN. WALL 17.95T.O FENCE 19.78RECESSED PATTERN INCONC. RETAINING WALL190'-0" [57.91 M]4'-0" [1.22 M]186'-0" [56.69 M]42" HIGH MIN. ALUMN.GUARDRAIL ANCHOREDON TOP OF CONC. RETAININGWALL WITH POSTS AT 48" O.C MAX.152'-2" [46.38 M]FIN. GRADE @ 17.51EXISTING GRADEINTERIOR P.LLAND. STRIPCONC. RETAIN. WALL ANDFOOTING AS PER STRUCT.CONC. PLANTERFINISHED GRADE @ 17.51EXISTING GRADEINTERIOR P.LMIN. LAND.CONC. RETAIN. WALL ANDFOOTING AS PER STRUCT.DRAIN TILE AS PER OTHERCONC. RETAINING WALLAPPENDIX E
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-361-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C0W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7190-2015
Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment for a “1 km rule” fo r Wine Stores in Grocery
Stores
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At a Council Meeting held on November 24, 2015, Council directed staff to bring forward a bylaw to
establish a 1 kilometre distance rule (the 1-km Rule) through a Zoning Bylaw amendment for all
future alcohol beverage retailers in Maple Ridge. This would prohibit wine and liquor sales from
establishing in grocery stores within one kilometer of existing private or government liquor stores.
Council passed the following resolution:
That the City hereby begin the preparation of a zoning bylaw in the form of a bylaw attached
as Appendix “H” of the staff report dated August 31, 2015 to prohibit the sale of liquor in any
grocery store located within one kilometer of a license retail store or government liquor store.
When the staff report was considered on December 8, 2015, Council passed the following
resolution:
That Bylaw No. 7190-2015 be given first reading and that staff be directed to provide Council
with information as to the decision of the City of Pitt Meadows and the City of Mission on the
sale of wine in grocery stores.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7190-2015 be given second reading, and
forward ed to Public Hearing.
BACKGROUND
Council received a letter dated June 18, 2015 from the Alliance of Beverage Licensees (ABLE BC)
(see Appendix A) regarding Bill 22, the new Special Wine Store Licence Auction Act. The Alliance
expressed concern about the impact of wine sales in grocery stores on private liquor stores (referred
to as “licensee retail stores” under the Liquor Control and Licensing Act and the Liquor Control and
Licensing Regulation).
1103
At a Council Meeting held on July 28, 2015, Council directed staff to prepare a report on options for
implementing a minimum 1 kilometre distance rule (the 1-km Rule) through a Zoning Bylaw
amendment for all future alcohol beverage retailers in Maple Ridge . Council passed the following
resolution:
That staff be directed to prepare a report on options for the implementation of a minimum
one km distance rule for all future beverage alcohol retailers in Maple Ridge.
The requested report was presented at Workshop on August 31, 2015, at which time; Council was
presented with three options to proceed with in response to the ABLE BC.
These options were:
1.Make no changes and maintain the “status quo” with the Liquor Cont rol Licencing Branch
regulating the licensing of liquor sales in grocery stores through their regulations and
directives; or
2.Amend the Zoning Bylaw to prohibit liquor sales in all grocery stores, such that a site specific
Zoning Bylaw amendment would be required for any grocery store wishing to sell wine or
other liquor; or
3.Amend the Zoning Bylaw to prohibit the sale of liquor in grocery stores that are located
within 1 kilometre of an existing liquor store
Council selected Option 2, granted first and second readings to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw
No. 7162-2015 on August 31, 2015, held Public Hearings on September 15 and October 20, 2015,
and defeated the bylaw when third reading was considered on October 27, 2015. In the interim
period between Council’s decision to defeat the amending bylaw (No.7162 - 2015) and the decision
to again reconsider the matter (Nov 24th, 2015), an application was received for a business licence
from a grocery store for wine sales. Given that there was no restriction in place and Council had
dealt with the issue fully, the business licence was issued and wine may be purchased at the Valley
Fair Mall Save-on Foods. Any new amendment by Council to the Zoning Bylaw intending to restrict
wine sales in grocery stores cannot be applied retroactively to this store (i.e. it is now in operation
and therefore “grandfathered”).
On November 24, 2015, Council directed staff to bring forward a bylaw in line with Option 3 to
establish a 1 kilometre distance rule (the 1-km Rule) through a Zoning Bylaw amendment.
The requested bylaw Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7190-2015 (Appendix C) was
considered by Council on December 8, 2015. Council granted first reading only, and requested
more information on decisions in the neighbouring communities of Pitt Meadows and Mission,
before making a decision about whether or not to proceed further. The following motion was passed
by Council:
That Bylaw No. 7190-2015 be given first reading and that staff be directed to provide
Council with information as to the decision of the City of Pitt Meadows and the City of
Mission on the sale of wine in grocery stores.
DISCUSSION
Decision by Pitt Meadows:
On December 15, 2015, Pitt Meadows Council referred the issue of establishing a one kilometre
distance requirement for liquour/wine sales in grocery stores to their staff. On January 25, 2016,
Pitt Meadows Council decided to proceed with a text amending bylaw (Appendix B) to establish such
a distance restriction, granting first and second reading on March 1, 2016. The bylaw went before
Public Hearing and was granted third and final reading on April 5, 2016.
Decision by Mission:
As of mid-April, Administrative staff in Mission have advised us that Mission Council does not intend
to regulate wine sales in grocery stores.
CONCLUSION
On November 24, 2015, Council requested that a 1 kilometre distance rule (the 1-km Rule) be
established through a Zoning Bylaw amendment for all future alcohol beverage retailers in Maple
Ridge.
Such a report was brought forward and Bylaw No. 7190-2015 was given first reading, pending more
information from staff about decisions by the councils in Pitt Meadows and Mission on the same
grocery store wine sale issue. A 1 Kilometre Rule similar to the one being considered by Maple
Ridge Council was passed by Pitt Meadows Council. Mission Council will not be pursuing grocery
store wine sale restrictions at this time.
“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, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
__________________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng.
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_________________________________________________
Approved by : E. C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
Appendix A – Letter from Alliance of Beverage Licensees (ABLE BC)
Appendix B – Pitt Meadows Zone Amendment Bylaw No. 2731, 2016
Appendix C - Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7190-2015
APPENDIX A
CITY OF PITT MEADOWS
ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 2731, 2016.
#134572v1
A Bylaw to amend a section of Zoning Bylaw No. 2505, 2011
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend the City of Pitt Meadows Zoning Bylaw
No. 2505, 2011, as amended; AND
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Pitt Meadows in open meeting
assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as the "City of Pitt Meadows Zoning Bylaw
Amendment Bylaw No. 2731, 2016".
2.Part 5 Specific Use Regulations is amended by inserting the following:
Section 5.16 Liquor and Wine Sales in Grocery Stores
Liquor or wine sales in grocery stores are not permitted unless the grocery store
is located no less than 1 km from any existing liquor or wine store (as measured
in a straight line from the primary retail entrance to the primary retail entrance).
3.City of Pitt Meadows Zoning Bylaw No. 2505, 2011 as amended, is hereby
amended accordingly.
READ a FIRST and SECOND time the 1st day of March, 2016.
PUBLIC HEARING held the ___ day of __________, 2016.
READ a THIRD time the ___ day of __________, 2016.
FINALLY CONSIDERED AND ADOPTED the ___ day of __________, 2016.
Mayor Corporate Officer
- 175 -
APPENDIX B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7190-2015
A Bylaw to prohibit liquor sales in grocery stores within one kilometre of a liquor store
__________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Bylaw No. 3510-1985;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
Citation
1.This Bylaw may be cited as “Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7190-2015.”
Amendments
1.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 is amended by adding the following under
Part 4, GENERAL REGULATIONS, Section 401(3):
(g) The sale in or from an ineligible grocery store, or in or from a store located in an
ineligible grocery store, of beer, cider, wine or spirits, or any other product
intended for human consumption, that contains more than 1% alcohol by volume,
except a product produced primarily for cooking purposes, and for this purpose
“ineligible grocery store” means a grocery store any part of any public entrance to
which is located within 1 kilometre, measured in a straight line, from any part of
any public entrance to a Licensee Retail Store or government liquor store that is
carrying on business when sales referred to in this section commence.
READ a first time the 8th day of December, 2015.
READ a second time the day of 2016.
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of 2016.
READ a third time the day of 2016.
ADOPTED the day of 2016.
_______________________________ ________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2014-054-SD
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First, Second, and Third Reading
Dogwood Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7246-2016
23590 Dogwood Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The developer of the property located at 23590 Dogwood Avenue has made a formal petition
(Appendix “E”), per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), requesting the City provide
a Local Area Service Bylaw specific to those properties to be created by subdivision. The service is
for enhanced landscape maintenance of a parkette and trail within the development. The bylaw will
require the future property owners of each of the 12 single family lots to pay an annual fee as a
Local Service Tax for these enhanced landscape maintenance areas within the development. Similar
Local Area Service bylaws have been established in Albion and Silver Valley. A concurrent rezoning
application (2014-054-RZ) was granted final reading on March 8, 2016.
Local Area Service Bylaws have previously been applied in other areas of Maple Ridge,
predominantly in growth areas such as Silver Valley and Albion. The nature of this development
project as a relatively small infill project has generated discussion about the application parameters
for when Local Area Service Bylaws are required. As such, staff will be preparing an information
report to Council in 2016 outlining the current practices and performance of Local Area Service
Bylaws.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That a Local Area Service Bylaw, as formally petitioned by the developer of the lands referred
to as ‘Dogwood’, 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 Dogwood Ridge Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7246-2016 be given first, second and
third readings.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The subject property was rezoned on March 8, 2016 to allow for future subdivision into 12 single
family lots. The lots will be accessed from a new local road connected to Dogwood Avenue. The new
local road has been designed to maintain a large isolated stand of mature trees through the creation
of a 1,158 m2 (12, 464 ft2) ‘parkette’ within the road allowance. Similar road designs have been
used in Silver Valley Eco-Cluster developments, and in Albion. The proposed road will loop around
this stand of trees so that they can be preserved in their natural state.
1104
- 2 -
In addition, the applicant proposes to dedicate 6,601.1 m2 (71,054 ft2) of developable land along
the eastern property line for preservation of mature trees. These combined areas are equivalent to
25% of the development site area, which does not include Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA)
that are undevelopable. A pedestrian trail will be constructed through the dedicated park land to the
river and will connect to the vehicle access road. As this area has not been identified as part of the
trail network, ongoing maintenance for the trail, as well as the ‘parkette’, will be funded through a
Local Area Service Bylaw for the benefitting 12 lots created through subdivision.
b)Desired Outcomes:
A Local Area Service Bylaw is required for the enhanced landscape maintenance of a parkette and
trail within the development in order for subdivision approval under application 2014-054-SD. The
developer has made a formal petition, per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a),
requesting the City provide a Local Area Service Bylaw, specific to those properties to be created by
subdivision.
The developer of the site will be responsible for the enhanced landscaped areas installation costs
and maintenance costs, ensuring 100% survival, for the first year after completion of planting. The
costs for ongoing maintenance in subsequent years will then be provided by the 12 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)Dogwood Enhanced Landscape Area Requirements:
The enhanced landscape maintenance areas include a parkette and trail. These areas are identified
on the Bylaw Map (Schedule “A” of Appendix “D”). The planting concept for these landscape areas is
for enhanced natural areas that will preserve the existing trees and will include a variety of native
shrubs.
The planting plan for the enhanced landscape planting areas was prepared by Letts Environmental
Consultants and is attached as Schedule ‘C” of Appendix “D”. The recommended procedures and
frequencies for maintenance is Level 3 – Moderate, 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 natural condition.
Phoenix Environmental has provided an estimate for the yearly maintenance of $1,350.00 per year
after the developer’s initial one year maintenance period, attached as Appendix “E”.
d) Citizen Implications:
The estimated cost of the petitioned service will be $112.50 per year for each residential lot of the
12 lots in the Dogwood Local Area Service. It is anticipated that this charge will start in 2018, after
the completion of the one 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.
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
- 3 -
Ridge, and therefore would be unfunded by the City. Local Area Service bylaws have been
established in several other areas in the City, including Albion and 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 Dogwood
Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7246-2016.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
“Original signed by Christine Carter” “Original signed by David Boag”
____________________________________________ _______________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP Approved by: David Boag
Director of Planning Director of Parks & Facilities
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Photo
Appendix C – Subdivision Plan
Appendix D –Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7246-2016
Appendix E – Cost Estimate for Yearly Maintenance
Appendix F – Petition for Local Area Service
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Jun 16, 2014 FILE: 2014-054-RZ BY: PC
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
´
Scale: 1:2,500
23598 & 23627 DOGWOOD AVENUE
128 AVE
FERN CR
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Jun 16, 2014 FILE: 2014-054-RZ BY: PC
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
District of Maple Ridge´
Scale: 1:2,500
23598 & 23627 DOGWOOD AVENUE
128 AVE
FERN CR
SKRWRJUDSK\LPDJH
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
LOCAL AREA SERVICE
BYLAW NO. 7246-2016
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 Corporate Officer 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 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan EPP56756 Except Plan EPP56757
that will benefit from the service.
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as “Dogwood Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7246-2016”.
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 City 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 and design plans “Trail & Parkette Restoration Planting
Plan” by Phoenix Environmental Services Ltd dated April 2016; are attached as Schedule “C”
6.The bylaw shall take effect as of the date of adoption hereof.
READ a first time the day of , 201.
READ a second time the day of , 201.
READ a third time the day of , 201.
ADOPTED the day of , 201.
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX D
DOGWOOD AVE.
128 CRESC
E
N
T
234 B ST.23565236812355323490235902349623641235242361223669235752348323647234612344712835 23532236471287023452 23694236792365323463/65235052368923525234972344812895
13034
12865 236623
B
1
4
PARK4
5
A
37
1
E
41
PARK
A
2
A
D
3
F A
1
2
4
Rem 16
Rem A
2
3 2
42
241
38
ARem 13
P 2637
P 20363
P 50674P 19475P 46567
P 77771
P 17199
RP 15169P 7806P 38973P 11075EPP 56756 EPP 56757
P 46567
P 6438
P 77771
P 63548P 6735
RP 13095P 6734
P 50674
P 1719
9
P 11117P 6438
P 6734
P 6438
LMP 29631
BCP 44989 EP 67619EP 77772
FERN CRESCENT
´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE LOCAL AREA SERVICE BYLAWBylaw No.
Enhanced Landscape Areas
Original Lot Boundary
7246-2016
"Schedule A"
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
LOCAL AREA SERVICE
BYLAW NO. 7246-2016
SCHEDULE “B”
Class of Work:
The establishment, maintenance and replacement of enhanced road parkette and trail indicated by
bold outline on Schedule “A” are to be maintained as per the recommended procedures and
frequencies for maintenance “Level 3 – Moderate” 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 12 lots created by the subdivision of:
Lot A Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan EPP56756 Except Plan EPP56757
Of $ 112.50 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 each year 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 2015, as provided by Statistics Canada.
"Schedule C"
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
- 1 -
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-002-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Final One Year Extension Application
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795 - 2011
25608 Bosonworth Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Council granted a one year extension to the above noted application on April 14, 2015. The
applicant has now applied for a final one year extension under Maple Ridge Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. The purpose of this application is to rezone the subject property
from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to allow for future
subdivision into 3 lots.
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, a final one year
extension be granted for rezoning application 2011-002-RZ (property located at 25608
Bosonworth Avenue and that the following conditions be addressed prior to consideration of
Final Reading:
i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of
the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii.Road widening, truncation and cul-de-sac turn-around as required;
iii.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;
iv. 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.
v. Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management Act,
the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s).
1105
- 2 -
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Paul Hayes
Owner: Ian A Speckman
Legal Description: Lot 1, Section 12, Township 12, New Westminster District
Plan 2713
OCP:
Existing: Suburban Residential
Proposed: Suburban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Proposed: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) subject to 2012-
102-RZ for 4 RS-2 lots and 1 renmant RS-3 zoned lot
Designation Suburban Residential
South: Use: Vacant District Land
Zone: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Designation: Forest
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Designation: Suburban Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential Strata
Zone: RG-2 (Suburban Residential Strata)
Designation: Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 1.882 HA. (4.56 Acres)
Access: Bosonworth Avenue and 256 Street
Servicing requirement: On-site septic and municipal water
Companion Applications: 2015-330-SD
The purpose of this application is to rezone the subject property from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to allow for future subdivision into 3 lots.
- 3 -
The following dates outline Council’s consi deration of the application and Bylaw 6795 – 2011:
- First reading was granted February 8, 2011;
- Second reading was granted on March 25, 2014;
- Public Hearing was held April 15, 2014;
- Third reading was granted April 22, 2014; and
- A first extension was granted April 14, 2015.
Application Progress:
The extension request for this application was submitted too late to make the April 18, 2016 CoW
meeting, but before the expiry date of April 23, 2016. If Council allows the extension, it would
apply retroactively, April 23, 2016 – April 23, 2017.
As well, the subject site and the application across the street to the north (2012-102-RZ) have the
same developer (Paul Hayes). Both applications share some conditions (e.g. those related to the
road, a trail and services) making it more effective for the developer to proceed in unison .
Therefore, the extension applications for both files (2012-102-RZ expires May 27, 2015) have been
submitted together to allow both to proceed to completion and are both scheduled for the May 2,
2016 Committee of the Whole meeting.
The applicant has made progress on some of the terms and conditions of 2011-002-RZ, including
submission of a geotechnical report, a storm water management concept, topographic analysis and
plans for the septic system and steep slope covenants. The steep slope covenant has replaced the
requirement for a development permit application. The applicant has also made a new subdivision
application in place of the one that expired.
Alternatives:
Council may choose one of the following alternatives:
1.grant the request for extension;
2.deny the request for extension; or
3.repeal third reading of the bylaw and refer the bylaw to Public Hearing.
In considering these alternatives, pursuant to Council Policy 6.31 under the Community Amenity
Contribution (CAC) Program, Council may choose to apply the CAC Program when considering
extension applications. Council may choose to add to the third reading terms and conditions to
require the following CAC contribution be made prior to final reading:
$5,100 x 3 single family lots = $15,300
- 4 -
CONCLUSION:
The applicant has completed some of the terms and conditions of this rezoning application;
however, needs additional time to complete the remaining ones and to coordinate this with another
project across the street from the subject site. Therefore, the applicant has applied for a final one
year extension.
“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, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – Second Reading Report
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Mar 14, 2014 FILE: 2011-002-RZ BY: PC
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
256 STBOSONWORTH AVE
´
Scale: 1:2,000
25608 BOSONWORTH AVENUE
GODWIN DR
5=
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Mar 14, 2014 FILE: 2011-002-RZ BY: PC
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
256 STBOSONWORTH AVE
District of Maple Ridge´
Scale: 1:2,000
25608 BOSONWORTH AVENUE
GODWIN DR
2011 photography image
APPENDIX B
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: March 17, 2014
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-002-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795 - 2011
25608 Bosonworth Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential), to permit a future subdivision of 3 lots.
The proposed RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) zoning complies with the Official Community
Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795 - 2011 be given second reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
2.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 a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii.Road widening, truncation and cul-de-sac turn-around as required;
iii.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;
iv. 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.
v.Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management
Act, the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s).
APPENDIX C
- 2 -
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Applicant: Paul Hayes
Owner: Ian A. Speckman
Legal Description: Lot 1, Section 12, Township 12, New Westminstwer Plan 2713
OCP:
Existing: Suburban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Proposed: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation Agricultural and Suburban Residential
South: Use: Vacant District Land
Zone: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Designation: Forest
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Designation: Suburban Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential Strata
Zone: RG-2 (Suburban Residential Strata)
Designation: Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 1.882 HA. (4.56 Acres)
Access: Bosonworth Avenue and 256 Street
Servicing requirement: On-site septic and municipal water
Companion Applications: 2011-002-SD
b)Project Description:
The applicant is seeking to rezone the subject 1.882 hectare (4.56 acre) property from A-2 (Upland
Agricultural) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential), to create 3 single family lots. Two of the
proposed lots will front on Bosonworth Avenue and the third southernmost lot will face 256 Street.
Bosonworth Avenue becomes an unpaved gravel road in front of this property and 256 Street has
been constructed south of Bosonworth Avenue as part of the Grant Hill subdivision to the west.
Widening and paving of Bosonworth Avenue, a cul-de-sac turnaround at the current south terminus
of 256 Street and a corner truncation at the intersection of these two streets will be provided as part
of the subdivision associated with this rezoning application.
- 3 -
The subject property contains an existing dwelling to be retained. It will be sited on one of the three
lots in accordance with Zoning Bylaw setback requirements. The land slopes upwards from
Bosonworth Avenue and is particularly steep at the southern end of the site abutting the District
Forest Lands. The southern portion of the site and the unconstructed portion of 256 Street will be
retained in its natural state.
A preliminary site plan showing the lot layout, proposed building envelopes and on-site septic
disposal areas is attached for reference (Appendix C).
c)Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The proposal for RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) Zoning is consistent with the zones
permitted in the Zoning Matrix for lands designated as Suburban Residential. Consequently, the
proposal is consistent with the existing Official Community Plan designation.
Zoning Bylaw:
The proposed lots will meet the minimum lot width, depth and area set out in the Zoning Bylaw for
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) zone. Each lot is at least 0.40 hectares (1.0 acre) in area,
with the southern lot having a greater area of 1.055 hectares. The two lots along Bosonworth
Avenue will be about 50 metres wide and 84 metres deep, and Lot 3 is about 100 metres in both
width and depth. Lot 3 is larger to permit adequate space for a building site and septic fields due to
the sloping conditions of the land.
Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting was not required because the proposed subdivision will result
in fewer than 25 dwelling units, and no Official Community Plan amendment is required.
d)Environmental Implications:
At first reading, it was anticipated that pursuant to Section 8.10 of the Official Community Plan, a
Natural Features Development Permit (NFDP) application would be required for the portion of the
site with an average natural slope of greater than 15 percent.
After further review, it has been determined that a development permit will not be required. Instead,
the sloping lands in the southern part of the site will be subject to a no-build/no disturb steep slope
covenant. Plantings will be undertaken by the applicant in lieu of a development permit, for
restoration and enhancement works along an unbuilt portion of 256 Street north of Bosonworth
Avenue in conjunction with another site (2012-102-RZ) being developed by the same applicant.
The necessary covenant and accompanying explanatory plan will be registered on proposed Lot 3 at
the time of subdivision.
- 4 -
e)Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
Engineering has identified a number of required off site works including: construction of Bosonworth
to a rural standard (it is currently a gravel road) in front of the property, a corner truncation,
dedication to complete the cul-de-sac at the south end of 256 Street, storm water/drainage works
on Bosonworth, and installing a mast-arm street light and new water service connections.
Latecomers for the area’s water system and road access onto 256 Street may apply.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
An existing off road trail within the Bosonworth Avenue right-of-way may need to be accommodated
as a boulevard trail in the road right of way in conjunction with the construction of Bosonworth
Avenue across the frontage of the property. This will be determined as part of the subdivision
approval process.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that second reading be given to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795 –
2011 and that application 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, RPP
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
Appendix C – Site Plan
- 1 -
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-102-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Final One Year Extension Application
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013
25638 112 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Council granted a one year extension to the above noted application on June 23, 2015. The
applicant has now applied for a final one year extension under Maple Ridge Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. The purpose of this application is to rezone the southern portion
of the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential), to allow for future subdivision into 4 lots and create 1 remnant RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) lot in the northern part of the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, a final one year
extension be granted for rezoning application 2012-102-RZ (property located at 25638 112
Avenue) and that the following conditions be addressed prior to consideration of Final Reading:
i.Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and
receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii.Road dedication as required;
iii.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;
iv. Registration of a Tree Protection/Steep Slope Restrictive Covenant at the Land
Title Office;
v.Registration of a Agricultural Impact Assessment report and a Landscaping Plan
for a buffer along the Agricultural Land Reserve Boundary at the Land Title Office;
vi. Entering into a Restoration and Enhancement Agreement for the unconstructed
portion of the 256 Street allowance abutting the site;
vii. Removal of the existing building/s;
1106
- 2 -
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.
ix.Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental
Management Act , the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject
land(s).
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Paul Hayes
Owner: Walter Heckmann and Karoline Heckmann
Legal Description: Lot 8, Section 13, Township 12, New Westminster
District Plan 8336
OCP:
Existing: Agricultural, Suburban Residential
Proposed: Suburban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Single Family Residential in ALR
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Agricultural
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Under application
2011-002-RZ for RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Agricultural
East: Use: Single Family Residential in ALR
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Vacant, forested
Proposed Use of Property: Residential
Site Area: 4.047 Ha (10 acres)
Access: Southern lots: Bosonworth Avenue
Northern remnant lot: 112 Avenue
Servicing requirement: Southern lots: Municipal water and on-site septic disposal;
Northern remnant lot: Well water and on-site septic disposal
- 3 -
Companion Applications: 2015-229-SD
This application is to permit the southern portion of the subject property to be rezoned from RS-3
(One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to allow subdivision into
(4) lots with a minimum lot size of 0.4 ha. and one remnant RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) lot
having a minimum lot size of 0.8 ha.
The following dates outline Council’s consideration of the application and Bylaw 6965-2013:
First Reading was granted March 20, 2013;
Second Reading was granted April 8, 2014
Public Hearing was held May 20, 2014;
Third Reading was granted May 27, 2014; and
First extension as granted on June 23, 2015.
Application Progress:
This application shares terms and conditions with application 2011-002-RZ submitted by the same
developer (Paul Hayes). The rear portion of the subject site was also subject to a successful ALR
exclusion application 2014-060-AL, approved by the ALC on July 27, 2015. Following this, time was
spent adjusting the project (e.g. reducing the ALR buffer, changing the layout to accommodate
future subdivision and grading plans).
The applicant has complete some terms and conditions (e.g. topographic analysis, preliminary
rehabilitation and enhancement plan, septic disposal and grading plan) and requires additional
time to complete the remaining requirements. Some requirements are being pursued with 2011-
002-RZ for the road frontage the two development proposals share. Both of the extensions are
scheduled for the May 2, 2016 Committee of the Whole meeting. The applicant has also submitted
a new subdivision application in place of the one that expired.
Alternatives:
Council may choose one of the following alternatives:
1.grant the request for extension;
2.deny the request for extension; or
3.repeal third reading of the bylaw and refer the bylaw to Public Hearing.
- 4 -
In considering these alternatives, pursuant to Council Policy 6.31 under the Community Amenity
Contribution (CAC) Program, Council may choose to apply the CAC Program when considering
extension applications. Council may choose to add to the third reading terms and conditions to
require the following CAC contribution be made prior to final reading:
$5,100 x 5 single family lots = $25,500
CONCLUSION:
With the successful exclusion of the northern portion of the property from the ALR, the applicant
has been able to complete some of the terms and conditions of this rezoning application. However,
additional time is needed to turn their attention to the remaining requirements and to coordinate
this with another project across the street (2011-002-RZ) from the subject site. Therefore, the
applicant has applied for a final one year extension.
“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, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – Second Reading Report
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Feb 25, 2013 FILE: 2012-102-RZ BY: PC
25638 112 AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:3,000
BOSONWORTH AVE PALMER ROLPH ST5=
APPENDIX A
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Jun 5, 2013 2012-102-SD BY: JV
25638-112 Ave
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
P L A N NIN G D E P A RT M E N T2553 62554 92567 62555 62559 52559 62557 52557 7
1119 8 (PUMP STATIO N)2563 82560 92559 02555 92558 02560 82566 3/97
11 360
2554 02557 22559 2
11 438
2554 12563 0
11 267
2555 42558 02573 1
11 2252552 02554 22558 8256 S T.
11
2
A
V
E
.PA L M E R R O LP H S T.PA L M E R R O LP H S T.
EPS 234
13 14
1
A
EP 17454
SL49
P 17459
12
SL47
8
P 8336
SL59
11
SL58 SL57
2
P 27239
SL60
SL48
Rem 6
3
SL50
P 17459 5
P 2713
710
15
´
Scale: 1:2,500
APPENDIX B
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-102-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6965-2013
25638 112 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the portion of the subject property located outside of
the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential) to permit a future subdivision into four (4) RS-2 lots and one RS-3 lot
remaining in the ALR
This application received first reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013 on March 12,
2013 and second reading on March 25, 2014. The site is identified by the Agricultural Land
Commission as one of the “Remnant Properties” in their comments concerning the Albion Flats
Concept Plan. The applicant was given the option of proceeding with an exclusion application on
the rear portion of the development site ahead of rezoning. The applicant did not choose to do
the exclusion; therefore, instead of rezoning from RS-3 to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential) and A-1 (Small Holding Agricultural), the northern portion located in the ALR will
retain its current RS-3 zoning.
This report is being brought forward because the bylaw granting second reading on March 25,
2014 contained an error – the map schedule correctly showed the front being rezoned from RS-3
to RS-2 and the rear retaining RS-3; however the bylaw text still referred to the A-1 Zone. This
inconsistency needs to be corrected by rescinding second reading, amending the bylaw and
granting second reading to the amended bylaw before being advanced to Public Hearing.
The southern portion is proposed to be subdivided into 4 RS-2 lots. The proposed RS-2 (One
Family Suburban Residential) zoning complies with the Official Community Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013 be rescinded;
2.That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013 be amended as identified in the staff report
dated April 7, 2014, be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and
APPENDIX C
- 2 -
3.That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading:
i.Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and
receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii.Road dedication as required;
iii.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;
iv. Registration of a Tree Protection/Steep Slope Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title
Office;
v.Registration of a Agricultural Impact Assessment report and a Landscaping Plan for
a buffer along the Agricultural Land Reserve Boundary at the Land Title Office;
vi. Entering into a Restoration and Enhancement Agreement for the unconstructed
portion of the 256 Street allowance abutting the site;
vii. Removal of the existing building/s;
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.
ix.Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management
Act, the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s).
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Applicant: Paul Hayes
Owner: Walter and Karoline Heckmann
Legal Description: Lot 8, Section 13, Township 12, Plan 8336
OCP:
Existing: Agricultural, Suburban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
- 3 -
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Single Family Residential in ALR
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Agricultural
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Agricultural
East: Use: Single Family Residential in ALR
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Vacant, forested
Proposed Use of Property: Residential
Site Area: 4.047 Ha (10 acres)
Access: Non-ALR lots: Bosonworth Avenue
ALR lot: 112 Avenue
Servicing requirement: Non-ALR lots: Municipal water and on-site septic disposal;
ALR lot: Well water and on-site septic disposal
b)Project Description:
The subject property slopes down from Bosonworth Avenue northward through the ALR and to 112
Avenue. The property is currently forested, except for a clearing at the northern end. A small existing
structure will be removed prior to final reading. The site is serviced with a well and septic fields.
The applicant proposes to rezone the southern portion of the property that is not in the ALR from
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential. This will permit the
creation of about 4 lots having an area of 0.45 Ha (1.1 acres) each fronting along Bosonworth
Avenue. The northern 2.22 Ha (5.5 acres) portion of the property within the Agricultural Land
Reserve will retain its RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) zone.
The attached preliminary site plan shows the lot layout, proposed building envelopes and on-site
septic disposal areas (Appendix C). This subdivision does not require Agricultural Land Commission
approval because Section 10 (1) (d) of the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and
Procedure Regulations allows the Approving Officer to establish a legal boundary along the boundary
of the Agricultural Land Reserve.
- 4 -
c)Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The southern portion of the development site is currently designated Suburban Residential and the
northern portion located and being subdivided along the Agricultural Land Reserve boundary is
currently designated Agricultural. The proposed rezoning complies with the established
designations.
Zoning Bylaw:
The application proposes to rezone the southern portion of the property located at 25638 112
Avenue from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to
permit four 0.45 Ha (1.1 acre) RS-2 lots, and a remnant 2.22 Ha (5.5 acres) RS-3 parcel in the
Agricultural Land Reserve. The proposed lots will comply with Zoning Bylaw requirement for lot area,
width and depth.
Subdivision and Development Services Bylaw:
256 Street is an unconstructed road to the west of the subject site. Due to excessive grade, the
Engineering Department determined it cannot be built within municipal road standards and a
development variance permit is required to dispense with its construction. Engineering is supportive
of this variance. A separate report will be forwarded to Council on this matter at a future date.
The road allowance contains a water pumping station at the bottom of the hill on 112 Avenue, and
municipal water main from the station up the hill to Bosonworth Avenue and then further south to
the Grant Hill Reservoir.
Development Information Meeting:
A development Information Meeting was not required because the proposed subdivision will result in
fewer than 25 dwelling units.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.5 of the Official Community Plan, a Natural Feature Development Permit is
required to address excessive sloping conditions on portions of the site.
This development permit will be coordinated with these landscaping requirements:
Restoration and enhancement plantings will be undertaken by the applicant in lieu of
plantings on the subject site and another to the south (2011-002-RZ). This planting will be
designed not to impact the recently installed water main and to stabilize the sloping 256
Street right-of-way.
- 5 -
Landscaping will be planted along the rear of the proposed 4 lots and on the eastern side of
the easternmost lot to create a buffer with the Agricultural Land Reserve in accordance with
the Landscaping Buffer Specification established by the Agricutural Land Commission.
d)Environmental Implications:
The site is covered by a tree canopy that increases in intensity from north (along 112 Avenue) to
south (along Bosonworth Avenue). The site is characterized by slopes between 10 and 25 percent.
The southeastern portion of the site has excessive sloping (more than 25%) conditions. Therefore,
the proposed eastern lot will be subject to a Tree Protection/Steep Slope Restrictive Covenant to be
registered on title as a third reading condition.
The Arborist Report and Tree Survey identify trees to be removed to provide envelopes for building
sites and septic fields. Plans have been submitted identifying these envelopes. These envelopes will
need to be adjusted for best practices as part of fulfilling subdivision conditions, particularly on the
easternmost lot.
A geotechnical engineer must insure that any lot grading will have no impact on slope stability.
A combination of Development Permit and Restoration and Enhancement Agreement will be used to
protect sensitive sloping areas and provide the specification for the necessary plantings to maintain
slope stability on the site and along the 256 Street right-of-way.
e)Agricultural Impact:
Policy 6-12 b) strives to protect the productivity of agricultural lands by “requiring agricultural impact
assessments (AIAs) and Groundwater Impact Assessment of non-farm development and
infrastructure projects and identifying measures to off-set impacts on agricultural capability.”
An Agricultural Impact Assessment report has been provided that satisfies District requirements for
this purpose. This report confirms that there will be no direct or indirect drainage, water quality,
noise and traffic impact on the agricultural area. A Landscaping Buffer Plan in accordance with ALC
and District standards will be completed by the applicant.
Registration of a Restrictive Covenant, with the Agricultural Impact Assessment report, a
Landscaping Buffer Plan and submission of a security, is a third reading requirement.
f)Interdepartmental Implications:
Building Department:
Comments from Building include: referencing the 2012 Building Code in the Geotechnical Report,
insuring building permits are obtained to demolish existing buildings, and insuring the final site
grading plan provides for smooth grade transitions between lots.
- 6 -
Engineering Department:
Comments from Engineering have identified some off-site requirements that the applicant needs to
address. These include: road widening along 112 and Bosonworth Avenues, and the construction of
Bossonworth Avenue (currently a gravel road) to a rural standard. Engineering further advises that
the location and design of each driveway be reviewed to avoid excessive driveway grades.
Fire Department:
Due to heavy tree cover, Fire requires adequate clearance to each future residential dwelling. When
constructed, the driveways will need to be clear of vegetation 6 metres wide and minimum 5 metres
high with a 5 metre wide drivable surface.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013 have second reading
rescinded, be amended as identified in the staff report dated April 7, 2014, be given second reading
as amended, and 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, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by David Pollock” for
_______________________________________________
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
Appendix C – Site Plan
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 11-5255-40-195
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Award of Contract ITT-EN16-23: 128 Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and Drainage
Improvements (216 Street to 224 Street)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A primary arterial roadway, 128 Avenue from 210 Street to 232 Street provides east-west access
across Maple Ridge to the Golden Ears Bridge and Lougheed Highway and is part of the TransLink
Major Road Network. The widening of 128 Avenue to an ultimate four lane cross-section was
identified in the 2014 Strategic Transportation Plan (STP) and is required as traffic volumes
increased due to growth. The expansion of 128 Avenue is in the City’s approved Financial Plan with
the construction of Phase I from 210 Street to 216 Street now substantially complete and Phase II
from 216 Street to 224 Street proposed for 2016.
The construction on 128 Avenue from 216 Street to 224 Street includes widening the roadway from
two to four lanes with a paved three metre wide multi-use path and one metre wide gravel horse trail
on the north side. The work generally consists of roadway construction, ducting for future fibre optic
cable, street lighting, signal modifications, landscaping, stream and ditch relocation, and fish habitat
and riparian restoration. The project construction is anticipated to commence in late May 2016 with
substantial completion in November 2016.
An Invitation to Tender was issued on March 23, 2016 and closed on April 22, 2016. The lowest
compliant tender price was submitted by B & B Contracting (2012) Ltd. for $6,524,600.00 excluding
taxes. There is additional work to be undertaken by City crews on the City water infrastructure; third
party utility relocations; environmental monitoring and construction compliance reviews.
Council approval to award the contract is required for the work to proceed.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Contract ITT-EN16-23, 128 Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and Drainage Improvements (216
Street to 224 Street), be awarded to B & B Contracting (2012) Ltd. in the amount of $6,524,600.00
excluding taxes; and
THAT a construction contingency of $975,000.00 be approved to address potential variations in field
conditions; and
THAT the ISL Engineering and Land Services Ltd. contract for Engineering Design Services for 128
Avenue (Abernethy Way) from 210 Street to 224 Street, be amended to increase the budget by
$250,000.00 for environmental monitoring and construction compliance services; and
THAT the Financial Plan be amended to increase the project budget by $989,600.00 as detailed in
the Council Report dated May 2, 2016 titled Award of Contract ITT-EN16-23: 128 Avenue/Abernethy
Way Road and Drainage Improvements (216 Street to 224 Street); and further
THAT the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contracts.1107
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
A primary arterial roadway, 128 Avenue from 210 Street to 232 Street provides access
across Maple Ridge to the Golden Ears Bridge and Lougheed Highway and is part of the
TransLink Major Road Network. The widening of 128 Avenue to an ultimate four lane
cross-section was identified in the 2014 Strategic Transportation Plan (STP) and is
required as traffic volumes increased due to growth. The expansion of 128 Avenue is in
the City’s approved Financial Plan with the construction of Phase I from 210 Street to
216 Street now substantially complete and Phase II from 216 Street to 224 Street
proposed for 2016.
The construction on 128 Avenue from 216 Street to 224 Street includes widening the
roadway from two to four lanes with a paved three metre wide multi-use path and one
metre wide gravel horse trail on the north side. The work generally consists of roadway
construction, ducting for future fibre optic cable, street lighting, signal modification,
landscaping, stream and ditch relocation, and fish habitat and riparian restoration. The
project construction is anticipated to commence in late May 2016 with substantial
completion in November 2016. There are significant water courses that parallel or cross
128 Avenue that will be relocated to the south side of the proposed roadway.
Utility relocations by third parties such as BC Hydro are required as part of the project
and are included in the project costs.
Tender Evaluation
An Invitation to Tender was issued on March 23, 2016 for the 128 Avenue/Abernethy
Way Road and Drainage Improvements (216 Street to 224 Street) and closed on April
22, 2016. Six compliant tenders were received ranging from $6,524,600.00 to
$8,765,041.75 excluding taxes as noted below, listed in order from lowest to highest
price:
Staff has reviewed the tenders and the lowest compliant bid is $6,524,600.00 from B &
B Contracting (2012) Ltd. who has completed a number of projects with a similar scope
as 128 Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and Drainage Improvements (216 Street to 224
Street) and is suitably qualified for the works. Staff undertook reference checks with
other municipalities and BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to confirm B &
B Contracting (2012) Ltd. is capable of completing the project successfully and these
were positive.
Tender Price (excluding taxes)
B & B Contracting (2012) Ltd. $6,524,600.00
BD Hall Constructors Corp. $7,382,053.00
Eurovia British Columbia Inc. $7,754,632.23
Tybo Contracting Ltd. $8,210,858.00
Pedre Contractors Ltd. $8,423,000.00
Triahn Enterprises Ltd. $8,765,041.75
Consultant Construction Services
The City will have a site representative responsible for the day-to-day quality assurance of
the contractor’s work and coordination of all site issues. However, given the complex
nature of the environmental, fisheries and drainage elements of the project, on-site field
reviews and monitoring by the design consultant is required to support City staff as well
as satisfy Engineer of Record requirements. The project consultant, ISL Engineering and
Land Services Ltd. (ISL), has provided a contract administration proposal of
$250,000.00 for the necessary civil, geotechnical, electrical and environmental services
during construction.
b) Desired Outcome:
The construction of 128 Avenue from 216 Street to 224 Street will provide significant
improvements to safety, convenience and accessible movement of people, goods and
services. This project will also provide a strong multi-modal transportation system by
promoting alternative modes (pedestrian, bike) of travel to reduce reliance on the
automobile.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The 128 Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and Drainage Improvements Project supports the
following key strategies identified in the City’s Strategic Plan:
Ensure that the transportation system is accessible to individuals of all ages and
physical abilities.
Continue to address long-term safety of the City’s roadway network.
Support development of efficient connections between Maple Ridge, key
gateways and other regional nodes to enhance regional mobility.
Expand the network of cycling routes within the City and connections to nearby
municipalities.
Provide attractive pedestrian facilities in key pedestrian areas and provide for
safe facilities along corridors for growing areas.
Ensure that the transportation system serves and supports growth plans within
the City and work with the Ministry of Transportation and TransLink to support
regional travel demands.
Develop a transportation system that minimizes impacts on the air quality within
the City by supporting walking, cycling and transit.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The estimated construction duration is approximately five months (100 working days)
with construction commencing approximately two weeks after the project is awarded and
is expected to be substantially complete by November 2016.
The impact to everyday traffic, residents, and businesses in the neighbourhood will be
minimized as much as possible. 128 Avenue is expected to remain open to traffic
throughout construction. Work on roadways and interruption of traffic is prohibited
during peak traffic periods of 6:00am – 9:00am and 3:00pm – 6:00pm. Single lane
alternating traffic will be maintained at all times unless approved otherwise in the Traffic
Management Plan. In-stream works for the two major culvert crossings will be completed
within the fisheries window which extends from August 1 to September 15.
The Contractor’s schedule will be monitored to minimize impact on properties and events
along the 128 Avenue corridor. Impacted parties, as well as the general public will be
informed of the construction progress through the City’s website and social media
sources.
e)Interdepartmental Implications:
The Engineering, Operations, Parks and Planning Departments have provided input
during the design stage and City resources have been used where possible in the
interests of cost effectiveness and efficiencies.
f)Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The estimated project construction cost is $8,289,600 including all third party utility
relocates, field reviews and monitoring by professional consultants, construction costs
and contingencies. The projected costs and funding breakdown is as follows:
Construction $ 6,524,600
Additional Consultant Services $ 250,000
Third Party Utility Costs $ 300,000
Operations $ 240,000
Construction Contingency $ 975,000
Grand Total $ 8,289,600
Existing Funding
128 Avenue (216 St to 224 St ) $ 7,300,000
Additional Funding Requested
Accumulated Surplus $ 296,880
Development Cost Charges $ 692,720
Subtotal $ 989,600
Total Funding $ 8,289,600
This project is largely funded by Development Cost Charges (approx. 70%). The balance is
funded through General Revenue and grant funding.
The project expenditures include a contingency that will only be utilized if required to
address unforeseen issues throughout construction. To accommodate this, the approval
for an additional potential draw of $695,300 from Development Cost Charges is
identified along with $297,990 from accumulated surplus is required.
CONCLUSIONS:
The tender price of $6,524,600.00 excluding taxes by B & B Contracting (2012) Ltd. for 128
Avenue/Abernethy Way Road and Drainage Improvements (216 Street to 224 Street) is the lowest
compliant tendered price. It is recommended that Council approve the award of the contract to B &
B Contracting (2012) Ltd. It is further recommended that Council approve a total budget of
$8,293,290 to allow for City water and traffic works, consultant construction services, third party
utility relocations, and a project contingency.
“Original signed by Jeff Boehmer” “Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
Prepared by: Jeff Boehmer, PEng. Financial Trevor Thompson, CPA, CGA
Manager of Design & Construction Concurrence: Manager of Financial Planning
“Original signed by David Pollock”
Reviewed by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
General Manager: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 11-5255-20-060
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis
Phase 2 - Technical Investigations Completion Final Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Over the past decade flooding along the Alouette Rivers, especially the North Alouette River has
become a concern for residents living in the floodplain. In 2007, extensive flooding prompted Maple
Ridge to establish a multi-stakeholder Task Force for the Alouette Rivers floodplain to identify and
compile information on flood issues in the area as well as develop a strategy to manage and/or
improve the flood risks along the North and South Alouette rivers.
On the recommendation of the Task Force, a hydrotechnical study was initiated to investigate and
model both rivers, summarize the results in a report to improve the understanding of the river
regimes, and help all parties with interests in the floodplain make informed future decisions.
In January 2010, the City retained Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC) to undertake an
assessment of the North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers, develop the hydrotechnical model of
the flood plain and prepare floodplain maps for both rivers.
Staff developed a comprehensive plan based on recommendations from NHC to guide future flood
management actions through a phased approach:
Phase 1 – Data Review and Scoping: The first phase included a review of flood hazard problems and
available information along with the development of a project scope for the technical investigations
as the second phase. A final report for this phase was issued in January 2011, which was reviewed
by staff.
Phase 2 – Technical Investigations: The second phase included geomorphic assessments, climate
and hydrologic analyses, hydraulic modelling of both rivers and floodplain, flood events and hazard
mapping. An interim report for Phase Two was issued in May 2012 but limitations in accuracy of the
river cross sections (supplied by BC Hydro as part of their dam breach modelling for the Alouette
Dam) resulted in the model not being able to be calibrated. In 2014/15 NHC undertook a finely
grained cross-sectional survey of the rivers and were able to complete the calibration of the model
and finalize the Phase Two report. The report includes the updated hydraulic model, flood profiles
and inundation mapping for different storm intensities ranging from a one-in-two year event up to a
one-in-two hundred year event.
The inundation maps indicate the extent of the floodplain affected by the flooding as well as the
approximate water depths.
1108
Having a calibrated model now allows the City to determine the effect of any planned land changes
in the floodplain. In 2012 the City adopted Policy 9.10 – “Regulation of Earth Fill within Floodplains”
that requires applicants seeking to place fill or flood-proof lands within the floodplain to undertake a
hydraulic assessment. With the current model a property owner with land in the floodplain can, for a
fee have the City evaluate the impact on the floodplain, if any, and identify how to alleviate the
impact.
The “North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis Phase 2 – Technical
Investigations Completion Final Report”, dated February 24, 2016 is attached for Council’s perusal.
The amended Flood Construction Levels (FCL) will be utilized by City staff when reviewing proposed
developments in the flood plain. The flood inundation maps will be incorporated into the City’s
Emergency Response Plan and will assist in the development of guidelines for a flood recovery
program.
The consultant has proposed a third phase to the project that would utilize the calibrated model for
the development of flood management strategies and flood damage mitigation options. This could
include the development of a flood bylaw to improve flood resiliency, clarify flood proofing
regulations and reduce flood risks in the long term as well as the development of a flood early
warning system. These tasks will be brought forward for consideration in the next Financial Plan and
Business Planning cycle.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the “North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis Phase 2 -
Technical Investigations Completion Final Report, dated February 24, 2016” be endorsed.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The hydrologic regimes of the North and South Alouette Rivers are markedly different.
The North Alouette is smaller and un-controlled and responds quickly to storm events,
particularly large rain or rain-on-snow events. The much larger watershed of the South
Alouette includes the Alouette Lake, controlled by BC Hydro, which is dominated by
spring freshet type events. However, downstream of the dam, peak flows typically occur
during the winter.
Both rivers are dynamic and their channel geometry has changed over the past century;
these changes are more apparent on the smaller, un-controlled North Alouette system.
There is evidence that some aggradation may be taking place in the lower North Alouette
study reach. The South Alouette River, that is controlled by BC Hydro, decreases peak
flows downstream of the dam, has altered the natural geomorphology of this system,
with some corresponding reduction in channel size.
Over the past decade, flooding along the Alouette Rivers, especially the North Alouette
River has become a concern for the residents living in the floodplain. In 2007, extensive
flooding prompted Maple Ridge to establish a multi-stakeholder Task Force for the
Alouette Rivers floodplain to identify and compile information on flood issues in the area
as well as to develop a strategy to manage and/or improve the flood risks along the
North and South Alouette rivers.
The Task Force identified six focus areas:
River hydrology, hydraulics and flood plain mapping
Operation and maintenance
Flood response
Flood proofing and protection
Data collection and information sharing, and
Flood plain management roles and responsibilities.
A hydrotechnical study was initiated to investigate and model both rivers, summarize the
results in a report to improve the understanding of the river regimes, and help all parties
with interests in the floodplain make informed future decisions. In January 2010, the
City retained Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC) to undertake an assessment of the
North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers, develop the hydrotechnical model of the flood
plain and prepare floodplain maps for both rivers.
Staff developed a comprehensive plan based on recommendations from NHC to guide
future flood management actions through a phased approach:
Phase 1 – Data Review and Scoping: The first phase included a review of flood hazard
problems and available information along with the development of a project scope for
the technical investigations as the second phase. A final report for this phase was issued
in January 2011, which was reviewed by staff.
Phase 2 – Technical Investigations: The second phase included geomorphic
assessments, climate and hydrologic analyses, hydraulic modelling of both rivers and
floodplain, flood events and hazard mapping. An interim report for Phase Two was
issued in May 2012 but limitations in accuracy of the river cross sections (supplied by BC
Hydro as part of their dam breach modelling for the Alouette Dam) resulted in the model
not being able to be calibrated. In 2014/15 NHC undertook a finely grained cross-
sectional survey of the rivers and were able to complete the calibration of the model and
finalize the Phase Two report. The report includes the updated hydraulic model, flood
profiles and inundation mapping for different storm intensities ranging from a one-in-two
year event up to a one-in-two hundred year event.
The inundation maps indicate the extent of the floodplain affected by the flooding as well
as the approximate water depths.
Floodplain mapping corresponding to the 200-year flood was prepared for the North and
South Alouette Rivers’ study area. The 200-year flood construction levels (FCLs) include a
freeboard allowance of 0.6 m. The mapping also shows levels corresponding to the 25-
year flood level including 0.6 m freeboard. Flood contours are based on the two-
dimensional model output. The inundation boundaries were verified in the field by NHC
staff and vary slightly compared to the previous mapping - reduced in a few areas and
slightly increased in others.
b)Desired Outcome:
The Phase 2 report by NHC provides updated information regarding the Alouette
floodplain that will assist both residents and the City.
c)Strategic Alignment:
The information compiled and floodplain maps developed as part of the present project
form a key tool in meeting the Task Force objectives and aiding the City in moving
forward to reduce potential future flood losses.
d)Citizen/Customer Implications:
The key benefits of the project are:
Areas prone to flooding during different return period events are now identified and
up‐to‐date Flood Construction Levels (FCLs) estimated. Over time, appropriate flood
protection measures (structural and non-structural) can be developed for affected
housing and long‐range improvements to infrastructure be planned.
The hydraulic model forms a tool for evaluating the impact on flood levels caused by
changes within the floodplain and the river channels. The effects on flood levels
resulting from fill placement, new diking or development on the floodplain can be
evaluated using the model. The benefits of enlarging bridge openings/ culverts or
removing gravel depositions and debris can be also assessed.
The hazard mapping can be used for issuing flood warnings to areas likely to be
affected during particular events and for developing emergency response
procedures. The maps indicate which roads will be most severely affected at a
particular flow and safe access/egress routes can be identified.
The mapping forms a public educational tool to inform residents regarding flood
hazards and to provide guidance on improving residents’ safety.
An important component of flood preparedness is flood recovery. (This was clearly
demonstrated after the Calgary 2013 flooding, where recovery plans had been
developed in advance.) The present mapping products will aid in developing flood
recovery procedures.
e)Interdepartmental Implications:
The Engineering, Operations, Parks and Planning Departments have provided input
during the analysis and modelling of the project.
f)Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The City’s investment in floodplain mapping products is of significant value and
facilitates:
Identification of present flood hazards
Evaluation of any planned future changes in the floodplain/river channels
Development of flood management tools
CONCLUSIONS:
The completion of the second phase of this project has produced a calibrated model that can be
utilized by the City to assist individual property owners as well as larger flood management issues.
It is recommended that “North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis
Phase 2 – Technical Investigations Completion Final Report”, dated February 24, 2016 be endorsed.
“Original signed by Velimir Stetin”
Submitted by: Velimir Stetin, PEng.
Project Manager
“Original signed by David Pollock”
Reviewed by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
General Manager: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
Att: North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers Additonal Floodplain Analysis Phase 2 – Technical
Investigations Completion Final Report
NORTH ALOUETTE AND SOUTH ALOUETTE
RIVERS ADDITIONAL FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS
(FILE NO. 11_5255-20-60)
PHASE 2 – TECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
COMPLETION
FINAL REPORT
City of Maple Ridge, British Columbia
24 February 2016
NHC Ref. No. 300349
NORTH ALOUETTE AND SOUTH ALOUETTE RIVERS
ADDITIONAL FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS
PHASE 2 – TECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS COMPLETION
FINAL REPORT
Prepared for:
City of Maple Ridge
Maple Ridge, British Columbia
Prepared by:
Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd.
Vancouver, British Columbia
24 February 2016
NHC Ref No. 300349
Prepared by:
Andromeda MacIsaac, EIT Vanessa O’Connor, PEng
Hydrotechnical Engineer Hydrotechnical Engineer
Reviewed by:
Monica Mannerström, PEng.
Principal
DISCLAIMER
This document has been prepared by Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd. in accordance with generally
accepted engineering practices and is intended for the exclusive use and benefit of City of Maple Ridge
and their authorized representatives for specific application to the North Alouette and South Alouette
Rivers Additional Floodplain Analysis Phase 2 – Technical Investigations Completion in Maple Ridge,
British Columbia, Canada. The contents of this document are not to be relied upon or used, in whole or
in part, by or for the benefit of others without specific written authorization from Northwest Hydraulic
Consultants Ltd. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd. and its officers, directors, employees, and agents assume no
responsibility for the reliance upon this document or any of its contents by any parties other than the
City of Maple Ridge.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisi
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
CREDITSANDACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TheNHCteamwouldliketothanktheCityofMapleRidgeforinitiatingthisstudy,makingavailable
extensivebackgroundinformationandprovidingadviceandsupportthroughoutthestudy.KeyCity
representativeswere:
VelimirStetin,PEngProjectManager
DavidPollock,PEngMunicipalEngineer
JeffBoehmer,PEngManagerofDesign&Construction
ThefollowingNorthwestHydraulicConsultantsLtd(NHC)personnelparticipatedinthestudy:
MonicaMannerström,PEngProjectManager,Reviewer
VanessaO’Connor,PEngProjectEngineer–HydraulicModelling
AndromedaMacIsaac,EITProjectEngineer–HydraulicModelling
SarahNorth,GISPGISSpecialist
AdrianChantler,PhD,PEngReviewer
TamsinLyle,PEngProjectEngineer(Phase1)
GuilhermedeLima,PhDProjectEngineer–HydraulicModelling(Phase1)
CharleneMenezes,PGeoGeormorphologist(Phase1)
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisii
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
InJanuary2010,theCityofMapleRidge(theCity)retainedNorthwestHydraulicConsultants(NHC)to
completeahydraulicassessmentandpreparefloodplainmapsfortheNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.
ThisassessmentfocussedonthefloodplainareaboundedbyParkLane,236thStreet,127thAvenueand
136thAvenue(Figure1).
FloodingalongtheAlouetteRivershasbecomeasourceofincreasingconcernforMapleRidgeresidents
inrecentyears.In2007,extensivefloodingpromptedthecreationofamultiͲstakeholdertaskforce.Its
objectivesweretoidentifyandcompileinformationonfloodissuesandtodevelopastrategyto
manage/reducethefloodriskalongtheNorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRivers.
Inordertocompleteacomprehensiveplanthatcanguidefuturefloodmanagementactionsandadapt
tocommunityneeds,theCityofMapleRidgehasadoptedaphasedprojectwhichallowsforthe
adjustmentofprojectgoalsandobjectivesasfindingsaresummarisedandtoolsaredeveloped.The
projectistobecompletedinthreephases:
Phase1–DataReviewandScoping:Reviewoffloodhazardproblemsandavailableinformation.
Scopingoftechnicalinvestigations.(ReportissuedinJanuary2011.)
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion:Geomorphicassessments,climateandhydrologic
analyses,hydraulicmodellingofriversandfloodplain,andhazardmapping.(Describedinthisreport,
January2016.)
Phase3ͲResultsAssessmentandReporting:Assessmentofmodellingresultsforthedevelopmentof
floodmanagementstrategiesandflooddamagemitigationoptions.(Completionofadditionaltasks
recommendedinthisreport.)
ChannelcrossͲsectionsurveyscompletedin2014,highͲqualityLiDARdataalsofrom2014,andthe
collectionofcalibrationdataduringthewinterof2014Ͳ2015,allowedfordevelopmentofa
sophisticated2ͲdimensionalMIKEFloodnumericalmodel.Thehydraulicmodelwasusedforsimulating
thefloodlevelscorrespondingtothe2,5,10,25,50,100and200Ͳyeareventsandthesubsequent
generationoffloodextentandfloodhazardmappingfortheseflows.Theupdatedandimproved
mapping,basedoncurrenttopographicinformation,recentflowestimatesandmuchimproved
hydraulicmodellingmethods,ismoreaccuratethanthe1990floodplainmapsandshouldreplacethese.
Thisreportpresentstheupdated200ͲyearfloodplainmapsfortheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiverstudy
reachesanddescribestheirdevelopment.The200Ͳyearfloodlimitincludes0.6moffreeboardand
determinestheupdatedfloodconstructionlevels(FCLs).Alsoincludedarethe25Ͳyearfloodlevels,with
0.6mfreeboard.Floodestimatesincorporatea10%increaseinflowsonallunregulatedbasinsfor
projectedclimatechangeimpactstoyear2100.Downstreamboundaryconditionsweresettoalarge
winterflowontheFraserRiver,whichincludesanallowanceforsealevelrise.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisiii
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
TheCity’sinvestmentinfloodplainmappingproductsisofsignificantvalueandfacilitates:1)the
identificationofpresentfloodhazards;2)evaluationofanyplannedfuturechangesinthe
floodplain/riverchannels;and,3)developmentoffloodmanagementtools.Itisrecommendedthatthe
Cityadoptstherevisedfloodplainmaps.
RecommendationsforfuturetaskstobecompletedunderPhase3include:
x Developmentoffloodbylaws.
x Developmentofanearlywarningsystemforsevereflooding.
x Developmentofanemergencypreparednessplan.
x Developmentofafloodrecoveryprogram.
x Completionofavulnerabilityassessmenttoidentifyhighriskareas.
x Developmentandassessmentofdifferentfloodmitigationoptions.
Thereportalsoincludesrecommendationsformaintainingandupdatingthehydraulicmodeland
mappingovertime.
Section9providesastudysummary,conclusionsandadescriptionoflongtermbenefitsoftheproject.
SpecificrecommendationsareavailableinSection10.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisiv
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
TABLEOFCONTENTS
CREDITSANDACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................I
EXECUTIVESUMMARY...................................................................................................................................II
TABLEOFCONTENTS...................................................................................................................................IV
LISTOFTABLES............................................................................................................................................VI
LISTOFFIGURES..........................................................................................................................................VI
LISTOFMAPS............................................................................................................................................VIII
FLOODPLAINMAP.....................................................................................................................................VIII
1INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................1
1.1Background......................................................................................................................................1
1.1.1InitialPhase2Workin2011.......................................................................................................1
1.1.2FinalizationofPhase2in2015...................................................................................................2
1.2Terminology.....................................................................................................................................3
1.3ScopeofWork..................................................................................................................................3
1.4ReportOrganization.........................................................................................................................3
2GEOMORPHOLOGY................................................................................................................................3
2.1HistoricalPlanformChanges............................................................................................................4
2.1.1ImpactsofPlanformChanges.....................................................................................................4
2.2HistoricalCrossͲSections..................................................................................................................5
2.2.1CrossͲSectionAnalysis................................................................................................................5
2.2.2SpecificGaugeAnalysis...............................................................................................................6
2.2.3InstabilitySummary....................................................................................................................6
2.3ChangesinLandUse........................................................................................................................7
2.3.1ImpactsofLandUseChangesonHydroͲGeomorphology..........................................................7
3CLIMATE.................................................................................................................................................8
3.1.1AvailableData.............................................................................................................................9
3.1.2CurrentClimate...........................................................................................................................9
3.1.3HistoricTrends..........................................................................................................................10
3.1.4FutureClimate..........................................................................................................................11
4HYDROLOGY.........................................................................................................................................12
4.1AvailableData................................................................................................................................12
4.2GeneralHydrology.........................................................................................................................13
4.2.1NorthAlouetteRiver.................................................................................................................13
4.2.2SouthAlouetteRiver.................................................................................................................14
4.3HistoricTrends...............................................................................................................................16
4.3.1NorthAlouetteRiver.................................................................................................................16
4.3.2SouthAlouetteRiver.................................................................................................................16
4.4FrequencyAnalysisandDesignFlowHydrographs.......................................................................16
4.4.1NorthAlouetteRiver.................................................................................................................16
4.4.2SouthAlouetteRiver.................................................................................................................18
4.4.3TributaryInflows.......................................................................................................................20
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisv
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
4.4.4CoordinationofHydrographs...................................................................................................21
4.5DataLimitations.............................................................................................................................21
5COLLECTIONOFCALIBRATIONANDVALIDATIONDATA.....................................................................23
5.1November2014FloodEvent.........................................................................................................23
5.1.1ReviewofNovember2014Data...............................................................................................23
5.1.2November2014NorthAlouetteHydrograph...........................................................................24
5.2January2015Event........................................................................................................................24
5.2.1ReviewofJanuary2015Data....................................................................................................24
5.2.2January2015NorthAlouetteHydrograph...............................................................................25
6SURVEYOFCHANNELCROSSSECTIONS..............................................................................................25
7HYDRAULICMODELLING......................................................................................................................25
7.1DEMDevelopment.........................................................................................................................26
7.2MIKE11...........................................................................................................................................26
7.2.1Network....................................................................................................................................27
7.2.2CrossSections...........................................................................................................................27
7.2.3HydraulicStructures.................................................................................................................28
7.2.4ModelInflowsandWaterLevelBoundaries.............................................................................28
7.2.5MIKE11ModelCalibration........................................................................................................29
7.2.6MIKE11ModelValidation.........................................................................................................30
7.3MIKE21...........................................................................................................................................31
7.3.1ModelDevelopment.................................................................................................................31
7.3.2MIKE21ModelCalibration........................................................................................................33
7.4MIKEFlood......................................................................................................................................33
7.4.1MIKEFloodandMIKE21ModelCalibration..............................................................................33
7.4.2MIKEFloodandMIKE21ModelVerification.............................................................................34
7.5ModelLimitations..........................................................................................................................35
7.6ModelResults................................................................................................................................35
7.6.1SensitivityTesting.....................................................................................................................35
7.6.2DesignFloodModelling............................................................................................................36
7.6.3FloodHazardMapping..............................................................................................................38
8FLOODPLAINMAPPING.......................................................................................................................40
9PROJECTSUMMARY,CONCLUSIONSANDBENEFITS...........................................................................41
9.1SummaryandConclusions.............................................................................................................41
9.2ProjectBenefits..............................................................................................................................42
10RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................................................43
10.1TechnicalRecommendations.........................................................................................................43
10.2FloodManagementRecommendations........................................................................................44
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................46
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisvi
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
LISTOFTABLES
Table1.LargestrecordedprecipitationeventsatPittPolder....................................................................10
Table2.LargestrecordedprecipitationeventsatHaneyUBCRF..............................................................10
Table3.SummaryofWSChydrometricgauges..........................................................................................12
Table4.LargestrecordedfloweventsontheNorthAlouetteRiver(1969–Present)...............................14
Table5.LargestrecordedfloweventsontheSouthAlouetteRiver(1984–Present)1.............................15
Table6.SummaryofannualflowfrequencyanalysisfortheNorthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet........17
Table7.NorthAlouettedesigndischargehydrographswithclimatechangeimpacts...............................17
Table8.SummaryoffrequencyanalysisfortheSouthAlouetteRiveraboveAlouetteLake....................18
Table9.SummaryofAlouetteLakeinflowsanddesigndischargeoutflowstotheSouthAlouetteRiver.19
Table10.Tributarydesignhydrographpeakinstantaneousdischarges.....................................................20
Table11.Summaryoftributarywatershedareasandelevations..............................................................21
Table12.Summaryofflowsbyareafornearbygauges.............................................................................22
Table13.Summaryofbridgecrossings.......................................................................................................28
Table14.SummaryofMIKE11modelboundaries......................................................................................29
Table15.MIKE11calibrationpeakriverwaterlevelagreement................................................................30
Table16.SummaryofMIKE11roughnessvalues.......................................................................................30
Table17.MIKE11validationpeakriverwaterlevelagreement.................................................................31
Table18.Floodplainresistancevalues........................................................................................................32
Table19.MIKEFloodhighwatermarkwaterlevelagreement...................................................................34
Table20.Peakriverwaterlevelsforflowsensitivityanalysis....................................................................36
Table21.Peakriverwaterlevelsforroughnesssensitivityanalysis...........................................................36
Table22.Floodhazardratings....................................................................................................................38
LISTOFFIGURES
Figure1Studyarea.
Figure2Currentlanduse.
Figure3NorthAlouetteRiveroverviewofgeomorphicfeatures.
Figure4Historicalcrosssectionlocations.
Figure5HistoricalcrosssectioncomparisonontheNorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure6HistoricalcrosssectioncomparisonontheSouthAlouetteRiver.
Figure7Specificgaugecurve–08MH006–NorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure8Specificgaugecurve–08MH005–SouthAlouetteRiver.
Figure9Historicalairphotosofstudyareainsequence.
Figure10AlouetteRiverswatersheds.
Figure11MeanmonthlytemperatureandprecipitationforAlouetteRiverswatershedgauges:Pitt
Polder.
Figure12MeanmonthlytemperatureandprecipitationforAlouetteRiverswatershedgauges:Haney
UBCRFAdmin.
Figure13Annualmaximumprecipitationevents:PittPolder.
Figure14Annualmaximumprecipitationevents:HaneyUBCRFAdmin.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisvii
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Figure15Numberofrainydayeventsbyyear.
Figure16Annualandwinterprecipitation:PittPolder.
Figure17Annualandwinterprecipitation:HaneyUBCRF.
Figure18Temperaturetrendsunderclimatechange.
Figure19Precipitationtrendsunderclimatechange.
Figure20MeanmonthlyflowsforNorthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet.
Figure21SummaryannualhydrographsforNorthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet.
Figure22MeanmonthlyflowsforSouthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet.
Figure23SummaryannualhydrographsforSouthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet.
Figure24MeanmonthlyflowsforSouthAlouetteRiveraboveAlouetteLake.
Figure25SummaryannualhydrographsforSouthAlouetteRiveraboveAlouetteLake.
Figure26DailyflowonNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.
Figure27Annualpeakdailyandinstantaneousflows:NorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure28Annualpeakdailyseasonalflows:NorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure29Numberofhighflowdaysbyyear:NorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure30NorthAlouetteDesignFlowHydrographswithClimateChangeImpacts.
Figure31STELLASystemsModelofAlouetteReservoirandDamͲOverview.
Figure32DesignDischargeHydrographstoSouthAlouetteRiver.
Figure33HydrographShapeSensitivity.
Figure34Hypsometriccurvesfortributarywatersheds.
Figure35StageͲdischargeratingcurveforAVAGaugeatPedestrianBridge:NorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure36StageͲdischargeratingcurveforMapleRidgeGaugeat224thStreet:NorthAlouetteRiver.
Figure37NorthAlouetteRiverNovember2014InflowHydrograph.
Figure38NorthAlouetteRiverJanuary2015InflowHydrograph.
Figure39MIKE11modelnetwork.
Figure40November2014calibrationeventinflowboundaryconditions.
Figure41November2014calibrationeventwaterlevelboundaryconditions.
Figure42November2014calibrationatNorthAlouette232ndStreetBridge.
Figure43November2014calibrationatNorthAlouetteAVAGauge.
Figure44November2014calibrationatNorthAlouette224thStreetBridge(MapleRidgeGauge).
Figure45November2014calibrationatSouthAlouette232ndStreetBridge(WSCGauge).
Figure46November2014calibrationatAlouetteRiversconfluence(PittMeadowsGauge).
Figure47January2015validationeventinflowboundaryconditions.
Figure48January2015validationeventwaterlevelboundaryconditions.
Figure49January2015validationatNorthAlouette232ndStreetBridge.
Figure50January2015validationatNorthAlouetteAVAGauge.
Figure51January2015validationatNorthAlouette224thStreetBridge(MapleRidgeGauge).
Figure52January2015validationatSouthAlouette232ndStreetBridge(WSCGauge).
Figure53January2015validationatAlouetteRiversconfluence(PittMeadowsGauge).
Figure54MIKE21meshsurface.
Figure55MIKE21modelroughness.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysisviii
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
LISTOFMAPS
Map12ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map25ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map310ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map425ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map550ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map6100ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map7200ͲYearFloodDepths.
Map82ͲYearFloodHazard.
Map95ͲYearFloodHazard.
Map1010ͲYearFloodHazard.
Map1125ͲYearFloodHazard.
Map1250ͲYearFloodHazard.
Map13100ͲYearFloodHazard.
Map14200ͲYearFloodHazard.
FLOODPLAINMAP
200ͲYearFloodExtentsIncludingFreeboard.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis1
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
1INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
TheCityofMapleRidge(City)retainedNorthwestHydraulicConsultants(NHC)inJanuary2010to
completeahydraulicassessmentandpreparefloodplainmapsfortheNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.
ThisassessmentfocussedonthefloodplainareaboundedbyParkLane,236thStreet,127thAvenueand
136thAvenue(Figure1).CurrentlandusewithinthefloodplainisshowninFigure2.
FloodingalongtheAlouetteRivershasbecomeasourceofincreasingconcernforMapleRidgeresidents
inrecentyears.In2007,extensivefloodingpromptedthecreationofamultiͲstakeholdertaskforce.This
taskforceincludedrepresentativesfromthemunicipality,relevantprovincialandfederalagencies,
universitiesandthecommunityatlarge.Itsobjectivesweretoidentifyandcompileinformationonflood
issuesandtodevelopastrategytomanage/reducethefloodriskalongtheNorthAlouetteandSouth
AlouetteRivers.
Inordertocompleteacomprehensiveplanthatcouldguidefuturefloodmanagementactionsandadapt
tocommunityneeds,theCityofMapleRidgehasadoptedaphasedprojectapproachrecommendedby
NHC.Thisapproachallowsfortheadjustmentofprojectgoalsandobjectivesasfindingsaresummarised
andtoolsaredeveloped.Theprojectistobecompletedinthreephases:
Phase1–DataReviewandScoping:Reviewoffloodhazardproblemsandavailableinformation.
Scopingoftechnicalinvestigations.(ReportissuedinJanuary2011.)
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion:Geomorphicassessments,climateandhydrologic
analyses,hydraulicmodellingofriversandfloodplain,andfloodeventsandhazardmapping.
(Thisreport,issuedJanuary2016.)
Phase3ͲResultsAssessmentandReporting:Assessmentofmodellingresultsforthedevelopmentof
floodmanagementstrategiesandflooddamagemitigationoptions.
Phase1providedasummaryofthegeomorphology,climateandhydrologyoftheAlouetteRivers.For
completion,someofthismaterialisincludedhere.Thegeomorphologyandtheclimateinformationhas
notbeenupdated.However,someofthehydrologyhasbeenreviewedtoreflectrecenttrends.
1.1.1 InitialPhase2Workin2011
AninitialversionofthePhase2–TechnicalInvestigationsReportandExecutiveSummarywere
submittedtotheCityofMapleRidgeinJune2011.
AspartofthetechnicalinvestigationsintheinitialPhase2work,ahydraulicmodelwasdevelopedfor
theNorthandSouthAlouetterivers(1Dflow)andfloodplain(2Dflow).Themodellingwasundertaken
tosimulatearangeoffloodflowsuptothe200Ͳyeardesignfloodandtodevelopcorresponding
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis2
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
inundationmappingfortherivers.GeometricdatainputtothemodelincludedrivercrossͲsections
surveyedbyBCHydroandpartialDigitalElevationModel(DEM)dataofthefloodplain.
TheBCHydroriversurveys,completedin2008,werecollectedtocarryoutdambreachmodellingfor
theAlouetteDamaspartofabroadersafetyreviewofdamsinBC.ForconsistencywiththeBCHydro
study,thesamerivercrossͲsectionssurveyedbyBCHydrowereinitiallyprovidedtoNHCforflood
modelling.However,dambreachmodellingissignificantlydifferentfromfloodmodellinginthat
extremeflowvolumesaresimulatedandwaterlevelsareassessedtoalesserdegreeofaccuracy.
TheresultinginitialPhase2modelwasusefulforgeneraldemonstrationoffloodhazardsandassessing
impactsofmajorfloodplainalterations,whichweresummarisedinthe2011ExecutiveSummary.
However,duetothesimplifiedportrayaloftheriverchannels,themodelaccuracywaslowandthe
modelwasnotconsideredsuitableforestablishingFloodConstructionLevels(FCLs)ordetailed
inundationmapping.
TheinitialPhase2modellingwasalsolimitedbyalackofsuitablecalibrationdata.Ideally,ahydraulic
modelshouldbecalibratedtothehighestpossiblehistoricfloodif200Ͳyearfloodsimulationsaretobe
performed.Bothflowmeasurementsandsurveyedhighwatermarksareneededforthecalibration
event.AlthoughbothrivershaveWaterSurveyCanada(WSC)hydrometricgauges,thegaugesoftenfail
duringpeakflowsandobservedhighwatermarksarelimited.
1.1.2 FinalizationofPhase2in2015
On31May2013,theCityofMapleRidgeandNHCmettodiscussthestatusofworkcompletedtodate,
whatwouldberequiredtocompletePhase2andfinalizethestudyandhowtheCitycouldbestmove
forwardwithfloodmanagementoftherivers.Asaresultofthemeetingdiscussions,NHCrecommended
anewscopeofworktoenhanceandexpandonfindingsfromtheinitialprojectwork.
ItwasagreedthatNHCwouldresurveythechannelsinmoredetailandatareducedspacing.Thenew
(2014)surveyfocusedonthepreviouslydefinedprojectarea(roughly5kmlongreachesofbothrivers)
andwascarefullylaidouttocapturetheconstrictedchannellocationsthathavethegreatestimpacton
watersurfaceprofiles.Inaddition,theCitycollectedupͲtoͲdateLiDARdatafortheentirefloodplainto
bemodeled.
Aprogramwasalsoinitiatedallowingforthecollectionofmorecalibrationdataoverthewinterof2014
Ͳ2015.Thisprogrammonitoredpeakflows,quicklymobilizingafieldcrewduringhighfloodstomeasure
flowsandmaphighwaterlevels.Thedatacollectedfromthisprogramhasbeenusedtorecalibrateand
validatethePhase2model.
ThisreportsummarizesthefinalizedresultsofPhase2–TechnicalinvestigationsCompletion,including
theupdatedhydraulicmodel,floodprofilesandinundationmapping.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis3
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
1.2 Terminology
TodistinguishclearlybetweenthetwoAlouetteRivers,theAlouetteRiverisreferredtoastheSouth
AlouetteRiverinthisreport;theNorthAlouetteRiverkeepsitsofficialname.
1.3 ScopeofWork
AspertheCityofMapleRidgetermsofreference,thescopeofservicesforthePhase2Completion
Workcomprised:
Reviewofpastworkandnewdataavailable,
Collectionofcalibrationdata,
NewsurveyofchannelcrossͲsections,
UpdateofexistingMIKEFloodmodel,
Floodplainmapping,and
EnhancementandreissueofthePhase2report.
1.4 ReportOrganization
Inadditiontotheintroduction,backgroundinformationandscopeofworkincludedinSection1,Section
2providesareviewoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRivergeomorphology.Theclimateandhydrologyof
thesystemareincludedinSections3and4,respectively.Calibrationdatacollectionisoutlinedin
Section5,thechannelsurveysinSection6andthehydraulicmodellingofthesystemisdiscussedin
Section7.Section8summarizesthefloodplainmappingforthestudyarea,followedbysummaryand
conclusionsinSection9andrecommendationsinSection10.
2 GEOMORPHOLOGY
ThegeomorphicsettingandasummaryofthefluvialgeomorphologyofboththeNorthandSouth
AlouetteRiverswaspresentedinthePhase1reporting.Thissectionsummarizespreviousanalyses
completedtomeettheevaluationobjective:
Assessifmorphologyofrivershaschangedovertime.Ifso,examinetheimpactofthese
changesonthefloodhazard.
Giventheaboveobjective,historicalchangestotherivers’morphologywasexaminedbylookingat
historicalairphotosandmapping(planformchanges),andbylookingatchangestobedlevels(section
changes).Changestothelanduseofthesurroundingwatershedswerealsoreviewed.Theresultsof
theseanalysesarepresentedbelow.ItshouldbenotedthattheSection2geomorphicassessmentwas
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis4
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
completedduringinitialPhase2workin2011andhasnotbeenupdatedtoincludethecrosssections
collectedbyNHCin2014.
2.1 HistoricalPlanformChanges
AvailableairphotographswerescaledandrectifiedusinggeoͲreferencingtools.Subsequently,bank
linesforalltheyearsofphotographyweredigitizedbasedontheedgeofvegetation.Overlayingthese
layersinGISallowedfortheevaluationofplanformchangesovertime.
OntheNorthAlouetteRiversystem,therehasbeensignificantchannelchange,particularlybetweenthe
232ndSt.Bridgeandthe132ndAve.Bridge(Figure3).Althoughanecdotalevidencesuggestsgreater
recentinͲchanneldepositionobservedthroughthegrowthandexpansionofbarfeatures,these
sedimentaccumulationsaretransientandarelikelytobemobilizedinthenexthighflowevent.A
possibleexceptionoccursneartheconstrictionintheNorthAlouettechanneldownstreamofthe224th
StBridge:sedimentaccumulatingupstreamofthebridgemaybeslowertoflushdownstream.Bedform
changesarenowexpectedatthe232ndStreetbridgecrossingasanewsinglespanbridgewas
constructedin2013.Asthebridgeclearancewasincreasedandtheoldpierswereremoved,conveyance
atthislocationhasbeensubstantiallyincreased,loweringwaterlevelsforsomedistanceupstreamof
thebridge.
Since1959,theSouthAlouetteRiverchannelhasexperiencedsomelateralmigration,mainlyat
meanderbends.AtthelargebendatMapleRidgePark,fieldobservationsverifythatsignificanterosion
ofwidesectionsalongtheright(north)bankhasoccurred.Conversely,pointbarfeaturesalonginner
banksoftheSouthAlouette–oneatthefirstlargebenddownstreamof232ndStandanother,
immediatelyupstreamofthe224thStBridge–becameincreasinglyvegetatedandestablishedbetween
1959and1974.
2.1.1 ImpactsofPlanformChanges
Ingeneral,ameanderingplanforminvolveschannelshiftingthrougherosionontheoutsideofbends
anddepositionontheinside.Bankretreatasaresultofthiserosionhasbeenobservedbothonthe
NorthandSouthAlouetteRiversystems.ThepropertyonthenorthbankoftheNorthAlouettejust
upstreamofthe224thStBridgeisaffectedbythisprocess.OntheSouthAlouette,thishasbeen
occurringonthenorthbankalongMapleRidgePark.
Landlossisbalancedbythedevelopmentofbarformsalongtheoppositebank.TheinͲchannel
depositionhasbeenaconcernlocallyontheNorthAlouetteRiversystem.Theaggradationofthe
channelbedͲeveniftemporaryͲcancontributetohigherwaterlevels,andincreasetheseverityof
floodingduringhighflowevents.
Incontrast,theestablishmentofvegetationonpointbarsontheSouthAlouetteRiversuggeststhatthe
channelbedhasbecomemorestablepresumablybecauseofreducedsedimentinputfromupstream
relatedtoriverregulationbyBCHydro’sAlouetteDam.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis5
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
2.2 HistoricalCrossͲSections
TheProvincesurveyed68sectionsoftheNorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversin1981,whichwere
usedinthe1991floodplainmappingstudy.Horizontalpositionsfor1981crossͲsectionswererecorded
toalesspreciselocaldatum.In2008,BCHydroconductedextensivesurveysofbothriversaspartof
theirAlouetteDamFloodSimulationandMappingproject;109sectionsweresurveyedfromthedamto
themouthoftheriverstogeodeticdatum.Figure4showsthelocationsofthe1981and2008crossͲ
sectionsinthestudyarea.
TherewerelimitationstotheprecisequantitativeanalysisofcrossͲsections.Assectionsweresurveyed
atdifferentlocationsin1981andin2008,directcomparisonofcrossͲsectionswaslimited.Although
crossͲsectionsatbridgelocationswereconsistentlysurveyed,bridgereplacementsintheintervening
periodmayhavealteredsomesections.Forinstance,the132ndAve.BridgeacrosstheNorthAlouette
Riverwasreplacedin1995andthe232ndStreetbridgewasreplacedin2013.OntheSouthAlouette
River,the232ndSt.Bridgewasbuiltin2004andthe224thSt.Bridgein1995.Attwolocationsonthe
SouthAlouette,crossͲsectionsthatdonotlieatbridgecrossingsweresurveyedattheidenticallocations
butwithdifferentorientationsacrossthechannel,complicatingdirectcomparison.
2.2.1 CrossͲSectionAnalysis
Figure5andFigure6showhistoricalcomparisonofcrossͲsectionscollectedontheNorthandSouth
AlouetteRiversrespectively.
TheNorthAlouetteRivershowsgreaterchangewithincrossͲsectionsthantheSouthAlouetteRiver.The
riverhasthepotentialtomovelargequantitiesofrelativelyunconsolidated,glaciofluvialtill,which
formstheregion’ssurficialgeology,becauseoftheerodibilityofthematerialandthegradientofthe
channelheadwaters.Thissedimentiscarrieddownstreamanddepositedonthefloodplain;itistypically
reͲmobilizedinsubsequenthighflowevents.Asaresult,channelgeometryvariesassedimentis
depositedandlatertransportedfurtherdownstream.Atboththe224thSt.andthe132ndAve.bridges
acrosstheNorthAlouette,thecrossͲsectionsclearlyshowthattheriverbedhasaggradedbetween1981
and2008,withdepositionontheorderof1m.Thereachbetween232ndStand224thStisexpectedto
beadepositionaloneowingtoitslowgradient,althoughthenew2013232ndStreetbridgeshould
greatlyincreaseconveyance.Theamountofdepositionisprimarilyinfluencedbytheavailabilityof
sedimentfromupstream.Sedimentaccumulatedalongtherightbankatthe224thStcrossingmayhave
beenremovedbydredging(August6,1997)therebyexplainingtheretreatedrightbankprofilein2008.
IncomparisontotheNorthAlouette,crossͲsectionsonthelargerSouthAlouetteRiver(Figure6)show
lessvariationinbedtopography.ThereisaslightloweringofthechannelbedatcrossͲsectionsinthe
upperreach,particularlyupstreamofthe232ndStBridge;thetwolowerreachcrossͲsectionsexhibit
somedeposition,mainlyatthethalweg.Thisisexpectedasthereisamarkedchangeinchannelgradient
from0.7%to0.3%,andconsequently,instreamenergy,betweenthetworeaches.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis6
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
2.2.2 SpecificGaugeAnalysis
AspecificgaugeanalysiswasconductedforthetwoWaterSurveyCanada(WSC)hydrometricgauges
availableinthestudyarea;oneoneachoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.Specificgaugeanalyses
areconductedbylookingatmeasuredflowsandwaterlevelsatthegaugesitetocheckfortrendsover
time.Over600recordsofsitevisitsbyWSCwereexaminedandcompiledtocompletethisanalysis.On
theNorthAlouetteRiverover450recordsfrom1911through2003wereexamined;only7recordsare
availablefortheperiodfrom1911to1959.FewerrecordsareavailablefromtheSouthAlouettegauge,
180plusrecordswereexaminedstartingin1977.Therecordsweregroupedbydischarge,andwater
levelsovertimewereplotted.
ResultsofspecificgaugeanalysescarriedoutonthetwoWSCgaugesshowsometrendsinwaterlevels
overtime.AtWSCgauge08MH006ontheNorthAlouetteRiver,waterlevelsforaspecificdischarge
havedecreasedbetween1961and2003(Figure7).Thisimpliesdegradationofthechannelbedatthe
232ndSt.crossing,wherethegaugeislocated,orinthedownstreamreachcontrollinglevelsatthis
point.The232ndSt.Bridgelikelyactedasachannelconstrictionresultinginhighflowvelocitiesscouring
thebedatthegaugesection,particularlyathighflows.Apossiblesecondaryexplanationisthathigh
flowstravellingdownthesteepvalleyslopeareabletomobilizeanysedimenttemporarilydepositedat
thissection,transportingitdownstreamtowardsthe132ndStand224thStbridgeswhereaggradation
hasbeennoted.Itshouldbenotedthatthenewestreplacementofthebridgein2013mayhave
changedtheratingrelationshippostthisanalysis.
TheSouthAlouettegauge08MH005islocatedontherightbankat232ndSt.Tosomeextent,thebridge
replacementin2004couldhaveaffectedtheratingrelationship.Aspecificgaugeanalysissuggeststhat
thechannelhaspartlyaggradedaswaterlevelshaveincreasedbetween1977and2003forflowsless
thanthemeanannualflowof3.5m3/s(Figure8).Atflowsinthemeanflowrangethechannelis
relativelystable(i.e.thetrendlinesareeffectivelyflat).ThissuggeststhatoutsidethelowͲflowchannel,
theriverisnotchangingsignificantly.However,athigherdischarges,thechannelmaybedegradingas
suggestedbythecrossͲsectioncomparison.Unfortunately,therearetoofewdischargemeasurements
takenathighflowstoallowforaccuratecomparison.Also,the2008crossͲsectiondoesnotextendfully
totherightbanktoprovidecompleteevidence.Priortodamconstruction,muchlargerflowsshapedthe
riverchannelandforthecurrent,reducedflows,thechannelisoversized.Upstreamtributariesmay
havecontributedsomesedimenttoraisingthebedlocally,despitetheoverallreducedsedimentsupply
pastthedam.
2.2.3 InstabilitySummary
Bothriversaredynamicandhavechangedoverthecourseofthelastcentury;thesechangesaremore
apparentonthesmaller,unregulatedNorthAlouettesystem.TheregulationoftheSouthAlouette
system,whichdecreasespeakflowsdownstreamofthedam,hasalteredthenaturalexpectedchanges
tothesystem.Unfortunately,thelackofconsistenthistoricsurveydataandhighflowdischarge
measurementsmeanthatdrawingconclusionsregardingtheoverallpatternofaggradationor
degradationisdifficult.Bridgesitesgenerallyconstrictflowandcanconsequentlycausedegradationat
floodflows,whichappearstobethecaseatthetwogaugesites.AlthoughthecrossͲsectioncomparison
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis7
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
isquitelimited,thereisreasonableevidencethatsomeaggradationmaybetakingplaceinthelower
NorthAlouettestudyreach.
2.3 ChangesinLandUse
Changestolandusewithinthewatershedcanhavealargeimpactonrivermorphology.Forexample,an
urbanisedareawillgenerallycreatemorerunoffandstreampower,whichcanchangetheriver
structure.LandswithinthestudyareaintheCityofMapleRidgehavebeenconvertedfromprimarily
foresttoamixofagricultural,commercialandresidentiallandusesinceincorporation(Figure2).Much
ofthisareaalsolieswithintheAgriculturalLandReserve(ALR),andassuchisprotectedfrommajor
changesassumingtheregulatoryregimeremainsineffect.
Historicalairphotosfrom1959,1974,and1989werereviewedtoidentifypastchangesinlanduse
withinthewatershedandtheresultingimpacts.AdditionalhistoricalimagerywasavailablefromGoogle
Earthfortheyears2004and2008andprovidedamorecomprehensiveanalysisofchange.Figure9
showsthehistoricalairphotoimagesinsequence.
Inthe1959airphoto,landhasbeenclearedforfarmingandsomelowdensityresidential
developmentnortheastof224thSt.and136thAve.intersection.Landhasbeenclearednorth
of132ndAve.,between232ndSt.and224thSt.,forhousing.ClearingoflandintheSilver
Valleyareahasalsobegun.
The1974airphotoshowsnosignificantincreaseinlandclearedsince1959.Thedensityof
residentialdevelopmentisincreasingsouthof128thAve.
The1989airphotoshowssignificantclearingofthelandbetweenNorthandSouthAlouette
Rivers,includinglossofriparianvegetationalongthenorthbankoftheNorthAlouetteand
alongthesouthbankoftheSouthAlouette.LandhasbeenfurtherclearedinSilverValleyto
accommodatenewhouses.
Inthe2004airphoto,clearingsintheSilverValleyareahaveexpandedandthisisaccompaniedbythe
startofconstructionofanewresidentialsubdivision.Afarmoperationhasalsobeenbuiltalong232nd
St.betweenNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.Aswell,thereismoredenseresidentialdevelopment
southof124thAve.between232ndSt.and224thSt.Cranberrybogshavebeencreated,adjacenttothe
NorthAlouetteRiveranddownstreamof224thSt.,throughtheconstructionofdikes(beyondtheimage
extentsonFigure9).
The2008airphotoshowsthecontinuedconstructionofhousesaspartofthedevelopmentofa
residentialsubdivisioninSilverValley.
2.3.1 ImpactsofLandUseChangesonHydroͲGeomorphology
LargeͲscalelandconversionfromforesttomediumͲdensityresidentialdevelopmentintheSilverValley
areahaslikelyimpactedtheNorthAlouetteriversystemdownstreamof232ndSt.tosomeextent.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis8
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Increasedsedimentavailabilityandincreasedrunoffaretwotypicaleffectsoflanddevelopment.There
isasignificantbreakinchannelslopeapproximately500mupstreamofthe232ndSt.crossingwherethe
riverleavesthemountainvalleyandentersthebroad,alluvialplain.Availablesedimentistransported
downthesteephillslope,andsubsequentlydepositedinthelowͲgradientchannelbelow.Alongthe
SouthAlouetteRiver,theurbanizationoflandsouthof124thAve.mayhaveresultedinsomewhat
increasedstreamflowsinthetributariesduetoreducedinfiltration,andpotentiallyincreasedsediment
conveyedtothemainchannelfromthetributariesasaresultofgrounddisturbanceandincreased
runoff.However,adetailedassessmentofstormwaterrunoffwasnotcarriedout.
TributariestotheNorthAlouetteRiverhavelikelyalsobeenimpacted.Developmentofthearea
between224thSt.and232ndSt.,northof136thAve.,hasalteredthenaturaldrainagepatternandpathof
CattellBrooktributary.Itsflowhasbeendirectedthroughculvertsandditchesexcavatedalong224thSt.,
whichappeartobeinadequatelysizedtoaccommodateflowfromtheNorthAlouetteRiverwhenit
overtopsitsbanks.
ThehydraulicsoftheNorthAlouettesystemhasbeenalteredbylargewetlandspartiallybeing
convertedtobogstoaccommodatecranberryproduction.Therelatedconstructionofdikeshasreduced
thefloodplainwaterstorageareaavailabletotheNorthAlouetteRiverduringfloodperiods.
3 CLIMATE
CharacterizationoftheclimateoftheNorthandSouthAlouettewatershedsplaysanimportantrolein
thedevelopmentoffloodmappingandfloodmanagementplans.MapleRidge,inthelowerreachesof
theNorthandSouthAlouettewatershedsenjoysamild,temperatecoastalclimate.Meandaily
temperaturesvaryfrom2°Cinthewintermonthstojustover17°Cattheheightofsummer.Theregion
hasasignificantannualprecipitationofapproximately2,200mm,withmostoftheprecipitationfalling
asrainbetweenOctoberandMarch;thesummersarerelativelydry.
TheSouthAlouettewatershedincludesalargemountainousregion,withpeaksextendingupto1,800m
elevation.Theclimateinthispartofthewatersheddifferssignificantlyfromthelowerreaches.The
coastalmountainsreceivesignificantprecipitation,muchofwhichfallsassnow.Thiscanresultinlarge
flowsinthespring,whensnowinthemiddleandupperelevationsmelts.Inthefallandwinterwhen
warmcoastalfronts(sometimesreferredtoasa“pineappleexpress”)bringwarmmoistairtothe
region,riversswellwithstormwaterinadditiontomeltwaterfromtheserainͲonͲsnowevents.Manyof
theNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers’majorfloodeventshavebeenasaresultofthistypeofstorm.
ItshouldbenotedthattheSection3climateassessmentwascompletedduringinitialPhase2workin
2011.Norecordbreakingprecipitationeventshavetakenplacesince2011.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis9
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
3.1.1 AvailableData
EnvironmentCanadamaintainsfouractiveclimatedatagaugesinandneartheAlouettewatershed
basins(Figure10):
1) PittPolder(CI1106180),Elevation5m
2) HaneyUBCRFAdmin(CI1103332),Elevation147m
3) HaneyEast(CI1103326),Elevation30.5m
4) KanakaCreek(CI1104R02),Elevation70m
Datafromthesesiteshasbeenusedtoestablishgeneralclimateindicatorsforthewatersheds.
Historictemperatureandprecipitationrecordsforeachofthefourgaugesinthevicinityofthe
watershedswereanalysed.Afterinitialassessments,thetwomosteasterlygauges(HaneyEastand
KanakaCreek)wereeliminatedfromfurtheranalysis.Thesetwogaugeslieoutsidethewatersheds,and
showsignificantlydifferentannualprecipitationvolumesthanthegaugesinsidethewatersheds.The
analysisisthereforefocusedondatafromthePittPolderandHaneyUBCRFAdmingauges;these
provideexcellentinsightintotheclimateofthelowerandmidelevationwatersheds,butprovidelimited
informationastotheclimateoftheupperwatersheds.Precipitationandtemperaturerecordsforthe
twogaugesdatebackto1951.
3.1.2 CurrentClimate
ThePittPolderandHaneyUBCgaugesshowsimilarpatternsoftemperatureandprecipitation(Figure11
andFigure12).Meanmonthlytemperaturesrangefromjustover2°Cinthewintertoaround18°Cin
thesummer.Precipitationpatternsfollowgeneraltemperatecoastalpatterns,withthegreatest
precipitationamountsfallingbetweenOctoberandMarch;averagemonthlyprecipitationisaround
300mmforthisperiod.Thesummersarerelativelydry,withmonthlyprecipitationvolumesofaround
75mm.Themajorityofprecipitationfallsasraininthelowerwatershed;smallamountsofsnoware
observedonceortwiceayear.TotalaverageannualprecipitationatthePittPoldergaugeis2,230mm
and2,150mmattheHaneyUBCRFgauge.
Intheupperwatershedageneralpatternofhighprecipitation,coldwintersandlowprecipitation,and
highertemperaturesummersisexpected.However,temperaturesaregenerallylowerbyasmuchas15
degrees,andprecipitationvolumesarehigherthanatlowerelevations.Muchofthewinter
precipitationfallsassnow,andisstoredintheupperwatersheduntiltheairheatsupinthespringand
summer.ThisgivesrisetothenivalhydrologicregimeontheSouthAlouetteRiver;whereflowspeakin
thespringduringthesnowmeltperiod.TheNorthAlouetteRiverwatershedisoverallmuchlowerin
elevation,anddoesnothavehighvolumesofsnowstoredinthemountains.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis10
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
3.1.3 HistoricTrends
Accordingtosomeobservers,thehydrologyoftheAlouetteRivershaschangedovertime,particularlyin
recentyears.Toinvestigatepotentialchangesinthehydrology,longtermtrendsinprecipitation
recordswereassessed.FloodingontheAlouetteRiverscanresultfromanintensesingleday
precipitationevent,butismorecommonlyattributabletolongerperiodsofprecipitation.Therefore,
shortduration(1Ͳday),mediumduration(3Ͳday)andlongduration(5Ͳday)precipitationeventswere
calculatedforthePittPolderandHaneyUBCRFgauges.TheresultsarepresentedinTable1,Table2,
Figures13and14.
Table1.LargestrecordedprecipitationeventsatPittPolder.
Rank1ͲDay3ͲDay 5ͲDay
Preci
p
DatePrecip
(mm)
DatePrecip
(mm)
Date
1143.8November2,1955258.0 January17Ͳ19,1968 336.4 January15Ͳ19,2005
2142.6October16,2003253.6 January15Ͳ17,2005 287.0 January16Ͳ20,1968
3134.1January18,1968248.5 November7Ͳ9,1989 280.2 October16Ͳ20,2003
4131.0February23,1986248.4 October15Ͳ17,2003 278.0 November5Ͳ9,1989
5126.0December8,1956231.4 December7Ͳ9,1956 271.6 December13Ͳ17,
6117.9December22,1963226.1 April27Ͳ29,1959 271.5 November8Ͳ12,1990
7115.0January3,1984221.5 November8Ͳ10,1990 258.0 February12Ͳ16,1982
8115.0November9,1989211.1 November1Ͳ3,1955 253.0 Dec27ͲJan1,1963
9109.6July11,1983206.5 February22Ͳ24,1986 249.0 December14Ͳ18,
10106.0October9,1995205.0 December15Ͳ17,1966 247.9 April24Ͳ29,1959
Table2.LargestrecordedprecipitationeventsatHaneyUBCRF.
Rank1ͲDay3ͲDay 5ͲDay
Preci
p
DatePrecip
(mm)
DatePrecip
(mm)
Date
1145.8October16,2003256.8 March17Ͳ19,1997 287.1 October16Ͳ20,2003
2127.2March17,1997249.5 October15Ͳ17,2003 286.1 December13Ͳ17,
3125.2January18,1968238.2 January18Ͳ20,1968 283.8 March15Ͳ19,1997
4119.2December13,1979227.2 January17Ͳ19,2005 279.6 January16Ͳ20,2005
5115.0February23,1986220.0 November8Ͳ10,1990 263.0 January16Ͳ20,1968
6106.7December25,1972190.2 December15Ͳ17,1966 263.0 November8Ͳ12,1990
7104.0January17,2005187.0 November7Ͳ9,1989 259.0 December21Ͳ25,
8101.0January1,2007186.7 November12Ͳ14,1998 241.1 February12Ͳ16,1982
998.4January3,1984182.6 February12Ͳ14,1982 229.8 December14Ͳ18,
1098.0July11,1983180.7 February22Ͳ24,1986 227.5 November11Ͳ15,
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis11
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Thetwogaugesshowvariedresults,withtypicallyinconsistentrankingofthelargeevents.The
consistentlargeeventsincludeJanuary2005,October2003andJanuary1968.
Thelargesteventsineachyearwereanalysedtoseeiftherewasanyobservableincreaseinrain
volumesandnumberofeventsperyearoverthecourseofthegaugerecord.Figure13andFigure14
showpeakannualprecipitationevents;noincreaseineventvolumeisobserved.Thiswascorroborated
bycheckingforthenumberofheavyraindaysperyearsincethe1950s;atypicalheavyprecipitation
eventthatmightresultinflooding.AthresholdrainyͲdaywasestablishedtobethe2Ͳyear,1Ͳdayevent,
whichis82mmand78mmforthePittPolderandHaneyUBCRFgaugesrespectively.Thetotalnumber
ofdayswithraininexcessofthisispresentedinFigure15.Thechartshowsnoobservabletrendover
time,thoughitdoesclearlyshowthattherainiestyearsatbothgaugeswere1968,1997and2007.
Furthermore,longͲtermtrendswereexaminedbylookingatthedeviationfromnormalannualand
winterprecipitation(Figure16andFigure17).Inlinewiththeearlieranalyses,therearenodetectable
trendsovertheperiodofrecord.
Insummary,therehavebeenanumberofsignificantprecipitationeventsinMapleRidgeovertheyears.
However,thedataavailabletodatedoesnotconclusivelyshowthattherehasbeenanincreaseineither
theintensityorfrequencyofprecipitationevents.Thisconclusionisingeneralagreementwiththe
hydrologicanalysispresentedinSection4.
3.1.4 FutureClimate
GeneralclimatetrendswereidentifiedbyusingtheClimateBCdownscalingtooldevelopedbyUBCand
theBCMOF(ClimateBC2006).Usinglocationandelevationasinput,NHCcollectedandanalysedgeneral
temperatureandprecipitationtrendsforMapleRidgeunderthreeclimatechangescenarios.(Itshould
benotedthatupdatingtheseclimatetrendswasnotincludedintheprojectscope).
UsingtheClimateBCtool,keylongͲtermclimatevalueswereestimatedforthreecommonlyusedglobal
circulationmodelsdefinedinthesoftware.Theglobalcirculationmodelspredictdifferentoutcomes
overtime.Resultsfromthethreepresentedmodelscanprovideanideaofthevariationinpossible
futureclimateoutcomes.MeanannualtemperaturesfortheCityareexpectedtorisebetween2.5°C
and3.5°Coverthecourseofthenext60years;summermaximumdailytemperaturescouldrisetowell
over30°CfromthepresentdaymidͲtwenties(Figure18).Overallannualprecipitationisexpectedtorise
minimally;however,seasonalvolumeswillchangeconsiderably(Figures19aand19b).Ahigher
proportionoftheannualprecipitationwillfallduringtheautumnandwinter,whichhassignificant
implicationsforraindrivenfloodeventsintheAlouettesystem.Underthemostextremescenario
(GCM_A2x)thisyieldsa10%increaseinwinterprecipitationvolumes,avaluerecommendedinthe
ProfessionalPracticeGuidelines–LegislatedFloodAssessmentsinaChangingClimateinBCbyAPEGBC
foryear2100conditions.Thisincreaseisappliedtotheclimatechangescenariosinthenumerical
modelling.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis12
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
4HYDROLOGY
ThehydrologicregimesoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversaredistinct.TheNorthAlouette,being
smaller(drainageareaof37.3km2)andunregulated,respondsquicklytostormevents,particularlylarge
rainevents.ThemuchlargerwatershedoftheSouthAlouette(totaldrainageareaof234km2)includes
significantmountainousterrainandtheregulatedAlouetteLake.Thehydrologicregimeisdominatedby
springfreshettypeevents,whicharedampenedbythelakestorage.Thehydrologyofbothriver
systemsisexaminedinthissection.
4.1 AvailableData
ApprovedlongͲtermpeakanddailydischargerecordsupto2011wereobtainedfortheWaterSurvey
Canada(WSC)gaugesontheSouthAlouetteRivernearHaneyandtheNorthAlouetteRiverat232nd
Street(Figure1).Preliminarydatafrom2011toFebruary2015wasalsocollectedandreviewed.
Table3.SummaryofWSChydrometricgauges.
Station
NumberStationName
Gross
Drainage
Area
Periodof
Record
Hydrometric
Measurement
Type
Operational
Schedule
08MH005(SOUTH)
ALOUETTE
RIVERNEAR
HANEY
234km2*
1911–1915
1960–1964
1971–1973
1974–1974
1975–2015
Flow
Flow
Flow
Flow
Flow
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Miscellaneous
Continuous
08MH006NORTH
ALOUETTE
RIVERAT232ND
STREETMAPLE
RIDGE
37.3km21911–1913
1960–1968
1969–2015
Flow
Flow
Flow
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Note:
1. TheSouthAlouetteWatershedincludes24km2betweentheAlouetteDamandtheWSCgauge.
SurveynotesfromtechniciansconductingflowestimatesandmaintenanceonthetwoWSCgaugeswere
alsoexamined.Overtheyears,thestationshavebeenvisitedbetweenthreeandsixtimesperyearand
thegaugedatumcheckedduringthesevisits.Noanomalieswerenotedandnoadjustmentsweremade
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis13
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
totheapprovedrecordprovidedbyWSC.Historicratingcurvesforthegaugeswerealsoanalysedfor
anychangesovertime.
ContinuouswaterlevelandflowdataforthetwoWSCgaugeswasalsoreviewedfor2011toFebruary
2015.However,thisdataisconsideredtobepreliminaryandisnotyetapprovedbyWSC.Assuch,while
thisdatawasreviewedformodelcalibration,itwasnotincludedinthestatisticalfloodfrequency
analysis.
ThreeothercontinuouswaterlevelgaugeshavealsobeeninstalledontheNorthAlouetteRiver(Figure
1).TheCityofMapleRidgehasinstalledacontinuouswaterlevelgaugeontheNorthAlouetteRiverat
224thStreet.DataisavailablefromFebruary2009tothepresent.Similarly,theAlouetteValley
Association(AVA)hasinstalledawaterlevelgaugeatapedestrianbridgeontheNorthAlouettenear
232ndStreet;thistoohascontinuousdataavailablefromFebruary2009onwards.NHCsurveyedbothof
thesegaugelocationsonApril16th,2010inordertotiethegaugesintogeodeticdatum.Datumswere
confirmedduringfollowupsitevisitsinJanuary2015.Lastly,theCityofPittMeadowsmaintainsawater
levelgaugeattheconfluenceoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversandprovideshourlydataonits
website.
AdditionalSouthAlouetteRiverhydrometricinformationisavailablefromBCHydro,whichmonitors
outflowsfromthereservoiratAlouetteLake.BCHydrohasprovidedpartialdamoutflowrecordsfrom
1984,withcompleterecordsfrom2003onwards.BCHydrohasalsoprovidedinformationonestimated
inflowstotheAlouettesystemanddiversionflowstoStaveLake.
WSCalsomaintainsthewaterlevelgaugePittRiverNearPortCoquitlam(08MH035),locatedatthe
downstreamendoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversystem.Thisgaugeisapproximately2km
downstreamoftheconfluenceoftheSouthAlouetteRiverandPittRiver.Thiswatergaugeleveldata
setextendsfrom1948tothepresent.
4.2 GeneralHydrology
4.2.1 NorthAlouetteRiver
TheNorthAlouetteRiverhasatypicalpacificcoastalhydrologicregimewiththelargestflowsoccurring
inthewinterasaresultofheavyprecipitation(Figure20).Meanmonthlyflowsvaryfrom0.7m3/sin
Augustto4.9m3/sinNovember.Themeanannualdischargeis2.8m3/s.Thesemeanflowsare
relativelysmall;howeverpeakflowswellinexcessof80m3/shavebeenobserved(Figure21).Figure21
alsoshowsthatlargefloweventscanoccurinboththesummerandwinter,thoughlargerflowsare
morecommonlyseeninthewinter.ThelargestrecordedflowsontheNorthAlouettearepresentedin
Table4.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis14
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Table4.LargestrecordedfloweventsontheNorthAlouetteRiver(1969–Present).
RankInstantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
Date
12451 March11,2007
2162February24,1986
3157January18,2005
4154November6,2006
5147October16,2003
6140November11,1990
7132November13,1998
8126January4,1984
9124July11,1983
10118December26,1980
Note:
1. WSCestimate.Largeslidethatblockedthechannelatapproximately11.5kmfromthemouthmayhave
causedaflowspikewhenwaterbrokethroughtheslidedam.
Acomparisonwasmadebetweentheextremeflowsandextremeprecipitationevents.Althoughthe
largefloweventssometimesfollowlargeprecipitationevents,thisisnotalwaysthecase.Thereare
otherfactorssuchastemperatureandantecedentconditionsthatplayaroleinthehydrologyofthe
mostextremefloweventsontheNorthAlouetteRiver.
4.2.2 SouthAlouetteRiver
ThehydrologyoftheSouthAlouetteRiverwithinMapleRidgeisdominatedbythecontrolofthe
AlouetteDam;verylittleinformationisavailableregardingitsunregulatedregimepriortothe
constructionofthedamin1926.Modificationsmadetothedamin1984havealsoimpactedtheflow
regime.Meanannualdischargeafter1984is3.5m3/s.Priortothemodificationsitwas2.5m3/s.The
hydrologyinformationforthepostͲmodificationregimeispresentedinthisreport,asitreflectsthe
currentdegreeofregulation.SummaryinformationfortheSouthAlouetteWSCgaugeat232ndStreetis
presentedinFigure22andFigure23.Peakmeanmonthlyflowsoccurinthewinter,averaging6.7m3/s.
LowflowsareobservedinAugust,averaging2.3m3/s.Meanannualdischargeatthegaugeis3.5m3/s.
Althoughthelargesteventsoftheyearoftenoccurinthewintermonths(Figure23),somelargeevents
occurinthesummer.Theselargesummereventareflushing/pulseflowsreleasedbyBCHydrofor
fisheries(BCHydro2009)orlargefreshetreleases,suchasin1997.Table5summarisesthelargest
recordedflowsontheSouthAlouettesincedammodification.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis15
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Table5.LargestrecordedfloweventsontheSouthAlouetteRiver(1984–Present)1.
RankInstantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
Date
1121March11,2007
281.1January18,2005
376.7November23,1986
475.7November9,1989
564.3November6,2006
650.2January12,1987
747.3October17,2003
845.8December10,2004
941.2March19,1997
1040.5December15,1999
Note:
1. Onlyincludeseventswhichmodelthecurrentregime(eventssinceregulationbydam).
Upstreamofthelake,theAlouetteRiverwatershedisgenerallyuntouchedandinanaturalstate.
GeneralhydrologiccharacteristicsarepresentedinFigure24andFigure25.Theregimeisslightly
differentfromeithertheNorthAlouetteortheSouthAlouettedownstreamofthedam.Largeflowsare
seenbothinthewinterasaresultofrainͲonͲsnoweventsandinthespringduringthefreshet.Flowsare
attheirlowestinAugustandSeptember,wheninflowstothelakearearound6m3/s.
AlloutletsfromAlouetteLakeareregulatedthroughtwomajorroutes.First,flowsforpowergeneration
aredivertedfromthesystemintoStaveLakethroughadiversiontunnel,whichhasamaximum
dischargecapacityof56.6m3/s.Second,flowsarereleasedintotheSouthAlouetteRivereitherthrough
alowleveloutlet,oroverthespillway(overflowweirandcrestgate).Minimumflowreleasesinto
AlouetteRiveraregovernedbythe2009WaterUsePlan,andvarybetween1.52m3/sand2.97m3/s
dependingontheelevationoftheLakeandtimeofyear.Inthespring,a7Ͳdaypulsereleaseofatleast9
m3/sisusedtoprovideamigrationcuefortheKokanee.Otherwise,flowisreleasedtotheSouth
AlouetteRiverbasedonBCHydrooperationalproceduresthatmaximizestorageforpowerflowswhile
maintainingenoughlivestoragetoprovidesomefloodcontrolinthewinter.Floodmitigationprovisions
inthe2009WaterUsePlanrequireactiveregulationofthelakestoragewhenthereservoirreaches
122.6melevationinthewintermonths;thefreeoverflowweirisnotactivateduntilthelakereachesan
elevationof125.51m.
Themaximumflowreleasedfromthedamsince1984was143m3/s(hourlypeak)on29November
1995.Thenexttwolargestreleasesarehalfthisflow(76m3/sin1990and71m3/sin1986).General
patternsareshowninFigure22.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis16
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
4.3 HistoricTrends
Oneofthedefinedobjectivesoftheinitialstudyweretoexamineanytrendsinhydrologyandclimate.
Thereisconcernamongstsomestakeholdersthatflowsandfloodeventshaveincreasedoverthelast
coupleofdecades.Trendsinthehydrologicregimeareassessedinthissection.
Figure26showsobserveddailyflowsonbothriversfrom1911to2008.Significanteventsareseenon
bothriversthroughouttherecord.ThelargesteventsonthegraphoccurontheSouthAlouetteRiverin
1912and1913;thisispriortotheconstructionoftheAlouettedam,whentheriverwasunregulated.
4.3.1 NorthAlouetteRiver
AnnualpeakdailyandinstantaneousflowsfortheNorthAlouettearepresentedinFigure27.Although
thelargestrecordedeventwasintherecentpast(2007),nostatisticallysignificantpatternsshowa
distincttrendofincreasingpeakflows.The2007eventmayhavebeenaresultofalogjamoutburst
flowandlikelydoesnotrepresenttrueflowvolumesintheriver.
Inadditiontothepeakflowanalysis,thedatawasseparatedintowinterandsummerseriestoreview
observabletrendsinpeakseasonalevents(Figure28).Nosignificanttrendsareobserved.
Finally,thenumberoflargefloweventsperyearatthegaugewerecalculated,wherealargeflowevent
wasconsideredtobe40m3/sormore,whichistheestimatedbankfullflow(NHC1990).Nocleartrends
wereobserved(Figure29).However,itshouldbenotedthattheperiodfrom2002to2007hadalarger
numberoffloodflowsthantypical.
Althoughnocleartrendsaredetectableatthistime,theymaybecomeapparentinthefutureasmore
dataiscollected.Areassessmentoftheclimateandhydrologicdatashouldbemadeinadecade.
4.3.2 SouthAlouetteRiver
AsnotedinSection4.2,theregimeoftheSouthAlouetteRiverhaschangedasaresultofthe
constructionoftheAlouettedamin1926andsubsequentdammodifications.Atrendanalysisusing
post1984modificationlakeinflowswascompletedbutshowednosignificantchanges.Themorphology
oftheSouthAlouetteRivergenerallyshowsthattheriverchannelisoversizedforthecurrentflow
regime,asthechannelconveyedsignificantlyhigherflowspriortoregulation.TheSouthAlouetteRiver
isthereforelesspronetoriparianfloodingthantheNorthAlouette.
4.4 FrequencyAnalysisandDesignFlowHydrographs
4.4.1 NorthAlouetteRiver
Todeterminedesignflowsforfloodplainmapping,afrequencyanalysisofavailableNorthAlouetteflow
datawascompleted.Peakannualflows(bothdailyandinstantaneous)wereusedtoestimateflowsfor
variousreturnperiods.Inbothcases,aLognormaldistributionwasdeterminedtobethebestfittothe
availabledatapoints.Maximumannualdailyflowdatawasanalysedfortheyears1960to2011.Peak
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis17
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
annualinstantaneousflowdatawasanalysedfortheperiodfrom1969to2011.Flowsforvariousreturn
periodsarepresentedinTable6.
Table6.SummaryofannualflowfrequencyanalysisfortheNorthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet.
ReturnPeriod
(years)
DailyFlow
(m3/s)
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
24278
560115
1071141
2581174
5098201
100110228
200122256
The1990BCEnvironmentreportusedforthepreviousAlouettefloodplainmappingincludeda200Ͳyear
peakdailyflowof140m3/sandapeakinstantaneousflowof300m3/s,values15%and17%higherthan
thepresentanalysis,respectively.Thisisduetotheincreasedperiodofrecord,whichisdoublethe
recordthatwasavailablein1990.
ThevaluesfromthefrequencyanalysiswereusedtocreatedesigninflowhydrographsfortheMaple
Ridgefloodplainmapping(Figure30).Thesedynamichydrographsincorporatea48hourfloodingevent,
withapeakinstantaneousflowincorporatinga10%increasetoallowforclimatechangeprojectionsto
year2100asrecommendedbyAPEGBC(2012).Thecentral24hourperiodoftheeventalsohasan
averagedailyflowequaltothecorrespondingpeakdailyflowwitha10%climatechangeincrease(Table
7).
Table7.NorthAlouettedesigndischargehydrographswithclimatechangeimpacts.
ReturnPeriod
(years)
DailyFlow
(m3/s)
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
24686
566127
1078155
2589180
50108221
100121251
200134282
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis18
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Usingthedesignhydrographswithaclimatechangeallowance,200Ͳyeardailyandpeakinstantaneous
flowvaluesarewithin6%oftheprevious1990study.Forreference,the200Ͳyeardesignflowis15%
largerthanthehistoricalmaximumflowof245m3/sexperiencedin2007.
4.4.2 SouthAlouetteRiver
AsimplefloodfrequencyanalysiswasnotpossibleforSouthAlouetteRiver,astheriverisregulatedand
floodflowscouldnotbedirectlybasedonthegaugerecords.Forthepurposesofthisprojectandfuture
planning,itassumedthatthedamremainsinplaceandoperationalconditionsinthe2009BCHydro
WaterUsePlanremainineffect.
DesigninflowsintoAlouetteLakewereestablishedusingrecordsprovidedbyBCHydro,datingfrom
1984.Theseincludeobservedreleasesfromthedam,lakeelevationsandcalculatedinflowstoAlouette
Lake.Afrequencyanalysisofpeakannualdailyinflowstothelakewascarriedoutandresultsare
presentedinTable8;noinstantaneousdatawasavailable.However,BCHydroreportsthetopfour
hourlypeakeventsintheirFloodSIMMreport.Theseare781m3/sinMarch2007,759m3/sinOctober
2003,710m3/sinNovember1995and703m3/sinNovember1990.Peakhourlyflowsaresignificantly
largerthanpeakdailyflows,withinstantaneous/daily(I/D)ratiosrangingfrom1.7to2.3andaveraging
1.9forthesefourevents.
Table8.SummaryoffrequencyanalysisfortheSouthAlouetteRiveraboveAlouetteLake.
ReturnPeriod
(years)
DailyFlow
(m3/s)
2275
5357
10401
25448
50479
100507
200533
TocalculateoutflowfromthelakeandintotheSouthAlouettedownstream,NHCdevelopedaSTELLA
flowroutingmodel,whereinflowhydrographsbasedonthepeakdailyflow(Table8)wererouted
throughtheLakeandouttheoverflowweir.Severalassumptionsandsimplificationsweremadeto
completethisanalysis;thesewerebasedonBCHydro’soperationalguidelinesforthedam:
Dynamichydrographsweredevelopedassuminga48Ͳhourstormeventwithatriangular
shape,wherethemiddle24hourshadadailyflowequaltothatpresentedinTable8;peak
instantaneousflowis1.3timesthedailyflow.Baseflowswereassumedtobe10%ofthe
peakdailyflow.Theshapeandlengthofthestormweredevelopedbasedonobserving
historicrecordsandfindingacommonrepresentativestormshape.Alternatestormlengths
andshapesweretestedaspartofasensitivityexercise.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis19
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
ThelakeelevationwasassumedtobeattheMaximumNormalOperatingLevelof125.51m
elevation.Thisisaconservativeassumption,asthelakewouldbeactivelyoperated(i.e.
flowswouldbereleasedslowly),oncethelakehasreachedanelevationof122.6m.
Thefreecrestweirwasassumedtobefullyoperational,withnoflowbeingdivertedtothe
crestgate.Outflowfromthelowleveloutletgatewasassumedtobenegligible.
TheStavediversionsystemwasassumedtobenonͲoperational;allflowwasroutedintothe
SouthAlouetteRiver.Thisisaconservativeassumption,astheStavediversionsystemhasan
actualmaximumcapacityof56.6m3/s.
OutflowsfromthedamintotheSouthAlouetteRiverwerecalculatedbyroutinginflowsthrough
AlouetteLake.DesignoutflowsaresummarisedinTable9andFigure32.
Table9.SummaryofAlouetteLakeinflowsanddesigndischargeoutflowstotheSouthAlouetteRiver.
Return
Period
(years)
Peak
Daily
Inflow
(m3/s)
Peak
Instantaneous
Inflow(m3/s)
PeakDaily
Discharge
(m3/s)
Peak
Instantaneous
Discharge(m3/s)
2275359200227
5357466276315
10401523314362
25448584362412
50479625389444
100507661415473
200533695440500
AlouetteLakesignificantlyattenuatesthereservoirinflows,evenwhenconservativeassumptionsare
usedintermsofoutflowscenarios.Thepeakinstantaneousflowof500m3/siscomparabletothe
558m3/susedinthe1990MOEstudy.Thedammodificationsin1984accountforthedecreaseinthe
expectedflow.Noextraallowancewasmadeforclimatechange,asthesystemiscontrolledbythe
AlouetteDamanditisassumedthatcompensationinoperatingprocedureswillbemadebyBCHydro.
ThisassumptionshouldbeconfirmedwithBCHydrointhefuture.
Somesensitivitytestswereperformedonthesynthesizedstormlengthandstormshapes.Thesensitivity
ofthesynthesizedflowtostormlengthwastestedusingtheSTELLAModel.Both72Ͳhourand120Ͳhour
storms,withtheidenticalpeakdailyflowasthe48Ͳhourstormwereroutedthroughthelake(Figure33).
Theassumedlengthofthestormhasanimpactonthepeakoutflow,andconsequentlyonthetotal
volumeofflowdischargedintotheSouthAlouettesystem.Thechangeismoremarkedforthefrequent
events,witha15.9%increaseinpeakflowsforthe2Ͳyearevent,whena120Ͳhourstormisconsidered
ratherthana48Ͳhourstorm.Forthe200Ͳyeareventthereisonlya4.8%increaseinflows.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis20
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
ThesensitivityofthesynthesizedflowtostormshapewastestedusingtheSTELLAModel.A48hour
stormwithapeakflowequalto1.9timesthedailyflowwasdeveloped.The1.9Qi/Qd(peak
instantaneousflowtodailyflowratio)wasassumedbasedontheaveragecalculatedratiovalueforthe
fourextremeeventsintheupperSouthAlouetteforwhichbothdailyandhourlyinflowestimatesare
available.Thestormproducesthesamevolumeofwaterasthebasetriangular48Ͳhourevent;a
comparisonispresentedinFigure33.Theassumedshapeofthestormhasasmallimpactonthepeak
outflow.Thechangeismoremarkedforthelargestevents,witha4.6%increaseinpeakflowsforthe
200Ͳyearevent,whenapeakystormisconsideredratherthanatriangularstorm.Forthe2Ͳyearevent
thereisa2.2%decreaseinpeakflows.Thechangeinstormvolume(i.e.totalflowoutofthelakeovera
10Ͳdayperiod)isalmostunchangedforallevents.
4.4.3 TributaryInflows
InflowhydrographsformajorNorthandSouthAlouettetributariesidentifiedinPhase1ofthisproject
aresummarizedinTable10.Thesewerecalculatedbasedonthedesigndischargehydrographsforthe
NorthAlouetteRiver(Table7),asthetributarywatershedcharacteristics(size,elevation,aspect)were
consideredtobesimilartotheNorthAlouettesystem(Figure10).Asimpleareawatershedtransferwas
usedtogeneratescaledhydrographsandisbasedonthewatershedareaspresentedinTable11.
HypsometriccurvesforeachofthetributariesarepresentedinFigure34forcomparison.
Table10.Tributarydesignhydrographpeakinstantaneousdischarges.
Return
Period
(years)
BlaneyCreek
Peak
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
FentonRoad
Peak
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
McKenny
CreekPeak
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
Additional1
NorthAlouette
Peak
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
Additional2
South
AlouettePeak
Instantaneous
Flow(m3/s)
26415141443
59422212064
1011527252578
2513332292991
50164393635112
100186444140127
200209504645142
Notes:
1. FlowscontributedbytheNorthAlouettewatershedareadownstreamoftheNorthAlouetteWSCGauge.
2. FlowscontributedbytheSouthAlouettewatershedareadownstreamoftheSouthAlouetteWSCGauge.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis21
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Table11.Summaryoftributarywatershedareasandelevations.
Location
Watershed
Area
(km2)
Mean
Elevation
(m)
NorthAlouetteWSC(08MH006)37.3448
BlaneyCreek26.8216
FentonRoad5.413
McKennyCreek5.017
ConfluenceofNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers42.1Ͳ
SouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)234.0568
ConfluenceofAlouetteRiverandPittRiver251.5Ͳ
Additional1NorthAlouetteTributaryArea4.8Ͳ
Additional2SouthAlouetteTributaryArea17.5Ͳ
Notes:
1. NorthAlouettetributarywatershedareadownstreamoftheNorthAlouetteWSCGauge.
2. SouthAlouettetributarywatershedareadownstreamoftheSouthAlouetteWSCGauge.
4.4.4 CoordinationofHydrographs
Forthepurposesoffloodplainmappingandmodeldesignruns,itisassumedthatthefloweventpeaks
simultaneouslyinallunregulatedwatersheds.InflowhydrographspeaksimultaneouslyontheNorth
AlouetteRiver,thefivesmallertributarywatershedsandtheSouthAlouetteRiverupstreamofthe
AlouetteReservoir.DuetotheroutingthattakesplacethroughtheAlouetteReservoir,thereisa
7.5hourdelaybetweenthepeakingoftheNorthAlouetteRiverandthepeakingoftheSouthAlouette
Riverdownstreamofthereservoir.Actualcombinationsmayvarybutthisassumptionisconsidered
representativeofactualconditionsandsomewhatconservative.
4.5 DataLimitations
Allhydrometricinformationsuffersfrominherentlimitations;theseareparticularlyrelevantinahighly
dynamicsystemsuchastheNorthAlouetteRiver.Throughoutthecourseofthehydrologicand
hydraulicmodellinginvestigations,NHCidentifiedpossiblefailingsinthepublishedflowdataforthe
NorthAlouettegauge.Theseincludegeneralerrorsassociatedwithhighflowestimatesfromrating
curves,anderrorsinlowerandmediumflowsresultingfrommorphodynamicchangestotheriverinthe
vicinityofthegauge.
Publishedflowsformostgaugesarecalculatedfromobservedwaterlevelsandanassumedratingcurve.
Ratingcurvesaredevelopedbasedonriversurveyswhereboththewaterlevelandtotalflowacrossa
sectionaremeasured.Themajorityofthesemeasurementsaretakenwhentheflowsareloworat
mediumflowevents;itisraretocaptureahighflowevent.Thus,curvesareextrapolatedwellbeyond
thehighestmeasuredflowͲwaterlevelpairandthereisagreatdealofuncertaintyinthecurveathigh
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis22
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
waterlevelsandflows.Forexample,thehighestmeasuredflowattheNorthAlouettegaugewas
41.3m3/sinJanuary1966.However,WSChasreportedflowsashighas245m3/sbasedonan
extrapolatedcurve.
Theuncertaintyinthehighflowestimatesisfurtherincreasedbycompletingaregionalhydrologic
analysis.Nearbygaugedwatershedsthathavesimilarcharacteristics(medianelevation,size,aspect,
nonͲregulated,morethan15yearsofrecord)totheNorthAlouetteRiverwereexamined.Acomparison
ofmaximuminstantaneousflowsperareaarepresentedinTable12.TheflowͲarearatiosfortheNorth
AlouetteRiveraresignificantlyhigherthanforothernearbygauges.
Table12.Summaryofflowsbyareafornearbygauges.
Return
Period
(years)
NorthAlouette
(08MH006)
Instantaneous
PeakFlow/Area
(m3/s/km2)
KanakaCreek
(08MH076)
Instantaneous
PeakFlow/Area
(m3/s/km2)
JacobsCreek
(08MH108)
Instantaneous
PeakFlow/Area
(m3/s/km2)
22.11.31.5
53.12.01.8
103.72.52.0
254.53.12.1
505.13.92.2
1005.74.72.2
2006.25.5N/C
Atlowerwaterlevelsthereremainsuncertaintyinthepublishedflows;primarilybecausetheNorth
AlouetteRiverisadynamicsystemandthechannelinthevicinityofthegaugechangesfrequently(see
Section2).Inanattempttodealwiththerapidlychangingchannel,WSCupdatestheratingcurvesfor
theNorthAlouettegaugeregularly;ithasbeenupdatedsixtimessince2007.Overthisperiod,forthe
samewaterlevel,reportedflowsvarybyasmuchas20%.
Giventheabove,itisimportanttoconsiderlimitationsofthehydrologicanalysesandsubsequent
hydraulicmodellingwhenlookingatprojectresults.
AfurtherlimitationtothehighflowdataontheNorthAlouetteRiveristheknownhistoryofoutburst
floodsresultingfromthesuddenreleaseofalogjam;thisisawellͲknownprocessinthePacific
Northwest.Forexample,alargelogjamwasobservedintheupperwatershedinMarch2007.Thereis
reasontobelievethatanoutburstfloodthroughthisjamwasthecauseofthefloodingintheAlouette
Valleyon11March2007.Unfortunately,theWSCgaugeontheNorthAlouettethatmighthave
recordedthistypeofpeakyfloweventwasnotfunctioning;thereportedhydrographwasestimatedby
WSC.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis23
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
5 COLLECTIONOFCALIBRATIONANDVALIDATIONDATA
InOctober2014,NHCinitiatedaprogramforthecollectionofhydraulicmodelcalibrationdataalongthe
NorthAlouetteRiver.Thisprogramwasinstatedduetothelimitedpeakflowdataandfloodingextent
informationavailableforlargeevents.Duringthedurationoftheprogram,NHCmonitoredpeakflows
sothatfieldcrewscouldbequicklymobilizedduringhighfloodstomeasureflows,markhighwater
levelsandnotefloodedareas.ThisprogramwasundertakenbetweenOctober2014andFebruary2015.
Datawascollectedforfloweventson3November2014and23January2015andusedforcalibration
andverification,respectively.
5.1 November2014FloodEvent
Onthenightof03November2014,NHCstaffmembersmeasuredflowsontheNorthAlouetteRiver
approximately100mdownstreamoftheWSC08MH006gauge(Figure1).Highflowmeasurements
weretaken,however,theactualpeakwasnotcaptured.Thestaffalsocollectedseveralwaterlevel
measurementsatthemajorNorthAlouetteRiverBridgesat132ndAvenue,224thStreetand232ndStreet.
Lastly,highwaterlevelsandfloodextentsweremarkedalong132ndAvenue,224thStreetand136th
Avenue.ThisinformationwasgeoreferencedandincorporatedintotoprojectGISdata.
ArequestforfloodinformationandphotographswasmadetotheAlouetteValleyAssociation(AVA),
whichprovidedacompiledreportoflocalresidents’commentsandobservations.Residentresponses
werecollectedfrom132ndAvenue,136thAvenueand224thStreet.Floodwatersurfacelevels,extents
anddebrisinformationprovidedbytheAVAwasalsogeoreferencedandincorporatedintoprojectGIS
data.
5.1.1 ReviewofNovember2014Data
InadditiontotheinformationcollectedbyNHConsite,dataontheNovember2014floodeventwas
collectedfromallavailablegaugesapplicabletotheprojectstudyarea.Thedatacollectedincluded:
MapleRidgeGaugeat224thStreet–WaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
AVAGaugeatthepedestrianbridgeͲWaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
PittMeadowsGaugeatAlouetteConfluenceͲWaterSurfaceElevationData(1hrInterval)
SouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)–PreliminaryWaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
SouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)–PreliminaryFlowData(5minInterval)
PittRiverWSC(08MH035)–PreliminaryWaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
Unfortunately,itwasnotpossibletousedatafromtheNorthAlouetteWSCgauge(08MH006).There
havebeenseveralmajorbedformchangesatthislocationsincethelastWSCstageratingcurvewas
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis24
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
developed.WSChasalsoreporteddifficultieswiththeexistingwaterlevelgauge,whichiscurrently
undertakingrepairs/recalibration.
TheonlysourcesofcontinuousgaugedataalongtheNorthAlouetteRiverduringtheNovember2014
eventcamefromthetwowaterlevelgaugesat224thStreet(propertyoftheCityofMapleRidge)and
thepedestrianbridgedownstreamof232ndStreet(propertyoftheAVA).
5.1.2 November2014NorthAlouetteHydrograph
TodeterminetheNovember2014eventNorthAlouetteinflowhydrograph,NHCdevelopedstageͲ
dischargeratingcurvesforboththeMapleRidgeandAVAgauges.Theseratingcurvesweredeveloped
inAquariusTimeͲSeriessoftwarebyAquaticInformaticsandareshowninFigures35and36.Usingthese
ratingcurves,thepeakinstantaneousflowfortheNorthAlouetteNovember2014eventisestimatedto
be69m3/s.Maximumflowwasreachedatapproximately1:30AMon04November2014.The
hydrographfromtheAVAgaugewasselectedformodellinguse,asitisfurthestupstreamandlessofa
dampingeffectisobservedonthepeak(Figure37).Theeventhasanestimatedreturnperiodofless
thantwoyears.
5.2 January2015Event
Asmallereventtookplacefrom23to26January2015andwasrecordedformodelvalidation.NHCstaff
measuredapeakflowof59m3/sattheNorthAlouetteRiver232ndStreetBridgeaswellashighwater
marksatmultiplepointsalongtheriver.Thisinformationwasgeoreferencedandincorporatedintoto
projectGISdata.Floodextentsdatawasnotcollectedbystaff,asthiseventwasconsideredtoosmall.
5.2.1 ReviewofJanuary2015Data
InadditiontotheinformationcollectedbyNHConsite,datafortheJanuary2015eventwasalso
collectedfromallavailablegaugesapplicabletotheprojectstudyarea.Thedatacollectedincluded:
MapleRidgeGaugeat224thStreet–WaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
AVAGaugeatthepedestrianbridgeͲWaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
PittMeadowsGaugeatAlouetteConfluenceͲWaterSurfaceElevationData(1hrInterval)
SouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)–PreliminaryWaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
SouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)–PreliminaryFlowData(5minInterval)
PittRiverWSC(08MH035)–PreliminaryWaterSurfaceElevationData(5minInterval)
AsinNovember,itwasnotpossibletousedatafromtheNorthAlouetteWSCgauge(08MH006)asthe
gaugewasnotrecording.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis25
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
5.2.2 January2015NorthAlouetteHydrograph
AswiththeNovemberevent,theNorthAlouetteJanuary2015inflowhydrographwasdeterminedusing
theNHCstageͲdischargeratingcurvesfortheMapleRidgeandAVAgauges(Figure38).AstheAVA
gaugeshowedthebestagreementwithonsitemeasurementscompletedbyNHC,theAVAhydrograph
wasselectedformodellinguse.Maximumflowwasreachedatapproximately7:30PMon23January
2015.
6SURVEYOFCHANNELCROSSSECTIONS
In1981,theBCMinistryofEnvironmentsurveyedatotalof68sectionsoftheAlouetteRiversto
producetheoriginalfloodplainmapping.ThesectionswerenotgeoͲregisteredandarenowoutͲofͲdate,
consideringthechannelchangesthathavetakenplaceovertime.TheBCHydrosurveyincludedatotal
of109crossͲsections.Inadditiontoprovidingonlyfairlyschematicoutlinesofthechannels,thesections
arealsowidelyspaced.ThesecrossͲsectionswereusedintheinitialPhase2modellingcompletedin
2011.
FollowingthisinitialPhase2modelling,itwasagreedthatmoredetailedrivercrossͲsectionsurveywas
requiredtoproducedetailedhydraulicmodelresults.NHCresurveyedtheNorthandSouthAlouette
riverchannelsinmoredetailandatareducedspacingin2014.Thissurveyfocusedonthepreviously
definedprojectarea(roughly5kmlongreachesofbothrivers)andwascarefullylaidouttocapture
constrictedchannellocationsthathavethegreatestimpactonwatersurfaceprofiles.Thisinformation
wascombinedwithprevioussurveyscarriedoutbyNHCin2010andincorporatedintothehydraulic
model.Atotalof77newsurveyedcrosssections(Figure39)wereaddedtothemodel.Spotsurveydata
collectedattheriverbridgeswasalsoincorporated.
7 HYDRAULICMODELLING
Asacomponentofthisproject,acomprehensivehydraulicmodelwasdevelopedofthetwoAlouette
RiversandMapleRidgefloodplainusingDHIMIKEhydrodynamicsoftware.A1Dmodelissuitablefor
simulatingdischarges,waterlevelsandotherhydraulicparameterswhileflowsremainwithintheriver
banks.Forthisproject,1DinͲbankrivermodellingwascompletedusingMIKE11.However,itisdifficult
torealisticallysimulatecomplexoverbankfloodingandbankbreachinginoneͲdimensionalmodelling.
Instead,thesefloodplainprocessesweremodelledwithamoreaccuratetwoͲdimensionalmodelusing
MIKE21FM(FlexibleMesh)software.Thetwomodelswerethenconnectedusingtheoverarching
MIKEFLOODsoftware.
ThischapteroutlinesthegeneralmethodologyusedtodeveloptheMIKE11,MIKE21andMIKEFlood
models.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis26
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
7.1 DEMDevelopment
TheCityofMapleRidgesuppliedanupdatedDEMdatasetin2014whichcoverstheentirestudyarea.It
wassuppliedtoNHCasa2mresolutiongrid.TheDEMdoesnotincludeinͲchannelbathymetricdata;
bathymetrywasderiveddirectlyfromcrossͲsectionsurveys.TheDEMwasusedtoguidedevelopmentof
thestreamnetwork,banklinesandcrossͲsections,aswellasthedikesandhighlandthatdefinethe
boundarybetweentheMIKE11andMIKE21modelareas.ElevationdatawasextractedfromtheDEM
viacrossͲsectionsforinputtotheMIKE11model,andtheDEMsurfacewasresampledbasedonthe
modelmeshforinputtotheMIKE21model.ProcessingwasdoneusingESRIArcGIS10.1software,
includingthe3DAnalystandSpatialAnalystextensions.
7.2 MIKE11
TheMIKE11modelcoverstheinͲchannelsectionsoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversfromtheir
headwaterstotheconfluencewiththePittRiver(Figure39).SomeofthekeyinputsfortheMIKE11
modelweredevelopedusingArcGIS.Theseincludethestreamnetwork,crossͲsectionsandwatershed
areas.
StreamcentrelinesfortheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversweredigitizedbasedonBC1:20,000scale
CorporateWatershedBase(CWB)streamdata.FeaturesweremodifiedwithreferencetotheDEM,
surveyandrecentorthophotography.VerticeswereaddedtorepresentkeyfeaturessuchascrossͲ
sectionlocations,bridgesandtributaryconfluencepoints.Thestreamfeatureswerecalibratedto
determineriverchainage.ThestreamnetworkshapefilewasinputdirectlytoMIKE11asthebasisfor
theMIKE11geometryfile.
CrossͲsectionlinesweredrawnbasedonthelocationsofthe2010and2014surveys.AdditionalcrossͲ
sectionlineswereaddedasrequiredatbridgelocationsandcrossͲsectionelevationvalueswere
extractedfromaninterpolatedsurfacegeneratedinGIS.Leftandrightbanklinesweredigitizedbased
ontheDEMandorthophotos,andwereused,alongwiththestreamcentreline,totagcrossͲsectiondata
pointsasleftbank,rightbankorthalweg.CrossͲsectionelevationsandtagswereextractedfroma
combinationoftheDEM(foroverbankareas)andthebathymetricsurveydata,usingcustomGIStools
developedbyNHC.ThecrossͲsectionlinelocationandelevationpointdatawereexportedfromtheGIS
toMIKE11.
PreparationofmodeldataintheGISwasaniterativeprocess.Aspreliminarymodellingresults
highlightedareasthatrequiredrefinement,revisionsweremadeintheGISanddatawasreͲexportedfor
themodel.
Mainstemandtributarywatershedareasarerequiredasinputstothemodel.Theseweredeterminedin
theGISusingBCCorporateWatershedBase(CWB)streamandwatershedboundarydataasabase.
AdditionaldatawasusedasreferencewhendevelopingtheGISdatalayersforthemodel.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis27
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
DikecrestmappingwasobtainedfromtheBConlineLandandResourceDataWarehouse
(LRDW).
TheCityprovided25cmresolutionorthophotosofthestudyareatakeninApril2009;these
weresupplementedbyrecentorthophotosfromGoogleMaps.
7.2.1 Network
AsinglemodelnetworkthatincludesboththeNorthandSouthAlouetteRiverswasdeveloped(Figure
39).ThenetworkwasdesignedusingcommonNorthAmericanpractice,wherethechainageincreases
movingupstream.Therefore,thenetworksandassociatedstructuresaresetuptorunwithnegative
flow.
Thenetworkincludestwobranches:
1.NorthAlouetteRiver–fromthekm13.0inUBCresearchforesttotheconfluencewith
theSouthAlouetteRiver.
2. SouthAlouetteRiver–fromkm19.6attheAlouetteDamtotheconfluencewiththePitt
River.
7.2.2 CrossSections
ThecrossͲsectionfilewascreatedbyupdatingthe2008crosssectionfilewithcrosssectionsimported
directlyfromtheGISDEMusinginͲhousetools;interpolatedsectionswereaddedasnecessary.Atotal
of327sectionsareusedtodescribetheNorthAlouetteRiver,and478sectionsmakeuptheSouth
AlouetteRiver.Thetotalnumberofcrosssectionsusedtodescribeeachriverinthemodelgreatly
exceedsthenumberofsurveyedcrosssectionsduetointerpolationbetweensurveyedsections.
Interpolatedcrosssectionswereaddedtothemodeltoincreasemodelstabilitybyallowingfora
smoothtransitionfromonebedformtothenext.
WheretheMIKE11modelisboundbytheMIKE21model,crossͲsectionsextents(markers1and3)were
locatedathighpointsasnotedintheGISanalysis.Someadjustmentstothemarkerlocationsand
elevationsweremadeoncetheMIKE11andMIKE21modelswerelinkedinMIKEFlood;theelevationsof
thetwomodelsshouldmatchascloselyaspossible.
Allsectionsaremodelledusingaresistanceradius;thismethodisapplicabletotherelativelysmall
channelsectionsfoundontheAlouetteRivers.Allsectionsaregeoreferencedandarethereforeeasily
viewedintheMIKE11Network.Relative,transversalroughnesswasappliedtoallsections.
Markerpointsforthelowflowboundarieswereplacedfromacombinationoftheorthophotosand
normalwaterleveledgesnotedonavailablemappingandfromvisualinspectionofthesectionshape.
Roughnessvaluesweredeterminedbasedonorthophotography,siteobservationandliteraturevalues.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis28
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
7.2.3 HydraulicStructures
Bridgestructureswereincludedinthenetworkfile.Atotalof7bridgeswereincludedasshowninTable
13.Allmajorroadcrossingswereincludedinthemodel,aswellasoneprivatecrossingontheNorth
AlouetteRiver,whichhasasignificantpierinthemainchannel.
BridgesweremodelledusingeitherbasicenergyequationsortheFederalHighwayAdministration
(FHWA)WSPROmethod,dependingonwhetherornotthebridgesareskewedfromthedirectionof
flow.Allbridgeswereassumedtobepronetosubmergenceandoverflow.Basicgeometricparameters,
includingbridgewidthandskewforeachofthebridgeswerederivedfromavailableinformationas
describedinthePhase1reporting.TheNorthAlouetteRiverbridgeat232ndStreetisanexception,asit
wasreplacedin2014.AsͲbuiltdimensionsforthisbridgewereprovidedbytheCity.
Table13.Summaryofbridgecrossings.
BridgeChainage(m)Comments
NORTHALOUETTE
224thStreetBridge8315Geometryfrom1981MOEStudyandLiDAR
132ndAvenue8770BridgeasͲbuiltinformationfrom1997
232ndStreet10240BridgeasͲbuiltinformationfrom2014
PrivateAccess10408Significantstructurewithlargeconcretepierinchannel
SOUTHALOUETTE
216thStreetBridge8772Geometryfrom1981MOEStudy
224thStreetBridge10720BridgeasͲbuiltinformationfrom1981
232ndStreet12610BridgeasͲbuiltinformationfrom2006
Itshouldbenotedthattwoadditionalprivatecrossingsbetween132ndAvenueand232ndStreetonthe
NorthAlouetteRiverwerenotmodelled;thesearesinglespannarrowstructuresthatwouldnotimpact
thehydraulicssignificantly.Theymayhoweveraccumulatedebrisduringafloodeventwhichwould
resultinlocalizedhydraulicimpacts;thesetypesofimpactswerenotmodelleddirectly.
7.2.4 ModelInflowsandWaterLevelBoundaries
Atotalof8boundariesareusedintheMIKE11model:twoopeninflowboundaries,fivepointsource
inflowboundariesandoneopenwaterlevelboundary.Theopeninflowboundariesarelocatedatthe
upstreammostlimitsoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.Pointsourceinflowboundariesareusedto
addflowtothesystemattheconfluenceofmajortributariestotheAlouetteRivers.Thelocationofthe
boundariesisdescribedinmoredetailinTable14.Thereisonlyonedownstreamwaterlevelboundary,
whichislocatedattheconfluenceoftheSouthAlouetteRiverwiththePittRiver.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis29
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Table14.SummaryofMIKE11modelboundaries.
BoundaryTypeBranchChainageComments
OpenInflowNorthAlouette12773PrimaryinflowtoNorthAlouette
OpenInflowSouthAlouette19025PrimaryinflowtoSouthAlouette
PointSourceInflowNorthAlouette2192BlaneyCreek
PointSourceInflowNorthAlouette136LocalinflowsdirecttoNorthAlouette
PointSourceInflowSouthAlouette7907McKennyCreek
PointSourceInflowSouthAlouette3078FentonSlough
PointSourceInflowSouthAlouette8000LocalinflowsdirecttoSouthAlouette
OpenWaterLevelSouthAlouette0DownstreamboundaryatPittRiver
7.2.5 MIKE11ModelCalibration
Modelcalibrationformsanimportantstepinhydraulicmodeldevelopment.Inthecaseofthe1D
MIKE11model,itinvolvesthefinetuningofinitiallyselectedchannelManning’sroughnesscoefficients
andtheenergylosscoefficientsassociatedwiththevarioushydraulicstructuresalongtherivers.
CoefficientswereadjustedtomatchresultstotheNovember2014floodeventdescribedinSection5.1.
TheNovember2014wassimulatedfromNovember3rdto5th,withpeakflowsoccurringat1:30AMon
the4th.TheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversweresettotheAVAGaugeNorthAlouetteNovember
2014hydrographandtheSouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)hydrograph,respectively.Thepointsource
tributaryinflowsweresetasscaledhydrographsoftheNorthAlouette.Last,thedownstreamwater
levelboundaryatPittRiverwassetusingatimeseriesfromthePittRiverWSC(08MH035)gauge.A
summaryofmodelcalibrationboundaryflowinputsisshowninFigure40anddownstreamwaterlevel
inputsinFigure41.FurtherdetailsontheseinputsareavailableinSection5above.
AcomparisonofmodelledtoobservedwaterlevelsarepresentedFigures42toFigure46.Themodelled
waterlevelsonboththeSouthandNorthAlouetteRiversmatchrelativelywellwiththeobservedwater
levels.Agreementbetweenmaximumobservedandmodelledpeakriverwaterlevelsissummarizedin
Table15.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis30
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Table15.MIKE11calibrationpeakriverwaterlevelagreement.
GaugeNameRiver
MIKE11
Chainage
(m)
PeakWLs(mGSC)
ObservedModelledDifference
232ndStreetHWMNorthAlouette1026514.6814.570.11
AVAGaugeNorthAlouette993712.7612.710.05
MapleRidgeGaugeNorthAlouette83407.077.180.11
PittMeadowsGaugeAlouetteConfluence311.841.820.02
SouthAlouetteWSCSouthAlouette1897312.4712.520.05
Agreementisverygoodthroughoutthestudyarea.AgreementattheMapleRidgegaugeatpeakflows
isapproximately11cm;thisisdueinparttothepresenceofasmalldepressionandditchsystemalong
theedgeofthebridgewhichconnectstothe224thStreetditchsystem.Thesefeatureswereconsidered
tobepartofthelocalminorstormwatersystemandwerenotincludedinthislargescalefloodmodel.
MorevariationisalsoseenatthePittMeadowsgaugelocatedattheconfluenceoftheNorthandSouth
AlouetteRivers,whichseesthreetidalpeaksduringthedurationofthefloodingevent.
Theroughnessvaluesrequiredtobestmatchthemodelresultstothecalibrationeventarewellwithin
normallimits.ThefinalroughnessvaluesusedintheMIKE11modelareshowninTable16.
Table16.SummaryofMIKE11roughnessvalues.
RiverDownstream
Chainage
Upstream
Chainage
Resistance
(Manning’sRoughness)
NorthAlouette3282070.035
NorthAlouette820789560.045
NorthAlouette89561277730.050
SouthAlouette678990.030
SouthAlouette7899130000.035
SouthAlouette13000189730.040
7.2.6 MIKE11ModelValidation
Modelvalidationallowsforasecondaryproofofthecompletedcalibration.TheJanuary2015eventwas
simulatedfromJanuary23rdto25thandreachpeakflowsatapproximately7:30PMonthe23rd.
TheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversweresettotheAVAGaugeNorthAlouetteJanuary2015
hydrographandtheSouthAlouetteWSC(08MH005)hydrograph,respectively.Thepointsource
tributaryinflowsweresetasscaledhydrographsoftheNorthAlouette.Lastly,thedownstreamwater
levelboundaryatthePittRiverwassetusingatimeseriesfromthePittRiverWSC(08MH035)gauge.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis31
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
AsummaryofmodelvalidationboundaryflowinputsisshowninFigure47anddownstreamwaterlevel
inputsinFigure48.FurtherdetailsontheseinputsareavailableinSection5.
AcomparisonofmodelledtoobservedwaterlevelsarepresentedFigures49toFigure53.Themodelled
waterlevelsonboththeSouthandNorthAlouetteRiversmatchrelativelywellwiththeobservedwater
levels.Agreementbetweenmaximumobservedandmodelledpeakriverwaterlevelsissummarizedin
Table17.
Table17.MIKE11validationpeakriverwaterlevelagreement.
GaugeNameRiver
MIKE11
Chainage
(m)
PeakWLs(mGSC)
ObservedModelledDifference
232ndStreetHWMNorthAlouette1026514.5014.420.08
AVAGaugeNorthAlouette993712.5912.580.01
MapleRidgeGaugeNorthAlouette83407.007.060.06
PittMeadowsGaugeAlouetteConfluence311.811.700.11
SouthAlouetteWSCSouthAlouette1897312.6612.570.09
Agreementisverygoodthroughoutthestudyarea,validatingtheNovember2014calibration.
7.3 MIKE21
AtwoͲdimensionalhydraulicmodel,MIKE21,wasusedtosimulateoverlandflowandtodetermineflood
depthsonthefloodplain.Thefollowingsectionprovidesinformationonthegeneralassumptions,setͲ
upandapplicationoftheMIKE21model.
7.3.1 ModelDevelopment
AswiththeMIKE11model,GISwasusedtodevelopsomeofthekeyinputstotheMIKE21model.These
includedtheDEMdescribedabove,thedefinitionoftheboundarybetweentheMIKE11andMIKE21
modelsandsurfaceroughnessdata.
InordertoinputtheDEMtotheMIKE21model,theMIKE21meshpointswereimportedtotheGIS,
elevationvalueswereextractedfromtheDEMsurfaceateachmeshpointlocation,andtheresults
returnedtotheMIKE21model.Themeshwasdevelopedsuchthatthefloodplaintopographywouldbe
adequatelyrepresentedwhilebeingmindfuloflongruntimesassociatedwithmeshesthataretoo
detailed;thefinalmeshispresentedinFigure54.ThetriangularmeshelementsonthemainMaple
Ridgefloodplainandadjacenttotheriverchannelshaveawidthof20m.Thoseelementsinthe
cranberryfieldsandthemostnorthernsectionofthestudyareahaveawidthof35m.
ItshouldbenotedthattheflowpathobservedduringtheNovember2014flooding,whichfollows224th
Street,wasrefinedtoimprovetherepresentationoftheroadandvariousditches.Similarrefinements
weremadeontherightbankoftheNorthAlouettenorthof132ndAvenueandwestof224thStreetto
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis32
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
improvetherepresentationofthevariousditchesthatdrainintotheNorthAlouette.Themodelhasa
totalof45,856elements.
TheboundarybetweentheMIKE11andMIKE21modelsalongtherivershouldfollowthehighpoint
alongeachbank,suchasthedikecrest.GISwasusedtomapthisboundary,andtorefineitbasedon
requirementsrelatingtomeshelementsizeandshapeinthehydraulicmodel.Oncetheboundarywas
finalizedinthemodel,theGISwasalsousedtodetermineMIKE11chainagevaluesforeachnodeinthe
boundary.ThisfacilitatedlinkagebetweentheMIKE11andMIKE21models.
ResistancevaluesaredefinedinMIKE21asaManning’sMvalue,whichisequivalenttotheinverseof
Manning’sN.AsurfaceroughnessdatalayerwasdevelopedintheGISbasedonasimplifiedversionof
landusedatasuppliedbytheCityandgeneralroughnessvaluesshowninTable18andFigure55.
RoughnessvalueswereextractedateachMIKE21meshpointlocation,andimportedtotheMIKE21
model.
Table18.Floodplainresistancevalues.
LandUseManning’sN
Urban0.08
Rural(residential,smallfarms)0.05
Agricultural0.04
Forest0.06
Water0.01
Other(minepits,significantroadways)0.03
Inordertolimitthenumberofelements,internalstructures(weirs)wereusedtorepresentthe
agriculturaldikesasopposedtorefiningtheelementsizenearthedikes.Weirelevationsweresetbased
onaverageLiDARelevations.Thisisaslightsimplificationofthesystem,astheweirsweregivena
constantelevation,whereasthereissomevariationindikeelevationalongtheirlengths.However,for
thepurposesofmodellingfloodlevels,thisisassumedtobearobustassumption.
Inadditiontothemajorinputsofboundariesandroughnesssomegeneralassumptionsweremade
including:
InMIKE21,wetting,floodinganddryingdepthswereselectedbasedonNHC’sexperience
withprevioussimilarmodels.Themodelwasassignedawettingdepthof0.2m,aflooding
depthof0.15manddryingdepthof0.02m;verysmalltolerancescancausemodel
instabilitiesascells‘switch’onandofftoofrequently,whilelargetolerancesmaycause
modelinaccuraciesthroughalossorgainofwatervolume.Asmallevaporationvolumewas
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis33
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
includedinthemodeltoapproximatelossestogroundwater(groundwaterlossesarenot
possibleinthebasicMIKE21setͲup).
Basedonthemeshsize,thewatervelocitiesandaseriesoftrials,atimestepof5seconds
wasselectedforthemodelruns.
Theinitialwatersurfaceelevationwassetataconstantvalueofzero,representingadry
startingcondition.
7.3.2 MIKE21ModelCalibration
TheMIKE21modelhasnoinflowboundaries,asitisdesignedtorunintandemwiththeMIKE11model.
Andtherefore,itisnotpossibletocalibrateorvalidatethismodelbyitself.Themodelwascalibrated
andverifiedalongwiththeMIKE11modelusingMIKEFlood.
7.4 MIKEFlood
MIKEFloodprovidesthelinkagebetweentheoneͲdimensionalflowinMIKE11andthetwoͲdimensional
overlandflowinMIKE21.Thelinksareestablishedthroughaseriesofweirequationsthatconnecta
MIKE21cellwiththenearestMIKE11channelsection.Oncealinkisestablished,MIKEFloodtracksthe
watersurfaceelevationsinbothMIKE11andMIKE21.Ifeithermodelovertopstheelevationofthe
connectionpoint,wateristransferredfromonedomaintotheotherviasource/sinktermsinMIKE21
andlateralinflowsinMIKE11.Thisallowswatertoovertopthechannelbanksandflowontothe
adjacentfloodplainordrainfromthefloodplainbackintothechannel.
LaterallinksweredevelopedinGISbasedontheDEM.Linksweredrawnathighpointsalongthe
boundarybetweenthechannelandfloodplainondikesornaturalhighpoints.Thedevelopmentoflinks
isaniterativeprocess,whereadjustmentsaremadetoeithertheMIKE21domainortheMIKE11marker
locationssothattheelevationsinthetwomodelsmatch.Ultimately,thelinksweresettobeequalto
theMIKE21elevation;nootherchangestothedefaultvaluesweremade.
7.4.1 MIKEFloodandMIKE21ModelCalibration
TheMIKEFloodmodelwasalsocalibratedtotheNovember2014floodevent.Informationcollectedby
NHCandtheAVAwasusedtoestimatetheobservedfloodextentsandcheckdepths.Adjustmentswere
madetotheMIKE11,MIKE21andlinkssuchthatthemodelextentsapproximatetheobservedextents.
Someoftheadjustmentsarelistedbelow:
ThemeshwasrefinedalongtheflowpathnotedduringtheNovember2014flooding,which
follows224thStreet,toimprovetherepresentationoftheroadandvariousditches.
ThemainMapleRidgefloodplainmeshwasrefinedtoa20mwidthtoallowthemodelto
includetheimpactsoflocalhighpointsalongtheriverchannel.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis34
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Duringthecalibrationevent,floodingbeganatthelowerreachesoftheNorthAlouetteRiverintheearly
eveningof03November2014andflowͲinsfromditchesalongtherightbankoftheNorthAlouetteata
chainageof5199m.WatertheninfilledthelowͲlyinglandsoneithersideof136thStreetbetween7PM
and10PM.Duringthistime,wateralsostartedtooverflowtheleftbankoftheNorthAlouetteatthe
downstreamboundaryoftheMIKEFloodmodel,floodingthelandlocatedbetweenthetwoAlouette
rivers.
FloodingattheNorthAlouette224thStreetbridgebeganjustpastmidnight,approximatelyanhour
beforethepeakofthestorm.Waterthenflowedup224thStreet,northofthebridge.Duringthepeakof
thestorm,wateralsoextendedalong136thStreet.
Table19.MIKEFloodhighwatermarkwaterlevelagreement.
HighWaterMarkLocation
PeakWLs(mGSC)
ObservedModelledDifference
224thStreet,NorthofNorthAlouetteBridge6.996.980.01
6.966.960.00
6.466.440.02
5.905.900.00
6.085.900.18
136thAvenue,Westof224thStreet4.454.070.38
4.184.030.15
4.023.700.32
3.793.350.44
3.913.300.61
Itshouldbenotedthatthemodeldidnotaccuratelycapturethefloodingalongsidetheintersectionof
224thStreetand136thAvenue.Observationssuggestthatmostofthiswaterwascarriedintheadjacent
ditch,partofthelocalminorstormwatersystemthatwasnotincludedinthislargescalefloodmodel.
Therelativelylargedifferenceinpeakwaterlevelsmodelledwestof224thSt.maybecausedinpartby
thefactthatthemodeldidnotcapturetheroutingwaterthroughthisditch.Thisshouldbeconfirmed
usingfloodextentsdatacollectedduringfuturefloodevents.
7.4.2 MIKEFloodandMIKE21ModelVerification
ItwasnotpossibletocompleteadetailedverificationoftheMIKEFloodandMIKE21modelwiththe
January2015event,astheeventwaslowerandnofloodingextentswererecorded.Themodelresults
weresimplyreviewedtoconfirmthatnofloodingextentsweregenerated.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis35
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
7.5 ModelLimitations
ThesimulationoftheNovember2014floodconfirmsthatthemodeliscapableofpredictingflood
extentsandwaterlevels,andprovidesinsightsintotheprogressionoffloodinginMapleRidge.The
modelperformedwell,withmodelledandobservedlateralextentsandhighwaterlevelsmatching
closely.Themodelshouldbeseenasavalidandusefultoolforfloodmanagementplanningforthe
region.
However,themodeldoeshavelimitationsthatneedtoberecognized.Itassumestheriverbedand
banksarefixed.However,bankerosion,sedimentationandlogjamformationcanalloccurduringmajor
floods,especiallyinthemoredynamicNorthAlouetteRiver.Theseprocessescanaffectthelocal
hydraulicconditionsconsiderably.Itshouldalsobenotedthatthecomputedfloodextentsrepresent
riparianfloodingfromthemainriverchannels.Themodelisnotintendedforrepresentinglocalised
pondingonisolated,lowͲlyingportionsofthefloodplaincausedbytheaccumulationofrainwateror
meltingsnow.Localisedpondingiscontrolledbyrainfallintensity,localtopography,drainage
characteristicsofthesoilandthecapacityofdrainagestructuressuchasculvertsandditches.
7.6 ModelResults
7.6.1 SensitivityTesting
Partoftheprocessofdevelopinghydraulicmodelsisconceivingasetofreasonableassumptionsthat
definethemodelstructureanditsinputs.Someoftheassumptionsmadeduringthemodel
developmentrelatetomodelboundariesandchannelandfloodplainroughness.Sensitivityanalyseson
theseassumptionswereconductedbyreͲrunningthemodelwithslightvariationsontheassumptions.
Theresultsofthesensitivityanalysesarepresentedinthissection.
ModelInflows
Waterlevelsandinundationareaareafunctionoftheinflowsusedforthemodelling.Totestthe
sensitivityofthis,themodelwasrunwithsomesimplechangestothe5Ͳyeardesigninflows.All5Ͳyear
designinflowstothemodel(mainstemandtributary)wereincreasedanddecreasedby10%.This
variationinpeakflowscorrespondedtoanaveragevariationinwaterlevelsofapproximately15cm
alongthelengthoftheriver,withatotalrangeof10cmto20cm,dependingonlocation.
TheimpactonwaterlevelsandinundationareasarepresentedinTable20.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis36
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Table20.Peakriverwaterlevelsforflowsensitivityanalysis.
GaugeNameRiverChainage
(m)
PeakWLs(mGSC)
5yrResults+10%FlowͲ10%Flow
232ndStreetHWMNorthAlouette1026515.0915.1715.06
AVAGaugeNorthAlouette993713.1113.1813.08
MapleRidgeGaugeNorthAlouette83407.617.627.42
PittMeadowsGaugeAlouetteConfluence313.533.603.49
SouthAlouetteWSCSouthAlouette1897314.2014.3014.11
RoughnessCoefficients(ChannelandFloodplain)
Akeyparameterinanyhydraulicmodelistheroughnesscoefficient.ForacoupledMIKEFloodmodel,
roughnessparametersareestimatedforboththechannel(inMIKE11)andforthefloodplain(in
MIKE21).FortheAlouettefloodmodel,theNovember2014calibrationeventwasusedtoselect
roughnessvaluesinbothmodeldomains.Totestthesensitivityoftheseinputs,twoadditionalmodel
runswerecompletedwherethechannelandfloodplainroughnesswerealladjustedupandthendown
by10%.Aswiththeothersensitivityruns,the5Ͳyeareventwasusedasabasecase.Resultsofthis
analysissuggestarangeof9cmto21cmintotalwaterlevelvariation,withanaveragevariationof
13cm(Table21).
Table21.Peakriverwaterlevelsforroughnesssensitivityanalysis.
GaugeNameRiverChainage
(m)
PeakWLs(mGSC)
Calibration+10%MͲ10%M
232ndStreetHWMNorthAlouette1026515.0915.1615.03
AVAGaugeNorthAlouette993713.1113.1813.05
MapleRidgeGaugeNorthAlouette83407.617.407.66
PittMeadowsGaugeAlouetteConfluence313.533.583.49
SouthAlouetteWSCSouthAlouette1897314.2014.2914.12
7.6.2 DesignFloodModelling
Themodelhasbeenrunforsevendesignscenariosfromthe2Ͳyeareventthroughthe200Ͳyearevent.
DesigninflowhydrographscorrespondtothosedevelopedinSection4.4andincludea10%flow
increaseontheNorthAlouetteandalltributariesasanallowanceforclimatechange(Table7).All
unregulatedinflowsweretimedtopeaksimultaneously.OutflowsfromtheAlouetteReservoirtothe
downstreamSouthAlouetteRiverincludea7.5hourdelayduetoreservoirrouting.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis37
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
DownstreamboundaryconditionsweresettoalargewinterflowontheFraserRiverandincorporatea
year2100sealevelriseallowanceof1m,whichyieldsahighwaterlevelof3.1mGSCattheconfluence
ofthePittandAlouetteRivers.Thisdownstreamwaterlevelwasheldconstantthrougoutthedesign
events,astheriseandfallofwaterlevelsduetolargeeventsontheFraserismuchslowerthanthatof
theAlouetteRiverssystem.Thesealevelriseallowanceonlyaffectswaterlevelsattheverydownstream
endsoftherivers.
ItshouldbenotedthattheTrethewayDikeislocatednearthewesternedgeofthestudyarea.Thisdike
isknowntobesubstandardandtheareawhichitprotectswouldbeinundatedatflowslessthanthe
200ͲyeareventontheAlouetteRivers.Asnobreachanalysisordetailedreviewofthisdikewas
completedaspartofthiswork,thecorrespondingfloodlevelsinthisareaarenotknown.Forthe
purposesoffloodmodelling,extentmapsandhazardmaps,thisareaisshadedingrey.
FloodextentmapsforeachofthesevendesignscenariosareavailableinMap1toMap7.Threeflood
scenarios;the2Ͳyear,25Ͳyearand200Ͳyearfloodsarecomparedtoprovideanoverviewofinundation:
2ͲYearFloodDepths
The2Ͳyearfloodextentsmappingshowsmoreextensivefloodingthanthe2014calibrationevent,
suggestingthecalibrationfloodhadareturnperiodunder2years.Whilethe2014eventhadonly
localizedfloodingatlowpointsadjacenttotheriver,the2Ͳyearextentsshowaninterconnectivity
betweenlowpoints.Waterisshownflowingfreelyalonglowersectionsofthefloodplain,including
areasnorthoftheNorthAlouetteRiversandinbetweentheNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers.
ItisimportanttonotethatthereareseveralareasadjacenttotheSouthAlouetteRiverthatshowwater
depthsof1morhigher.Thelargestoftheseareasarelocatedbetween224thStreetandtheAbernethy
Wayandupstreamofthe232ndStreetbridge.Bothoftheseareasincluderesidentialdevelopment
leadingtopotentialevacuationofresidents.
25ͲYearFloodDepths
Bythe25Ͳyearevent,amajorityofthestudyareaexperiencessomeinundation.Althoughmostofthe
inundatedarearemainsbelow0.5mofdepth,walkingordrivingbecomepotentiallydangerous
activities.ThesameareasadjacenttotheSouthAlouetteRiver(between224thStreetandthe
AbernethyWayandupstreamofthe232ndStreetbridge)requireresidentialevacuationandhave
localizeddepthsofabove2m.AgriculturalandundevelopedlandneartheNorthAlouetteGreenwayis
alsoinundatedtoadepthgreatthan1m.
The25Ͳyeareventalsoshowstheformationofdeepchannelflowcrossingthefloodplain.Narrow
channelswithdepthsofwatergreaterthan1mareobservedcrossingbetweenthetworiversand
followinglocalditchsystemsnorthoftheNorthAlouetteRiver.Thischannelizedflowisespecially
dangerousandisbetterhighlightedinthehazardmappinginthefollowingsection.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis38
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
200ͲYearFloodDepths
Duringthe200Ͳyearfloodevent,waterlevelsarehighenoughtocovermostofthelocalhighpoints
withinthefloodplain.Muchofthefloodplainexperienceswaterlevelsabove0.5m,floodingtheground
floorofbuildingsandcausingelectricalfailures.Thisisalsodeepenoughtocausevehiclestobecarried
offroadways.Undertheseconditions,safegroundtransportisnotpossible.Forhistoricalreference,this
eventislargerthanthefloodeventexperiencedontheNorthAlouetteRiverin2007.
ResidentialdevelopmentalongtheSouthAlouetteandportionsoftheNorthAlouetteexperienceflood
depthsinexcessof1mandshouldbeevacuated.Evacuationisalsorecommendedforresidentswithin
thefloodplainbetweenthetworiverswherewaterdepthsexceed1mandflowmaybecome
channelized.InundationoftheagriculturalandundevelopedlandneartheNorthAlouetteGreenwayis
expectedtoexceed2mofdepth.
7.6.3 FloodHazardMapping
FloodhazardmapsforplanningandemergencymanagementareincludedinMaps8toMap14andare
basedontheresultsofthedesignfloodmodelling.Hazardratingisafunctionofwaterdepthand
velocity(m*m/s).Hazardratingsarebasedonthe‘HazardtoPeoplefloodthresholds’determinedinthe
UK,whicharesummarizedinTable22below(UKDEFRA/EA2006):
Table22.Floodhazardratings.
HazardRating
depth*(velocity+0.5)
(mxm/s)
Degreeof
FloodHazardDescription
<0.75Low
Caution
“Floodzonewithshallowflowingwaterordeepstanding
water”
0.75to1.25ModerateDangerousforsome(e.g.children)
“Danger:floodzonewithdeeporfastflowingwater.”
1.25to2.5SignificantDangerousformostpeople
“Danger:floodzonewithdeepfastflowingwater.”
>2.5Extreme
Dangerousforall
“Extremedanger:floodzonewithdeepfastflowing
water.”
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis39
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
2ͲYearFloodHazardRating
The2Ͳyearfloodhazardmappingshowsrelativelylowhazardratingsacrosstheinundatedextents.
Thereissomeinterconnectivitybetweenlowpointsandwaterflowsfreelyalonglowersectionsofthe
floodplain.However,moderateandsignificanthazardsarepresentonlyinsmallcreeksandditches.
ExceptionsarefoundadjacenttotheSouthAlouetteRiverbetween224thStreetandtheAbernethyWay
andupstreamofthe232ndStreetbridge.Intheselocations,waterdepthsandvelocitiesreach
moderatetosignificantratings.Significanthazardsaredangerousformostpeople;theseareasare
withinthefloodzoneandcontaindeep,fastflowingwater.Asnotedintheprevioussection,bothof
theseareascontainresidentialdevelopmentandwouldlikelyneedtobeevacuated.
25ͲYearFloodHazardRating
Bythe25Ͳyearevent,amajorityofthestudyareahasahazardratingandcautionisrecommended.
ModeratetosignificanthazardratingsareassignedtothelandsadjacenttotheSouthAlouetteRiver
andtheagriculturalandundevelopedlandneartheNorthAlouetteGreenway.Moderatetosignificant
hazardratingsalsoapplytoareasadjacenttotheNorthAlouetteRivernearthe232ndStreetbridge,
132ndAvenuebridgeand224thStreetbridge.Theseareasbecomefloodzoneswithdeep,fastflowing
waterandaredangerousformostpeople.
Significanttoextremehazardratingsareappliedtothedeepchannelscrossingthefloodplainandalong
theSouthAlouettebetween224thStreetandtheAbernethyWayandupstreamofthe232ndStreet
bridge.Theseareasshouldbeassociatedwithanextremedangerrating.
200ͲYearFloodHazardRating
Duringthe200Ͳyearfloodevent,mostofthelocalhighpointswithinthefloodplainarenolongerdry
andcautionisrecommendedthroughoutthefloodplain.Thefloodplainisinterlacedwithlowlying
sectionsandchannelizedflowwithsignificanthazardratings,dangerousformostpeople.Underthese
conditions,safegroundtransportisnotpossible.
SignificanttoextremehazardratingsarealsoappliedtomuchofthefloodplainalongtheSouth
AlouetteRiverandtothelandneartheNorthAlouetteGreenway.AlongtheNorthAlouette,significant
hazardratingsarenotedinareasadjacenttotheNorthAlouetteRivernearthe232ndStreetbridge,
132ndAvenuebridgeand224thStreetbridge.Fullevacuationshouldbecompletedfromtheseareas
priortopeakinundation.Thisrequiresalargeandhighlyorganizaedevacuationplanandthe
implementationofahazardwarningsystem.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis40
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
8 FLOODPLAINMAPPING
The200ͲyearfloodplainmappingisincludedundertheFloodplainMappingtab.The200Ͳyearflood
constructionlevels(FCLs)shownincorporateafreeboardof0.6m.Alsoincludedisthe25Ͳyearflood
levelwithafreeboardallowanceof0.6m.This0.6mfreeboardallowanceactsasamarginofsafetyto
accountforvarioussourcesofuncertaintyinthemodelaswellaslocalvariationsintopographyand
correspondstotheprovincialstandard.Mappingwascompletedusingthe200Ͳyearand25Ͳyearresults
describedinSection7.6andincludea10%increaseinflowsonallunregulatedflowsourcestoallowfor
climatechangeimpactsasrecommendedbyAPEGBC(2012).Allunregulatedinflowsweretimedtopeak
simultaneously.OutflowsfromtheAlouetteReservoirtothedownstreamSouthAlouetteRiverincludea
7.5hourdelayduetoreservoirrouting.Downstreamboundaryconditionsweresettoalargewinter
flowontheFraserRiverandincorporatea1msealevelriseallowanceforyear2100conditions,alsoas
recommendedbyAPEGBC(2012).
LiDARdatasurveyedin2014wasusedtocreateadigitalelevationmodel(DEM)forthestudyarea.The
DEMwasmodifiedtoincludegroundsurveydataforthe132ndAvenuebridgeontheNorthAlouette
River,the224thStreetbridgeontheNorthAlouetteRiverandchannelsurveysfortheNorthandSouth
AlouetteRivers.ThemapdepictsfloodlevelsbasedongroundconditionsrepresentedintheDEM.Any
changestoground/channelelevations,landuseorbuildingsfromthoseincludedinthemodelwillaffect
thefloodlevelsandrendersiteͲspecificinformationobsolete.
Althoughthemodelgeometrywaskeptfixed,variations(erosion,degradationoraggradation)may
occurduringafloodeventand/orovertime.ThemapdoesnotprovideinformationonsiteͲspecific
hazardssuchaslanderosionorsuddenshiftsinwatercourses.Channelobstructions,localstormwater
inflows,groundwaterorotherlanddrainagecancausefloodlevelstoexceedthoseindicatedonthe
map.Landsadjacenttoafloodplainmaybesubjecttofloodingfromtributarystreamsthatarenot
indicatedonthemaps.
TheaccuracyofthelocationofthefloodplainboundaryislimitedbytheaccuracyoftheDEM,model
boundaryconditionsandmodelparameters.Locallyraisedareashavenotbeenmappedinthe
floodplainextents.AqualifiedprofessionalmustbeconsultedforsiteͲspecificengineeringanalysis.
ItshouldbenotedthattheTretheweyDikeatthedownstreamendofthestudyareadoesnotmeet
provincialdikingstandardsandwouldlikelybreachatsomeflowlessthanthe200Ͳyearflood.Thearea
behindthedikeisconsideredpartofthefloodplainalthoughnotspecificallymappedduetotheabsence
ofbreachmodelling.
The200Ͳyearfloodextentmapshowsboththe2016extentsrecommendedbyNHCandthecurrently
approvedfloodextents,whichwerepublishedin1990.Forthemostpart,extentsfromthetwostudies
areverysimilar.However,therearesomelocationswherethe1990extentsexceedtherecommended
2016extents.Thelargestvariationscanbeobservedatthenorthedgeofthefloodextentsnear232nd
Streetasaresultofthebridgereplacement.Also,somevariationisexpected,asthe1990mappingwas
completedusing1mtopographicdata,whichisfarlessdetailedthantheLiDARobtainedin2014.The
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis41
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
designflowsusedforthe1990mappingarealsoslightlymoreconservative.Yet,thereareareaswhere
the2016inundationboundariesexceedthe1990limits,slightlyincreasingthefloodplain.
ThefinalizedinundationboundariesincludedinthemapwereverifiedduringafieldvisitbyNHCstaffon
1December2015.Locationsandlocaltopographywerereviewedbasedonvariationsbetweenmodel
200yearFCLresultsandthe1990mapping.
9PROJECTSUMMARY,CONCLUSIONSANDBENEFITS
9.1 SummaryandConclusions
1. ThehydrologicregimesoftheNorthandSouthAlouetteRiversaredistinctlydifferent.The
NorthAlouette,beingsmaller(drainageareaof37.3km2)andunregulated,respondsquicklyto
stormevents,particularlylargerainorrainͲonͲsnowevents.Themuchlargerwatershedofthe
SouthAlouette(totaldrainageareaof234km2)includestheregulatedAlouetteLakewhichis
dominatedbyspringfreshettypeevents.However,downstreamofthedam,peakflowsoccur
duringthewinter.
2. Bothriversaredynamicandtheirchannelgeometryhaschangedoverthepastcentury;these
changesaremoreapparentonthesmaller,unregulatedNorthAlouettesystem.Thereis
evidencethatsomeaggradationmaybetakingplaceinthelowerNorthAlouettestudyreach.
TheregulationoftheSouthAlouetteRiver,whichdecreasespeakflowsdownstreamofthedam,
hasalteredthenaturalgeomorphologyofthissystem,withsomecorrespondingreductionin
channelsize.Duetothechannelchangesandextensivedevelopmentwithinthefloodplain,the
Cityidentifiedaneedtoupdatethefloodplainmappingfrom1990.
3. ChannelcrossͲsectionsurveysfrom2014,highͲqualityLiDARdataalsofrom2014,andthe
collectionofcalibrationdataduringthewinterof2014Ͳ2015,allowedfordevelopmentofa
sophisticated2ͲdimensionalMIKEFloodnumericalmodel.Thehydraulicmodelwasusedfor
simulatingthefloodlevelscorrespondingtothe2,5,10,25,50,100and200Ͳyeareventsand
subsequentgenerationoffloodextentandfloodhazardmappingfortheseflows.Theupdated
andimprovedmapping,basedoncurrenttopographicinformation,recentflowestimatesand
muchimprovedhydraulicmodellingmethods,ismoreaccuratethanthe1990floodplainmaps
andreplacesthese.
4. The200ͲyearupdatedpeakflowsontheNorthAlouetteRiverincludea10%increasetoaccount
forprojectedapproximateclimatechangeimpactstotheyear2100,asrecommendedinthe
APEGBC(2012)guidelines.NoextraallowancewasmadeforclimatechangeontheSouth
AlouetteRiverforoutflowsatthedam,asitisassumedthatBCHydrowilladjusttheiroperating
proceduresovertimetocompensateforclimatechange.Comparedtotheprevioushydraulic
modellingboundaryconditionsusedforthe1990floodplainmapping,theupdatedNorth
AlouetteRivermaximuminstantaneousflowis6%lowerandtheupdatedSouthAlouette
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis42
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
maximuminstantaneousflowis11%lower,implyingthepreviousvalueswereconservativein
viewofpresentlyavailablerecords.
5. Asealevelincreaseof1matthemouthoftheFraserRiverwasassumedbutwasfoundtoonly
affecttheverydownstreamreachesoftheriverswithinthestudyarea.Assumingahighwinter
tide,includingsealevelrise,andalargewinterflowontheFraserRiveryieldedawaterlevel
estimateof3.1mGSCattheconfluenceofthePittandAlouetteRivers.
Theupdateddownstreamstartinglevelis1.6mlowerthanthestartinglevelusedin1990and
reflectswinterconditions,whentheAlouetteRiverspeak,ratherthanthefreshetlevelas
previouslyused.(ThecurrentfreshetdesignlevelatPittRiverconfluenceis5.5manddoesnot
affectdesignlevelsinthestudyarea.
6. Floodextentmappingforthe200Ͳyearfloodsuggestswaterlevelswillcovermostofthelocal
higherͲelevationareaswithinthefloodplain.Muchofthefloodplainwillexperiencewater
depthsabove0.5m,typicallyfloodingthegroundfloorofbuildingsandcausingelectrical
failures.Thisdepthwillcausevehiclestobecarriedoffroadwaysandsafegroundtransportwill
generallynotbepossible.Forhistoricalreference,thiseventislargerthanthefloodevent
experiencedontheNorthAlouetteRiverin2007.
7. Floodhazardmappingforthe200Ͳyearfloodshowsthatthefloodplainisinterlacedwithlow
lyingsectionswhichexperienceextensivefloodingandsemiͲchannelizedflow,causing
significanthazardratings.‘Significant’to‘Extreme’hazardratingsareapplicabletomuchofthe
floodplainalongtheSouthAlouetteRiver,landneartheNorthAlouetteGreenwayandalong
theNorthAlouetteRivernearthe232ndStreet,132ndAvenueand224thStreetbridges.
8. Floodplainmappingcorrespondingtothe200ͲyearfloodwaspreparedfortheNorthandSouth
AlouetteRivers’studyarea.The200Ͳyearfloodconstructionlevels(FCLs)includeafreeboard
allowanceof0.6m.Themappingalsoshowslevelscorrespondingtothe25Ͳyearfloodlevel
including0.6mfreeboard.Isolinesarebasedonthe2Dmodeloutput.Theinundation
boundarieswereverifiedinthefieldbyNHCstaffandaresimilartothosepreparedin1990by
theprovincialgovernment.Comparedtothepreviousmapping,thefloodplainisreduced
somewhatinafewareasandslightlyincreasedinothers.
9.2 ProjectBenefits
OverthepastdecadesfloodingalongtheAlouetteRivers,especiallytheNorthAlouette,hasbecomea
sourceofincreasingconcernfortheresidentsofthefloodplains.In2007,extensivefloodingprompted
thecreationofamultiͲstakeholderTaskForcewhichhadasitsobjectivestocompileinformationon
floodissuesanddevelopastrategytomanageand/orreducethefloodriskofthearea.Sixfocusareas
were:1)Riverhydrology,hydraulicsandfloodplainmapping;2)Riveroperationandmaintenance;3)
Floodresponse;4)Floodproofingandprotection;5)Datacollectionandinformationsharing;and6)
Floodplainmanagementrolesandresponsibilities.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis43
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
Theinformationcompiledandfloodplainmapsdevelopedaspartofthepresentprojectformsakeytool
inmeetingtheTaskForceobjectivesandaidingtheCityinmovingforwardtoreducepotentialfuture
floodlosses.Keybenefitsoftheprojectare:
x AreaspronetofloodingduringdifferentreturnperiodeventsarenowidentifiedandupͲtoͲdate
FCLsestimated.Overtime,appropriatefloodprotectionmeasures(structuralandnonͲ
structural)canbedevelopedforaffectedhousingandlongͲrangeimprovementsto
infrastructurebeplanned.
x Thehydraulicmodelformsatoolforevaluatingtheimpactonfloodlevelscausedbychanges
withinthefloodplainandtheriverchannels.Theeffectsonfloodlevelsresultingfromfill
placement,newdikingordevelopmentonthefloodplaincanbeevaluatedusingthemodel.The
benefitsofenlargingbridgeopenings/culvertsorremovinggraveldepositionsanddebriscanbe
assessed.
x Thehazardmappingcanbeusedforissuingfloodwarningstoareaslikelytobeaffectedduring
particulareventsandfordevelopingemergencyresponseprocedures.Themapsindicatewhich
roadswillbemostseverelyaffectedataparticularflowandsafeaccess/egressroutescanbe
identified.
x Themappingformsapubliceducationaltooltoinformresidentsregardingfloodhazardsandto
provideguidanceonimprovingresidents’safety.
x Animportantcomponentoffloodpreparednessisfloodrecovery.(Thiswasclearly
demonstratedaftertheCalgary2013flooding,whererecoveryplanshadbeendevelopedin
advance.)Thepresentmappingproductswillaidindevelopingfloodrecoveryprocedures.
TheCity’sinvestmentinfloodplainmappingproductsisofsignificantvalueandfacilitates:1)the
identificationofpresentfloodhazards;2)evaluationofanyplannedfuturechangesinthe
floodplain/riverchannels;and,3)developmentoffloodmanagementtoolsasoutlinedinSection10.2.
10 RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 TechnicalRecommendations
1. ItisrecommendedthattheCityadopttheupdated200Ͳyearfloodplainmapsand
incorporatetherevisedFCLsintofloodbylaws.Floodbylawsservetoclarifyfuture
developmentguidelinesandprovideregulationsregardingbuildingrenovationsandany
modificationtothefloodplain.Typically,bylawshavetheaddedbenefitofreducingthe
City’sliability.Theyaregenerallydevelopedintwophases,thefirstphaserequiring
engineeringinputandapplicationoftheavailablefloodplainmappingandthesecondphase
involvinglegalreview.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis44
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
2. ItisrecommendedthatafloodearlyͲwarningsystembedevelopedfortheNorthAlouette.
NHCpreviouslyreviewedthepracticalityofinstallingrealͲtimeflowgaugesintheupper
watershedbutconcludedthatthesewouldnotprovideabeneficialincreaseinadvance
floodwarning.Similarly,hydrologicrunoffmodellingisnotapracticaloptionsince
insufficientmodelcalibrationdataisavailable.Asanalternative,realͲtimeprecipitationdata
couldbeusedinconjunctionwithexistingwaterlevelgaugestoobtainvaluableinformation
duringfloodevents.Attheveryleast,onerealͲtimeprecipitationgaugewouldprovidean
indicationofanticipatedchangesinwaterlevelsdownstreamorpotentiallyallowthe
detectionofadebrisblockageontheupperNorthAlouette.Theworkwouldinvolve
reviewinghistoricpeakflowsandprecipitationrecordstoexploreifareasonable
relationshipcanbedevelopedbetweenthetwo,incorporatingantecedentground
conditions.
3. ThehydraulicmodelprovidesasnapͲshotintimeofriverconditionscorrespondingtothe
estimatedfloodflowsandthesurveyedcrossͲsections/floodplain.Themodeland
correspondingmappingneedtobeupdatedovertime,typicallyatleasteverytenyearsor
followingalargeflood.Thefollowingspecificsarerecommended:
a) Recordpeakflows,highwatermarksandfloodextentinformationduringfuturefloods
(returnperiodof5Ͳ10yearsormore)tofineͲtunethepresentmodelcalibrationand
increasethefloodplainmappingaccuracy.
b) EncourageWSCtomaintaintheirgaugesontheAlouetteRiversystemsandensurethat
ratingtablesarekeptcurrent.TheAVAandMapleRidgegaugesarealsovaluableand
needtobemaintained.MakeallinformationavailableinrealͲtime.
c) Overtime,monitortemperature,precipitationandflowsinthestudyareatoidentify
potentialclimatechangeimpacts.
d) ConfirmwithBCHydrotheassumptionsmaderegardingfutureoperatingproceduresof
theAlouetteDam.
e) Monitorchannelchangesandanychangeswithinthefloodplainandresurveyas
deemednecessary.Updatethehydraulicmodelandfloodplainmaps.
10.2 FloodManagementRecommendations
ConsideringthefrequencyandseverityoffloodingwithintheAlouetteRiverwatersheds,itis
recommendedthatanintegratedfloodmanagementplanbedeveloped,incorporatingbothstructural
andnonͲstructuralmeasures.Theplanshouldincorporatethefollowingcomponents:
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis45
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
1. Developafloodemergencypreparednessandresponseplan.Utilizingthefloodplainand
hazardmapping,theplanshouldbepreparedjointlybetweentheCityanditsFirst
Responders.Highpriorityshouldbegiventosafeaccess/egresstoreducetheriskoflossof
lifeduringlargefloods.ThisisofparticularconcernwithinthelowͲlyinglandbetweenthe
tworivers,wherepreͲplanningiscriticaltothesafetransportandpossibleevacuationof
residents.
2. Developguidelinesforafloodrecoveryprogram.Theprogramneedstoclarifytheimpacts
offlooding,likelyinundationdurations,thepotentialextentofdamagesandproceduresfor
recovery.
3. CarryoutavulnerabilityassessmenttoidentifythepotentialforlossͲofͲlife,economic
losses,socialandenvironmentallossesresultingfromaparticularfloodorarangeoffloods.
Thepurposeoftheassessmentistoidentifycriticalareaswherepotentiallossesarehighest
andfloodmitigationmosturgentlyneeded.Theworkcanbecompletedateitheran
overviewlevelorasamoredetailedevaluation.
4. Basedonidentifiedhighriskareas,developsuitablefloodmitigationoptionsandassociated
approximatecostsforinitialevaluation.Improvementsinoneareamustnotnegatively
affectfloodhazardsinanotherarea.
NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRiversAdditionalFloodplainAnalysis46
Phase2–TechnicalInvestigationsCompletion
FinalReport
REFERENCES
APEGBC2012.ProfessionalPracticeGuidelines–LegislatedFloodAssessmentsinaChangingClimatein
BC.ProfessionalPracticeGuidelines.
BCEnvironment1990.ADesignBriefontheFloodplainMappingStudyAlouetteandNorthAlouette
Rivers.FloodplainMappingDesignBrief.
CityofMapleRidge2010.DiscussionwithOperationsStaff(RussCarmichael,WayneHardy,EdMitchell,
BernieSerneandRalphKivi),December1st,2010.
NHC2006.LowerFraserRiverHydraulicModel.FinalReport.PreparedforFraserBasinCouncil,
December2006.
NHC2010.NorthAlouetteandSouthAlouetteRivers’AssessmentandFloodplainAnalysis:Phase1Ͳ
Scoping.FinalReport.
UKDEFRA/EnvironmentAgency2006.R&DOutputs:FloodRiskstoPeople,Phase2.FD2321/TR2
GuidanceDocument.
Figures
""""ú
ú
úúú úúú
úSouthAlouetteRiverN orthAlouetteRiverCranberry FieldsEqui-Sport CentreMaple Ridge ParkHorseman's ParkSilver Valley132 AVE224 ST232 ST124 AVE227 ST128 AVEABERNETHY WAY232 ST127 AVEPARK LANE136 AVE236 ST232nd St. Bridge N224th St. Bridge N232nd St. Bridge S224th St. Bridge S132nd Ave. Bridge N08MH00608MH005AM & MSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig_OverviewMap1.mxdJob: 300349FIGURE 1Date: 08-DEC-2015Study AreaALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- City of Maple Ridge, 2011 Orthophoto- GeoBase National Roads Network- BC Freshwater Atlas- Esri World Street MapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:12,000±Project LimitsúBridge"WSC Hydrometric Station"AVA Hydrometric Station"CMR Hydrometric StationRiverDikeRoad0 100 200 300 400 500M
South Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverDEWDNEY TRUNK RD203 ST216 ST
240 ST
224 ST
RIVER RDNEAVES RD227 ST
256 ST
124 AVE123 AVEHANEY BYPASSLOUGHEED HWY210 STGOLDEN EARS WAY128 AVE132 AVEGOLDENEARSBRIDGEABERNETHY WAYHAMMOND RD
232 ST AM & MSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig2_LanduseMap.mxdJob:300349FIGURE 2Date: 30-NOV-2015Current Land UseALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- City of Maple Ridge- BC Freshwater Atlas Watershed Boundaries- Esri World Imagery- Esri World Street MapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:43,000±0 500 1,000 1,500MRiverProject LimitsWatershed BoundaryCurrent Land UseCommercialIndustrialHigh Density ResidentialMedium Density ResidentialLow Density ResidentialPublicAgriculturalPark, Green Space andConservation Areas
ú
ú úúú
úúúúúúúúúúwvwvwv
wv
wv
wv
wvSouthAlouetteRiverNorthAlouetteRiverMapleRidgePark232nd St. Bridge N224th St. Bridge N232nd St. Bridge S132nd Ave. Bridge N132 AVE224 ST
232 S T AM & MSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig3_NorthAlouetteGeomorph.mxdJob:300349FIGURE 3Date: 08-DEC-2015North Alouette RiverOverview of Geomorphic FeaturesALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge.Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:6,000±0 50 100 150 200 250MúBridgewvErosion SiteúDeposition Site
""""SouthAlouetteRiverN orthAlouetteRiver132 AVE224 ST232 ST124 AVE227 ST128 AVEABERNETHY WAY232 ST127 AVEPARK LANE136 AVE236 ST15758286231 6
7 41 71418
73857722
24
29212678727119847670
803079208131 251093174521420615-19 1582122121917
18
1011133-1
1-1
2-1
8
51411613AM & MSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig4_HistoricalRiverCrossSections.mxdJob: 300349FIGURE 4Date: 08-DEC-2015Historical Cross SectionLocationsALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- City of Maple Ridge, 2011 Orthophoto- BC Freshwater Atlas- Esri World Street MapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:12,000±Project Limits"WSC Hydrometric Station"AVA Hydrometric Station"CMR Hydrometric Station2008 Survey1981 SurveyRiverStream0 100 200 300 400 500M
HistoricCrossSectionComparisononNorthAlouetteRiver0246810120 50 100Elevation(mGSC)DistancefromLeftBank(m)NorthAlouetteRiverͲ224St.Bridge1981ͲXS72008ͲXS800246810120 50 100 150 200Elevation(mGSC)DistancefromLeftBank(m)NorthAlouetteRiverͲ132Ave.Bridge1981ͲXS122008ͲXS78Figure5
HistoricCrossSectionComparisononSouthAlouetteRiverFigure60510152025300 50 100 150 200Elevation(mGSC)DistancefromLeftBank(m)SouthAlouetteRiverͲ224St.Bridge1981ͲXS102008ͲXS250510152025300 50 100 150 200 250 300Elevation(mGSC)DistancefromLeftBank(m)SouthAlouetteRiverͲ232St.Bridge1981ͲXS182008ͲXS18051015202530-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200Elevation(mGSC)DistancefromLeftBank(m)SouthAlouetteRiverͲUpstreamof232St.1981ͲXS222008ͲXS14051015202530-100 -50 0 50 100Elevation(mGSC)DistancefromLeftBank(m)SouthAlouetteRiverͲBetween232St.and224St.1981ͲXS142008ͲXS21
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.4JanͲ60 JanͲ65 JanͲ70 JanͲ75 JanͲ80 JanͲ85 JanͲ90 JanͲ95 JanͲ00 JanͲ05WaterLevel(mGaugeDatum)SpecificGaugeCurveͲ08MH006ͲNorthAlouetteRiverSelectedFlowsandTrendlines0.250.511.523581425Linear (0.25)Linear (0.5)Linear (1)Linear (1.5)Linear (2)Linear (3)Linear (5)Linear (8)Linear (14)Linear (25)RecordedFlow+/Ͳ5%(m3/s)Figure7
0.400.450.500.550.600.650.700.750.80JanͲ75 JanͲ80 JanͲ85 JanͲ90 JanͲ95 JanͲ00 JanͲ05WaterLevel(mGaugeDatum)SpecificGaugeCurveͲ08MH005ͲSouthAlouetteRiverSelectedFlowsandTrendlines1.051.251.651.82.533.54Linear (1.05)Linear (1.25)Linear (1.65)Linear (1.8)Linear (2.5)Linear (3)Linear (3.5)Linear (4)RecordedFlow+/Ͳ5%(m3/s)DamModificationFigure8
1959 224th St 232nd St 132nd Ave
128th Ave
136th Ave
1974 224th St 232nd St 132nd Ave
128th Ave
1989 224th St 232nd St 132nd Ave
128th Ave
136th Ave
Figure9a:HistoricalAirphotosofStudyAreainSequence
2004 224th St 232nd St 132nd Ave
128th Ave
136th Ave
2008 224th St 232nd St 132nd Ave
128th Ave
136th Ave
Figure9b:HistoricalAirphotosofStudyAreainSequence
Silver Valley
Silver Valley
Alouette LakeNorth Alouette RiverSouth Alouette RiverHANEY EASTMAPLE RIDGE KANAKA CREEKPITT POLDERHANEY UBC RF ADMINBasin: Alouette RiverArea: 251 sq.kmBasin: NorthAlouette RiverArea: 42 sq.kmBasin: Blaney CreekArea: 27 sq.kmBasin: McKenny CreekArea: 5 sq.kmBasin: Fenton Road SloughArea: 5 sq.kmAM & MSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig10_Watershed.mxdJob:300349FIGURE 10Date: 30-NOV-2015Alouette Rivers WatershedsALOUETTE RIVERS ADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- Streams and watershed polygons: BC FreshwaterAtlas- Orthophotos: ArcGIS Map Service, World_Imagery- Inset map background: ArcGIS Map Service,StreetmapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:135,000±012345KMClimateGaugesLakeWatershed BoundaryStream
0.02.04.06.08.010.012.014.016.018.020.00100200300400500600700Temperature(DegC)MonthlyPrecipitation(mm)MeanMonthlyTemperatureandPrecipitationforAlouetteRiversWatershedGaugesPittPolder(1106180,Elevation5m)1951Ͳ2007MonthlyPrecipitation(Min,MeanandMax)MonthlyTemperatureFigure11
0.02.04.06.08.010.012.014.016.018.020.00100200300400500600700Temperature(DegC)MonthlyPrecipitation(mm)MeanMonthlyTemperatureandPrecipitationforAlouetteRiversWatershedGaugesHaneyUBCRFAdmin(1103332,Elevation147m)1961Ͳ2008MonthlyPrecipitation(Min,MeanandMax)MonthlyTemperatureFigure12
050100150200250300350400TotalPrecipitation(mm)AnnualMaximumPrecipitationEventsPittPolder(1106180,Elevation5m)1ͲDayPrecipitation3ͲDayPrecipitation5ͲDayPrecipitationFigure13
050100150200250300350TotalPrecipitation(mm)AnnualMaximumPrecipitationEventsHaneyUBCRFAdmin(1103332,Elevation147m)1ͲDayPrecipitation3ͲDayPrecipitation5ͲDayPrecipitationFigure14
012345NumberofEventsExceeding2ͲYear,1ͲDayPrecipitationNumberRainyDayEventsbyYearPittPolderHaneyUBCRFNodataavailableFigure15
Ͳ800Ͳ600Ͳ400Ͳ2000200400600800AnnualPrecipitationͲDeviationfromMean(mm)AnnualandWinterPrecipitationDeviationfromMeanatPittPolderGauge1952Ͳ2006AnnualWinterFigure16
Ͳ800Ͳ600Ͳ400Ͳ20002004006008001000AnnualPrecipitationͲDeviationfromMean(mm)AnnualandWinterPrecipitationDeviationfromMeanatHaneyUBCRFGauge1962Ͳ2006AnnualWinterFigure17
Figure18:TemperatureTrendsunderClimateChange
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
14.0
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Temperature(DegreesC)MeanAnnualTemperature TrendsUnderClimateChange
MapleRidge,BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Temperature(DegreesC)SummerMeanMaximumTemperature TrendsUnderClimateChange
MapleRidge,BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
Ͳ3.0
Ͳ2.5
Ͳ2.0
Ͳ1.5
Ͳ1.0
Ͳ0.5
0.0
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Temperature(DegreesC)WinterMeanMinimumTemperature TrendsUnderClimateChange
MapleRidge,BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
Figure19a:PrecipitationTrendsunderClimateChange
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Precipitation (mm)Mean Annual Precipitation Trends Under Climate Change
Maple Ridge, BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Precipitation as Snow (mm)Annual Precipitation as Snow Trends Under Climate Change
Maple Ridge, BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Precipitation (mm)Spring Monthly Precipitation Trends Under Climate Change
Maple Ridge, BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
Figure19b:PrecipitationTrendsunderClimateChange
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Precipitation (mm)Summer Monthly Precipitation Trends Under Climate Change
Maple Ridge, BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
210
215
220
225
230
235
240
245
250
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Precipitation (mm)Fall Monthly Precipitation Trends Under Climate Change
Maple Ridge, BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
210
215
220
225
230
235
240
245
250
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090Precipitation (mm)Winter Monthly Precipitation Trends Under Climate Change
Maple Ridge, BC
CGCM_A2x CGCM_B2x HADCM3_Adx
0.01.02.03.04.05.06.0Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecFlow(m3/s)MeanMonthlyFlowsforNorthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet1911to2008Mean Monthly FlowsMean Annual DischargeFigure20
02040608010012011223344556677889100111122133144155166177188199210221232243254265276287298309320331342353364Flow(m3/s)JulianDaySummaryAnnualHydrographsforNorthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet1911to2008AverageMinimumMaximum5thPercentile95thPercentileFigure21
0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.0Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecFlow(m3/s)MeanMonthlyFlowsforSouthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet1985toPresentMeanMonthlyFlowsMeanAnnualDischargeFigure22
02040608010012014011223344556677889100111122133144155166177188199210221232243254265276287298309320331342353364Flowm3/sJulianDaySummaryAnnualHydrographsforSouthAlouetteRiverat232ndStreet1985toPresentAverageMinimumMaximum5thPercentile95thPercentileFigure23
051015202530354045Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecFlow(m3/s)MeanMonthlyFlowsforSouthAlouetteRiveraboveAlouetteLake1984to2010MeanMonthlyFlowsMeanAnnualDischargeFigure24
05010015020025030035040045050011223344556677889100111122133144155166177188199210221232243254265276287298309320331342353364Flow (m3/s)JulianDaySummaryAnnualHydrographsforSouthAlouetteRiveraboveAlouetteLake1984to2010AverageMinimumMaximum5thPercentile95thPercentileFigure25
0501001502002501910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010Flow(m3/s)DailyFlowonNorthandSouthAlouetteRivers1911Ͳ200808MH00508MH006AlouetteDamConstructedAlouetteDamModifiedSouthAlouetteNorthAlouetteFigure26
0204060801001201401601801900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020Flow(m3/s)AnnualPeakDailyandInstantaneousFlowsNorthAlouetteRiverPeakAnnualInstantaneousFlowPeakAnnualDailyFlowLinear(PeakAnnualInstantaneousFlow)Linear(PeakAnnualDailyFlow)Figure27
01020304050607080901001900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020Flow(m3/s)AnnualPeakDailySeasonalFlowsNorthAlouetteRiverPeakDailySummerFlowPeakDailyWinterFlowLinear(PeakDailySummerFlow)Linear(PeakDailyWinterFlow)Figure28
012345191219151918192119241927193019331936193919421945194819511954195719601963196619691972197519781981198419871990199319961999200220052008NumberofDaysNumberofHighFlowDaysbyYearNorthAlouetteRiverNumberDayswithFlow>40m3/sNodataavailableFigure29
EŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞĞƐŝŐŶŝƐĐŚĂƌŐĞ,LJĚƌŽŐƌĂƉŚƐǁŝƚŚůŝŵĂƚĞŚĂŶŐĞ/ŵƉĂĐƚƐFigure30
STELLASystemsModelofAlouetteReservoirandDam–OverviewFigure3ϭ
0100200300400500600Discharge(m3/s)Time(Hours)DesignDischargeHydrographstoSouthAlouetteRiverB.1Ͳ2ͲYearFlowB.2Ͳ5ͲYearFlowB.3Ͳ10ͲYearFlowB.4Ͳ25ͲYearFlowB.5Ͳ50ͲYearFlowB.6Ͳ100ͲYearFlowB.7Ͳ200ͲYearFlowFigure3Ϯ
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0024487296120 144 168 192216 240ZĂƚŝŽŽĨYŝͬYĚTime(Hours)HydrographShapeSensitivity48HourTriangularHydrograph72HourTriangularHydrograph120HourTriangularHydrograph48HourPeakyHydrographFigure3ϯ
0%20%40%60%80%100%120%EntireWatershedSubbasin1ͲAlouetteRiverSubbasin2ͲBlaneyCreekSubbasin3ͲFentonRoadSloughSubbasin4ͲMcKennyCreekSubbasin5ͲNorthAlouetteRiverHypsometricCurvesforTributaryWatershedsElevation(m)Figure3ϰ
^ƚĂŐĞͲŝƐĐŚĂƌŐĞZĂƚŝŶŐƵƌǀĞĨŽƌs'ĂƵŐĞĂƚWĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶƌŝĚŐĞEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞZŝǀĞƌ&ůŽǁ(mϯͬƐ)Figure3ϱElevation(m)
^ƚĂŐĞͲŝƐĐŚĂƌŐĞZĂƚŝŶŐƵƌǀĞĨŽƌDĂƉůĞZŝĚŐĞ'ĂƵŐĞĂƚϮϮϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞZŝǀĞƌ&ůŽǁ(mϯͬƐ)Figure3ϲElevation(m)
EŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞZŝǀĞƌEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰ/ŶĨůŽǁ,LJĚƌŽŐƌĂƉŚFigureϯϳ
EŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞZŝǀĞƌ:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱ/ŶĨůŽǁ,LJĚƌŽŐƌĂƉŚFigureϯϴ
0100020003000 4000500060007000 800090 00100001100012000
0100020003000 400050006000700080009000 10000110 00120001300014000 150001600017000
1800019000
North Alouette RiverSouth Alouette Riveru/s North Alouette Boundaryu/s South Alouette Boundaryd/s Boundary232 ST
ABERNETHY WAY128 AVEGOLDEN EARS WAYLOUGHEED HWY123 AVE256 ST
227 ST
NEAVES RD224 ST
240 ST
216 ST
203 ST DEWDNEY TRUNK RDHARRIS RD132 AVEMCNEIL RDBlaney CreekFenton SloughNA Local InflowsMcKenny Creek +SA Local InflowsAM & GDL, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig39_MIKE11 Model Network.mxdJob: 300349FIGURE 39Date: 30-NOV-2015MIKE11 Model NetworkALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- Esri World Imagery- Esri World Street MapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:45,000±0 500 1,000 1,500MPoint SourceMIKE11 BoundaryCross SectionMIKE11 Model Network
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶǀĞŶƚDŽĚĞů/ŶĨůŽǁŽƵŶĚĂƌLJŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐFigureϰϬ
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶǀĞŶƚDŽĚĞůtĂƚĞƌ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶĚĂƌLJŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐFigureϰϭ
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞϮϯϮŶĚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌŝĚŐĞFigureϰϮ
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞs'ĂƵŐĞFigureϰϯ
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞĂƚϮϮϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌŝĚŐĞ;DĂƉůĞZŝĚŐĞ'ĂƵŐĞͿFigureϰϰ
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƚ^ŽƵƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞĂƚϮϯϮŶĚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌŝĚŐĞ;t^'ĂƵŐĞͿFigureϰϱ
EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϰĂůŝďƌĂƚŝŽŶĂƚůŽƵĞƚƚĞZŝǀĞƌƐŽŶĨůƵĞŶĐĞ;WŝƚƚDĞĂĚŽǁƐ'ĂƵŐĞͿFigureϰϲ
:ĂŶĂƵƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶǀĞŶƚDŽĚĞů/ŶĨůŽǁŽƵŶĚĂƌLJŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐFigureϰϳ
:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶǀĞŶƚtĂƚĞƌ>ĞǀĞůŽƵŶĚĂƌLJŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐFigureϰϴ
:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶĂƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞϮϯϮŶĚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌŝĚŐĞFigureϰϵ
:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶĂƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞs'ĂƵŐĞFigureϱϬ
:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶĂƚEŽƌƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞĂƚϮϮϰƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌŝĚŐĞ;DĂƉůĞZŝĚŐĞ'ĂƵŐĞͿFigureϱϭ
:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶĂƚ^ŽƵƚŚůŽƵĞƚƚĞĂƚϮϯϮŶĚ^ƚƌĞĞƚƌŝĚŐĞ;t^'ĂƵŐĞͿFigureϱϮ
:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϱsĂůŝĚĂƚŝŽŶĂƚůŽƵĞƚƚĞZŝǀĞƌƐΖŽŶĨůƵĞŶĐĞ;WŝƚƚDĞĂĚŽǁƐ'ĂƵŐĞͿFigureϱϯ
132 AVE216 ST224 ST124 AVENEAVES RD232 ST227 ST123 AVE128 AVE210 STABERNETHY WAY132 AVE128 AVEAM & GDL, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig54_MIKE21 Model Domain and Mesh.mxdJob: 300349FIGURE 54Date: 30-NOV-2015MIKE21 Mesh SurfaceALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- Esri World Imagery- Esri World Street MapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:20,000±5RDGVLink (MIKE21/MIKE11)MIKE21 BoundaryInternal WeirDikeMesh0 200 400 600 800M
128 AVE132 AVEABERNETHY WAY210 ST128 AVE227 ST232 STNEAVES RD224 ST216 ST132 AVEAM & GDL, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_AM_Fig55_MIKE21 Model Roughness.mxdJob: 300349FIGURE 55Date: 30-NOV-2015MIKE21 Model RoughnessALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSISDATA SOURCES:- Esri World Imagery- Esri World Street MapCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:20,000±Link (MIKE21/MIKE11)MIKE21 BoundaryModel Roughness12.516.720.025.00 200 400 600 800M
Maps
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 1Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS2-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 2Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS5-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 3Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS10-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 4Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS25-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 5Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS50-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 6Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS100-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodDepth1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsDepth (m)0 to 0.5Most houses are dry; walking in moving water or driving ispotentially dangerous; basements and undergroundparking may be flooded, potentially causing evacuation.0.5 to 1.0Water on ground floor; basements and underground parkingflooded, potentially causing evacuation; electricity failed;vehicles are commonly carried off roadways.1.0 to 2.0Ground floor flooded; residents evacuate.2.0 to 5.0First floor and often roof covered by water; residents evacuate.> 5.0; RiverFirst floor and often roof covered by water;residents evacuate.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 7Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD DEPTHSALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS200-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 8Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS2-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 9Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS5-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 10Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS10-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 11Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS25-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 12Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS50-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 13Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS100-YEAR
132 AVE224 ST128 AVE227 STABERNETHY WAY232 ST128 AVESouth Alouette RiverNorth Alouette RiverTrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should be considered to be within floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)T R E T H E W E Y D I K E
132 Ave acts as a dikeMSN, \\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Fig_FloodHazard1.mxdDikeStudy Area ExtentsHazard Rating (m*m/s)< 0.75Low: Caution - Flood zone with shallow flowing wateror deep standing water.0.75 to 1.25Moderate: Dangerous for some (e.g. children) - Danger: flood zone with deep or fast flowing water.1.25 to 2.5Significant: Dangerous for most people - Danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.> 2.5Extreme: Dangerous for all - Extreme danger: flood zone with deep fast flowing water.Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeDATA SOURCES: 2011 orthoimagery supplied by City of Maple Ridge. Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.±0200400MSCALE - 1:10,000Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESJob: 300349MAP 14Date: 08-DEC-2015FLOOD HAZARDALOUETTE RIVERSADDITIONALFLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS200-YEAR
Flood Plain Map
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!")")")")128 AVE227 ST232 ST232 ST224 ST132 AVEABERNETHY WAY224 ST128 AVE132 AVETrethewey Dike mayfail and area behindthe dike should beconsidered to bewithin floodplain.(Dike breachingwas not modelled.)TRETHEW
E
Y
D
I
K
E NorthAlouetteRiverSouthAlouetteRiver132 Ave acts as a dikeALOUETTE RIVERNEAR HANEY (08MH005)NORTH ALOUETTE RIVERAT 232ND STREET (08MH006)132 Ave & 224 Stapprox. 500m d/s of 232nd St.,near 23088 132nd Ave.9.00 8.87 9.00 8.87 7.00 6.87 7.00 6.87 6.00 5.77 8.00 7.93 8.00 7.89 10.00 9.79 10.00 9.82 21.00 20.81 20.00 19.32 20.00 19.73 19.00 18.34 19.00 18.74 18.00 17.54 18.00 17.81 17.00 16.44 17.00 16.79 16.00 15.40 14.00 13.65 13.00 12.69 13.00 12.78 12.00 11.71 12.00 11.77 11.00 10.73 11.00 10.80 15.00 14.45 16.00 15.78 14.00 13.79 15.00 14.79 STUDYLIMITSTUDYLIMITSTUDY LIMITSTUDY LIMIT115 10 095 908580
70
65
60
55
4580
45115
756055504540
353065505551510510 1550605550535
5525
51151 10
105025205130125
55252010105585807525
10
10
55305
510103530 25
51510 5
3515513512055251054540 25107065
555 1010101030
2555
530255105105255
55
555555105555555 5555551015520
20 2051510 201520102015
51520
1515 2010
205
15
51055
5515102015
20
105155201555520551520101510 20515 105105\\mainfile-van\Projects\Active\300349 Maple Ridge\GIS\300349_MSN_Map_Floodplain1.mxdCoordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 10NUnits: METRESSCALE - 1:5,000±0 100 200 300 400Mwww.nhcweb.com30034919-JAN-2016200-YEAR FLOOD EXTENTSINCLUDING FREEBOARDALOUETTE RIVERS ADDITIONAL FLOODPLAIN ANALYSISACMEngineerGISReviewerJob NumberDateMSNMMFlood Construction Level (FCL)1 in 25 yr Flood Level (+ 0.6 m freeboard)All elevations are in metres (GSC).Hydrometric Stations")Water Survey of Canada")City of Maple Ridge")Alouette Valley AssociationContours1 m interval5 m interval!!Study Limit!FCL - Thalweg IntersectionFlood Construction Level IsolineFloodplain Areas1 in 200 yr Flood Limit, including 0.6m freeboard (FCL)Potentially wetted area behind Trethewey DikeRiver1991 Provincial Designated 200 yr Flood LimitDisclaimer:This document has been prepared by Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd. inaccordance with generally accepted engineering and geoscience practices and isintended for the exclusive use and benefit of the City of Maple Ridge and theirauthorized representatives for specific application to the Alouette Rivers’ Assessmentand Floodplain Analysis Project. The contents of this document are not to be reliedupon or used, in whole or in part, by or for the benefit of others without specific writtenauthorization from Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd. No other warranty, expressedor implied, is made.Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd. and its officers, directors, employees, andagents assume no responsibility for the reliance upon this document or any of itscontents by any parties other than the City of Maple Ridge.1.2.3.4.5.6.Dike mapping supplied by City of Maple Ridge.Hydrometric station locations acquired from Water Survey of Canada and City ofMaple Ridge.1991 provincial floodplain boundary acquired from Data BC, digitized by BC Ministryof Environment from 1:5,000 scale floodplain maps of the Alouette and North AlouetteRivers (file 00-0200-S.2).Contours created by NHC based on 2014 Lidar data supplied by City of Maple Ridge.2011 orthophoto supplied by City of Maple Ridge.Index basemap from National Geographic and Esri.Data Sources:1.NHC (2016). North Alouette and South Alouette Rivers Assessment and FloodplainAnalysis, Phase 2 – Technical Investigations (Final Report). Report prepared for theCity of Maple Ridge.References:1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.This map delineates the potential for flooding under conditions caused by a 200-yearreturn period event as described in NHC (2016). To account for future climate changeimpacts, the 200-year peak flow based on historic analysis was increased by 10% onall unregulated flow sources. No climate change allowance was made for flowsreleased from the Alouette Reservoir, as these are controlled by BC Hydro instead ofnatural processes.A freeboard allowance (margin of safety) of 0.6 m is included in the flood levels shownto account for various sources of uncertainty in the model inputs and parameters.LiDAR data surveyed in 2014 was used to create a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) forthe study area. The DEM surface was modified to include ground survey data for (1)the 132 Avenue bridge on the North Alouette River, (2) the 224 Street bridge on theNorth Alouette River, and (3) in channel surveys for the North and South AlouetteRivers. The maps depict flood levels based on ground conditions represented in thisDEM. Any changes to ground/channel elevations, land use or buildings from thoseincluded in the model will affect the flood levels and render site-specific informationobsolete.The model geometry was kept fixed although variations (erosion, degradation oraggradation) may occur during a flood event and/or over time. The maps do notprovide information on site-specific hazards such as land erosion or sudden shifts inthe water courses. Channel obstructions such as log-jams, local storm water inflows,groundwater or other land drainage can cause flood levels to exceed those indicatedon the map. Lands adjacent to a floodplain may be subject to flooding from tributarystreams that are not indicated on the maps.The flood levels are based on water surface profiles simulated using an integratedone- and two-dimensional hydrodynamic model developed by NHC (2016) using theMIKE Flood software. Model roughness values were initially assigned based ontypical channel and overbank resistance values; then calibrated to a flood event in2014 and validated to a flood in 2015.The Tretheway Dike does not meet provincial diking standards and would likelybreach at some flow less than the 200-year flood. The area behind the dike isconsidered part of the floodplain although not specifically mapped due to the absenceof breach modelling.The accuracy of simulated flood levels is limited by the reliability and extent of thewater level data and flow magnitude used for calibrating the model.The accuracy of the location of the floodplain boundary is limited by the accuracy ofthe DEM, model boundary conditions and model parameters. Locally raised areashave not been mapped in the floodplain extents.A Qualified Professional must be consulted for site-specific engineering analysis.Industry best practices were followed to generate the flood extent maps. However,actual flood levels and extents may vary from those shown and Northwest HydraulicConsultants Ltd. (NHC) does not assume any liability for such variations.Notes:
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: CDPR-0640-30
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW
SUBJECT: Contract Award for Mowing Services – 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A tender for bids from qualified companies for the provision of mowing and trimming services was
issued in 2014 and, Horizon Landscape Contractors was the low bid in the invitation to tender #ITT-
PL14-67. The tender call asked vendors to provide two options:
- Option “A” for mowing and trimming services for Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows based on the
previous mowing contract, and
- Option “B” with pricing for mowing of parks sites that were being completed by parks staff at that
time.
Option “A” was approved for 2015, however staff are now recommending Option “B” which includes
all of the option “A” and “B” sites for the 2016 mowing season.
Option ”B” was asked for because staff wished to review the cost effectiveness of completing this
work with one of the City’s existing large mowers; the mower was approaching the end of its useful
life and would need to be replaced. The analysis in this case confirmed that this additional mowing
could be completed by contract for less than the annual cost of a replacement mower.
The review of the cost effectiveness of the mower also coincided with the review of the Parks
Department structure. It demonstrated that the outsourcing of the mowing and trimming work
would create an opportunity to re-assign a staff member to other priority activities that will continue
to be needed after the October 2016 exit from the Joint Parks and Leisure Services agreement. It is
important to note that the outsourcing of this mowing work will not negatively affect current staffing
levels.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Option “B” proposal from Horizon Landscape Contractors be approved for the sum of
$167,065 plus $2,240.52 for new 2016 sites recently added to the contract, plus a contingency
amount of $5,000 for other mowing services that may be required up to October 31, 2016 only.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The invitation to tender #ITT-PL14-67 requested two pricing options anticipating that the City
may wish to consider permanently retiring one of its large mowers as a cost saving initiative. A
thorough evaluation has confirmed that it would be more cost effective not to replace one of the
large mowers and instead, reassign the staff member involved in this specific task to assist with
other priority tasks. The costs to outsource this work are comparable to the annual cost of just
the lawn mower, not including staff time.
1151
2
b) Desired Outcome:
To ensure the provision of municipal mowing services in a cost effective manner.
c) Strategic Alignment
This initiative is consistent with the City’s business planning expectations to look for
opportunities to be more efficient and effective in day-to-day operations.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
There is no customer service implications anticipated and the mowing will be completed with the
same frequency as it was prior to this change.
e) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
There are no financial implications anticipated as staff will be reassigned to other parks
maintenance tasks. This contract will be re-evaluated again in 2017 when it is anticipated that
Pitt Meadows sites will be removed from the contract.
f) Alternatives:
The City could replace the mower at the end if it’s useful life, which is now. Staff does not
recommend this because the significant savings will support the future operating model for a
Maple Ridge Parks and Facilities Department, without incurring a negative impact on either
services to the community or the staffing compliment.
CONCLUSIONS:
The review of equipment replacements and the provision of services to our residents have in this
case provided a very positive outcome regarding cost savings in mowing services that assisted in
developing an exit strategy from the current Joint Leisure Services Agreement. This will allow us to
continue to provide cost effective mowing, trimming and other park maintenance services within the
planned City of Maple Ridge operating budget.
“Original signed by Wendy McCormick for”
Prepared by: David Boag
Director, Parks and Facilities
“Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
Reviewed by: Trevor Thompson
Manager, Financial Planning
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
Approved by: Kelly Swift
General Manager, Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
db
Attachments; Contract Agreement
I
Page 1 of 31
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
INVITATION TO TENDER # ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
November 24, 2014
City of Maple Ridge
11995 Haney Place
Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 2 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Invitation
The City of Maple Ridge, on behalf of the Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services
Commission, is inviting tender submissions for the provision of parks grass mowing and
trimming. Sealed tenders will be received on or before 2:00 P.M. Local Time, December 17,
2014 at the following address
City of Maple Ridge Municipal Hall
11995 Haney Place, 1st Floor Reception Desk
Maple Ridge, BC, V2X 6A9
Attn: Nichole Walsh
Tenders received after the requested time of receipt may or may not be considered.
There will be no public opening for this Invitation to Tender (ITT). No information will be disclosed
from the time of tender opening to the time a contract is awarded.
Once a contract has been awarded the name(s) of the successful Bidder(s) will be available to
anyone upon request. All submissions become the property of the City of Maple Ridge and are
subject to the Freedom of Information and Privacy Legislation.
Tender documents are available for download from BCBid at www.bcbid.bc.ca.
Tenders transmitted by facsimile machine or electronic mail will not be considered.
Questions regarding the information contained herein should be directed in writing to:
Nichole Walsh – Purchasing Supervisor, Tel: 604-476-2610 Fax: 604-466-4328 Email:
nwalsh@mapleridge.ca.
Tender Submission
A bidder’s basic submission should conform strictly to the requirements of the Invitation to
Tender documents and may also submit an alternative which is superior to or less costly than the
basic submission.
Terminology such as, “must”, “shall”, “should”, or “may” identify the criticality of requirement.
The terms “must”, and “shall”, are mandatory terms. “Should” and “may” are preferred, but less
desirable and may affect the overall rating of the Tender submission.
The Form of Tender should be submitted on the forms provided and are requested to be received
as per above in a sealed envelope clearly marked on the outside “ITT-PL14-67 Park Grass
Mowing and Trimming.”
The legal name and address of the Bidder is to be used when signing the tender documents.
All costs incurred by bidders in the preparation and presentation of their tender will be at their
own expense.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 3 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Please note that it is the responsibility of the bidder to occasionally check the BCBID website to
ensure they receive addendums that may be posted there.
Registration of Intent to Respond
Bidders should complete and IMMEDIATELY return the form titled “Registration of Intent to
Respond” appearing at the end of this section. Failure to do so may result in your company not
receiving addenda and other correspondence related to this Invitation to Tender.
Site Visits and Mandatory Information Meeting
It is the bidder’s responsibility to view the site(s) to determine the existing conditions,
dimensions, and limitations. The bidder will rely entirely upon his/her own judgment in
submitting a tender, and will include in the tender submission a sum sufficient to cover all items
required for the types of work specified. The bidder will be responsible to investigate the project
requirements and complete the works to the satisfaction of the City. In submitting a tender the
bidder confirms he/she has viewed the work sites.
A list of work locations and addresses, complete with mowing and trimming frequencies, and
including details pertaining to the areas is attached to the tender as “Pricing Schedule Option A”
and “Pricing Schedule Option B”.
Due to the number of sites the bidders are requested to view the locations on their own.
Contractors are encouraged to:
view all sites in order listed on the OPTION B pricing sheet (as all locations are included
for Option B);
consult both Option A and Option B pricing sheets at each location to understand
different scope of service for each Option (however, not ALL sites are requested for
Option A);
quote pricing as per scope requested per location, Option A and Option B.
It is the intention of the City to award the scope of work as outlined in Pricing Schedule Option A
as a minimum with the sole discretion of the City to select all, some or none of the enhanced
scope of services as outlined in Pricing Schedule Option B.
Site Locations: For your convenience a map of Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows has been attached as
“Appendix 1”. Not all sites have been identified – example: boulevards etc. are not identified.
A full size drawing of “Appendix 1” Maple Ridge / Pitt Meadows is available from City Hall
Reception – Free of Charge. Please refer to ITT-PL14-67 Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
when picking up your map in order to obtain the document without cost. Only (1) one map will be
issued per contractor.
IMPORTANT: ATTENDANCE IS MANDATORY TO SUBMITTING A BID.
A mandatory Information - Question and Answer Session will be held at 1:30 pm on December
11, 2014 at the City of Maple Ridge Municipal Hall located at 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge.
The Meeting will be held on the first floor in the Blaney Room. Please see Reception upon
arrival.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 4 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Prior to the meeting please notify Nichole Walsh of your attendance at 604-476-2610 or email
nwalsh@mapleridge.ca.
Vehicle parking is available in the underground parking lot at City Hall. The first hour is free of
charge, additional time is available at $0.75 per hour. Any costs associated with attending the
Mandatory Question and Answer Session on December 11, 2014 is the sole responsibility of the
Contractor.
This information session will be the only opportunity Bidders will be able to ask questions to
clarify the information, in person, for “Pricing Schedule Option A” and “Pricing Schedule Option
B” and to ask any other questions pertaining to the contract. If during this meeting it is deemed
that certain locations require a site meeting this can then be arranged. Any subsequent question
to be submitted in writing to: nwalsh@mapleridge.ca .
It is mandatory that all bidders that intend to submit bids attend the Question and Answer
Session and any site meetings that may be arranged.
Discrepancies or Omissions
Bidders finding discrepancies or omissions in the Invitation to Tender documents, or having any
doubts to the meaning or intent of any part thereof, should immediately notify the Purchasing
contact in writing, who may send written instructions or explanations to all bidders on record with
the City. No responsibility will be accepted for oral instructions. Addenda or correspondence
issued during the Invitation to Tender period shall be considered part of this document and
become part of the final Contract documents.
Except as provided by the above paragraph, no additions or deletions from the contents of these
documents will be permitted.
Irrevocability of Tender
The tender will be irrevocable for a period of ninety (90) days from the Closing Date.
Withdrawal of Tenders
Tender submissions may be withdrawn personally, by written notice or by fax, provided that
Nichole Walsh – Purchasing Supervisor, receives such notice of withdrawal, prior to the preferred
time of receipt.
Revision of Tender
A tender already delivered may only be revised in the following manner, and the revision must be
plainly referable to a particular tender.
Revisions to tenders already received shall be submitted only by fax or signed letter. The revision
must state only the amount of which a figure is to be increased or decreased, or specific
directions as to the exclusion or inclusion of particular words.
Please note in the case of faxed revisions to tenders, the City of Maple Ridge assumes no
responsibilities and the bidder assumes all risks of using faxed communication for revisions. The
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 5 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
faxed transmission must be received in the office of Nichole Walsh prior to preferred time of
receipt.
Acceptance of Tenders
The City may not necessarily accept the lowest priced tender or any tender. At its sole discretion,
the City reserves the right to reject any or all tenders received and to accept any tender which it
considers advantageous, whether or not it is the lowest priced tender. The City is not under any
obligation to award a contract, and reserves the right to terminate the Invitation to Tender
process at any time, and to withdraw from discussions with all or any of the Bidders who have
responded.
The City reserves the right to accept the tender in total or in part, and to waive any minor
informalities, irregularities, or technicalities, and to accept the offer deemed most favourable to
the City.
The City shall not be obligated either to accept or reject any non-compliance within the
requirements of this Invitation.
The City reserves the right to obtain additional information from the Bidder(s) to clarify the
information in their submission, without any obligation to any other bidder.
In the event that only one tender is received, the City reserves the right to return the tender
unopened. Tenders received after the preferred time of receipt may or may not be considered.
Contract Negotiation
The City reserves the right to negotiate specific terms of the contract with the short-listed vendor
prior to the final award of the contract.
Qualifications and Experience
All bidders should furnish satisfactory evidence as required to demonstrate that they have the
qualifications, experience and equipment to perform all of the work requested in this ITT and that
they have sufficient trained and experienced personnel to complete the requirements of the
contract to the satisfaction of the City.
The City reserves the right to make the final decision, as it sees fit, as to whether or not the
Bidders that have responded to this Invitation to Tender can satisfy this requirement.
Bidders are requested to provide with their submission a detailed list and description of the
equipment to be used should their firm be awarded this contract. This list should include, but is
not limited to, motor vehicles, rotary ride on mowers, grass mowers, grass trimmers and trailers.
Rotary mowers must be able to pick up leaves and grass clippings upon request, and cut at a
minimum height of two (2) inches.
Details of all employees’ qualifications and experience are to be provided.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 6 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Sub-Contractors
The bidder is to provide the names of all sub-contractors they plan on using in the work and
provide satisfactory evidence that the sub-contractors, also, have the training, experience and
ability to complete the work they are called on to perform to the satisfaction of the City.
References
Bidders should provide with their tenders a complete list of government agencies and/or
companies with which you are currently or have recently supplied services that are identical or
similar to that which you are proposing in this Invitation to Tender. Please show date of contract,
business name; contact name and phone number for each reference.
Disposal of Materials
Bidders are to show the name and address of the disposal site(s) that they will use for debris
from the various locations. All debris is to be disposed of off site and in accordance with all local
municipal and provincial laws.
Prices
Unit prices, in Canadian currency, shall be shown for each unit specified and shall include all
applicable charges excluding the GST is to be listed as an extra charge when applicable.
The Form of Tender, Pricing Schedule Option A and Pricing Schedule Option B are to be
completed in their entirety and any omissions may result in the tender submission being rejected
for informality.
Prices are to be shown per park, per cut, and/or per trim as outlined on the price sheets. Prices
are to include all travel time, labour, equipment and material costs plus an allowance for
overhead and profit. The total cost, excluding taxes, for all the sites, is to be entered on Form of
Tender as well as on Pricing Schedule Option A sheet and Pricing Schedule Option B sheet. All
prices are to be firm for the duration of the contract.
It is the intention of the City to award the scope of work as outlined in Pricing Schedule Option A
as a minimum with the sole discretion of the City to select all, some or none of the enhanced
scope of services outlined in Pricing Schedule Option B.
All prices offered must accurately reflect the true cost of work for each location. While it is the
intent of the City to award all of the work site locations to one Contractor, the City may deem unit
prices for specific locations to be unreasonably high in cost, whereas the City then reserves the
right to split the sites and to award a contract to one or more Contractors, or to not award a
contract at all.
If bid prices exceed the municipal budgeted amount for a Parks Trimming and Mowing contract,
all, or portions of the contract, may be cancelled.
Insurance Requirements
Indicate whether your company can meet the insurance requirements if awarded the contract.
You do not need to provide a Certificate of Insurance with your bid.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 7 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Business Licence and WorkSafeBC Registration
Enter your City of Maple Ridge and City of Pitt Meadows business licences and your WorkSafeBC
registration numbers in the places provided on the Form of Tender. If you do not have the
business licences and/or a WorkSafeBC registration number you will be required to obtain them
if awarded the contract.
Selection Criteria
The selection criteria used in the evaluation of the tenders will include, but not be limited to:
prices, qualifications and experience of Bidders and their employees, suitability and condition of
equipment, quality based on previous work and references, availability, compliance with
prescribed requirements, and any other information that may be requested in this contract
document prior to award.
Partial Award
The City reserves the right to award some, none or all locations listed in this call for Tender.
Should the City received only one (1) response to this call for Tender the City reserves to right to
return the bid unopened and cancel this tender process.
Solicitation of Employees
Bidders and their Agents are hereby warned that any attempt to solicit individual members of the
Selection Committee, the City Council or the Commission in regard to the award of this contract
may jeopardize the favourable consideration of their proposal(s).
Failure to Comply
If the bidder is awarded the contract tendered, and fails or refuses to enter that contract, the
bidder shall without limitation be liable to the City for the difference in the amount of the bidder’s
tender under this Invitation to Tender, and the next lowest tender, and the cost incurred by the
City in securing a substitute Contractor.
Council Approval
The awarding of a contract may be subject to the Municipal Council approving the award of a
contract to the successful bidder. The City reserves the right to cancel this tender request should
Council approval not be received.
All awards are subject to budget and available funding.
End of Section
Instruction to Bidders
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
Page 8 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
City of Maple Ridge
#ITT-PL14-67
Park Grass Mowing and Trimming
Registration of Intent to Respond
To ensure that your company receives any addenda and other correspondence related to the
Invitation to Tender, you are asked to return this sheet by email or fax to Nichole Walsh,
Purchasing Section, at the following address:
nwalsh@mapleridge.ca
FAX: 604-466-4328
The following information is required (please print):
Company Name: __________________________________________________________________
Address: _________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Contact Name: ____________________________________________________________________
Title or Position:____________________________________________________________________
EMAIL: ___________________________________________________________________________
Area Code: _______ Phone Number: ___________________ Facsimile _____________________
Date: _____________________________________
SPECIAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 9 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Special Terms of the Contract
The Special Terms appearing in this Section form part of any contract that may be awarded.
Definitions
Definitions of words and/or terms used in the contract documents will be found in the
General Terms of Contract included with the Request for Tender.
Nature of Work
The work involves the mowing and trimming of lawns within the City of Maple Ridge and City
of Pitt Meadows. The work includes the removal of vegetation and litter from the lawns,
walkways, trails and parking lot areas. The accumulation of the grass clippings and leaves
must be removed when necessary to keep the park attractive and useable and to avoid
damage to existing lawns. Grass clippings from any mowing or trimming must be removed
from all hard surfaces such as pathways and parking lots etc. at each visit.
Management of the Parks
The parks are managed by City of Maple Ridge on behalf of the Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows
Parks & Leisure Services Commission. Hereinafter referred to as the “Commission”.
Commission’s Representatives
The Commission’s Representatives for this project is Randy Van Tunen, Parks Foreman III
with the City of Maple Ridge, and is the contact for all technical matters. Nichole Walsh,
Purchasing Supervisor is the contact for all contract matters.
Contract Term
The contract term will be for three (3) years beginning with the 2015 thru to 2017mowing
season, With an option to renew the contract for an additional one final mowing season
(2017), upon mutual agreement between the City and the Contractor. The maximum
contract term will not exceed 48 months.
All prices offered must be firm for the duration of this contract. Incremental price changes
may be negotiated prior to establishing a contract for the renewal term.
The decision to renew the contract rests solely with the City. The City’s decision to extend the
contract may be made up to the beginning of the year that includes the following mowing
season.
Each mowing season typically runs from March 15 to October 31. The Commission
Representative reserves the option to delay the start date or to extend the service period of
this contract if required.
SPECIAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 10 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Mowing & Trimming Schedule
Working with the Commission’s Representative the awarded Contractor will prepare a
monthly mowing and trimming schedule based on the frequencies and scope of services
listed in either Pricing Schedule Option A of Pricing Schedule Option B as requested by the
Commission’s representative. The Commission’s Representative must approve, in advance,
of any changes to the monthly schedule.
The schedule must take into account the following limitations:
All work must be carried out between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. local time
Monday to Friday.
No work shall be done on a statutory holiday unless approved by the Commission’s
Representative.
Sport Playing fields are to be completed between Monday and Thursday each week.
Parks lands next to schools are to be mowed while children are in school not during
recess, lunch or other periods when children are using the fields.
The City reserves the right to order the discontinuance of the Contractor’s work for any period
of time, to alter the mowing and trimming schedule, and to increase or decrease the number
of sites covered by this contract.
The Contractor is expected to be available to respond to a request for extra cutting of grass &
trimming as required for special events, or a request to a change of the Contractors
schedule.
Notification of Vandalism and Safety Hazards
Any problems, damages, or potential problems encountered by the Contractor during the
work are to be brought to the attention of the Commission’s Representative. Such problems
may include damaged trees or plants, damage to sidewalks and structures, vandalism and
potential hazards to people and property.
Removal of Vegetation and Litter
All litter (i.e. papers, bottles, etc.) must be removed from the work area before mowing and
trimming the lawn.
During the mowing and trimming of the lawns, all grass thrown against buildings, windows or
other structures and on to sidewalks, trails and all hard surfaces, is to be removed the same
day.
Cutting of Grass
This includes the mowing of all grass areas in and around park area. Example : from park
perimeter fence to curb side along road. The grass will be cut to a height of two (2) inches
unless the Contractor is advised by the Commission’s Representative to adjust the cutting
height.
Cutting equipment used by the Contractor must have the ability to cut various heights of
grass starting at a minimum height of two (2) inches. When mowing, care must be taken to
SPECIAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 11 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
prevent tire scuff marks on ornamental light fixtures, etc. The scalping of lawns when
mowing is also unacceptable.
Trimming of Grass
This shall include push mower, push mower, small ride on mower and grass trimmer work
work to all areas that can not be cut by the contractor’s and Park’s large ride on rotary
mowers. Please note: additional trimming will be required in grass areas that larger ride on
rotary mowers cannot achieve an acceptable ‘close edge’ finish.
Examples of trimming ‘elements’:
Around fences;
Post lines;
Outfield baseball fences;
Soccer goal posts;
Fence corners;
Playground structures;
Trees and shrub beds;
Other structures within the park.
Trimming, typically, to be a minimum of 12 inches off/around any ‘element’
Trimming includes edging of all shrub/flower beds, with power grass trimmer, in all areas and
concrete walkways in high priority areas, such as Memorial Parks, Government buildings, Fire
Halls and Cenotaph areas etc.
Trimming also includes the cutting of any vegetation growing through fencing and onto
mowing areas, vegetation on walkways, sidewalks, curbs, parking areas, all other hard
surfaces, and around any structures on gravel surfaces such as information signs, buildings,
fire hydrants, concrete barriers, etc.
The Contractor is also responsible for trimming any areas outside of the park perimeters.
Example: from perimeter fence to curb side, along road right-of-way, including sidewalks.
Equipment
The Contractor must use the equipment that was listed in the Contractor’s response to the
Request for Tender unless permission is received in advance from the Commission’s
Representative to substitute another piece of equipment.
The Contractors’ ride on mowers must be capable of picking up grass clippings and leaves as
required.
Disposal of Materials
The Contractor is responsible for the removal and disposal of all vegetation and litter from
the areas of the Parks that the Contractor is responsible for maintaining. These items
include, but are not limited to, grass clippings, brush, leaves, bottles, cans, and paper.
SPECIAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 12 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
The City does not provide a disposal site, therefore it is the Contractor’s responsibility to
dispose of all material at a site that meets environmental and other government regulations.
No burning of materials is allowed within the City of Maple Ridge or the City of Pitt Meadows.
Damage to Plants and Trees
The Contractor is to take all precautions, including the use of tree collars, to prevent damage
to existing plants and trees from mowers, trimmers and other equipment.
Any trees and shrubs, as well as any other park property damaged by the Contractor’s
equipment, must be replaced as per direction from the Commission’s Representative. The
size and type of trees to be replaced will be decided by the City.
Insurance Coverage
The Contractor awarded the contract is required to have a minimum of $5,000,000 in
Comprehensive General Liability.
Updated Certificates of Insurance are to be given to the City prior to performing any work
under the contract.
Supervision
The Contractor shall have a responsible supervisor readily available at all times for progress
meetings, inspection tours of the work, and to receive instructions regarding the scope of
work and/or services from the City’s Representative.
Priority of Contract Documents
The final contract will consist of the following documents and, where there is a conflict
between the terms of these documents, the order of precedence will be the following:
1. Contract Award
2. Amendments to the Contract
3. Special Terms of Contract
4. General Terms of Contract
5. Bidder’s Response to the Request for Tender
Criminal Records Search
Officers, staff and sub-contractors of the Contractor that will be performing work under this
contract must provide proof to the City of having undergone a Criminal Records Search as
outlined in the General Terms of Contract, prior to commencing any work at the sites.
Name Badges and Uniforms
All officers and staff of the Contractor performing work under this contract must wear shirts
in accordance with WorkSafeBC regulations, and these shirts must allow for the visual
identification of the individual as one of the Contractor’s staff. At a minimum the shirts must
have the Contractor’s name on the front and back of the shirt.
SPECIAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 13 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Invoices and Payment
Invoices are to be submitted once a month to the City of Maple Ridge as per the instructions
in the Invoices and Payment section of the General Terms of the Contract.
All invoices submitted to the City of Maple Ridge shall clearly indicate the Work Order number
(see Pricing Schedule Option A or see Pricing Schedule Option B) for the park where the work
was completed.
Business Licences
The Contractor awarded this contract will be required to obtain a City of Maple Ridge and City
of Pitt Meadows Business Licence (or equivalent Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business
License) before performing any work under this contract.
WorkSafeBC Coverage
The Contractor must be in good standing with the WorkSafeBC. A WorkSafeBC Registration
number and a current WorkSafeBC Clearance Letter must be submitted to the City of Maple
Ridge prior to beginning work and the Contractor must remain in good standing with
WorkSafeBC for the duration of any contract term.
Contract Negotiation
The City reserves the right to negotiate specific terms of the contract with the Contractor as
the contract progresses.
Inspection of Work
See General Terms section Page 23.
End of Section
Special Terms of the Contract
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 14 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
General Terms of Contract
The General Contract Terms and Definitions appearing in this document shall form part of
any contract that may be awarded.
Definitions
In the contract, unless the context otherwise requires:
‘Commission’ will mean the Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services
Commission. The Commission is responsible for the administration of the parks and
recreational facilities for the City of Maple Ridge and the City of Pitt Meadows.
‘Contractor’ will mean the party awarded the contract by the City of Maple Ridge.
‘City” will mean the City of Maple Ridge.
‘Commission’s Representative’ will mean the managers, employees and agents of the
Commission, the City or the Department designated by the Commission to administer work
under this contract.
‘Department’ will mean the Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services
Department. The Department administers and operates the parks and recreation facilities on
behalf of the Commission.
‘Normal Work Day’ will mean Monday to Friday from 7:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m.
‘School District’ will mean the School District No. 42.
‘Site’ will mean the buildings and properties within the City of Maple Ridge and City of Pitt
Meadows owned, operated and/or administered by the Commission.
‘Work’ will mean all the work required to be done for the execution and the completion of the
contract to the satisfaction of the Commission and/or City of Maple Ridge.
Gender
Wherever the singular or masculine is used throughout this contract, the same shall be
construed as meaning the plural or feminine or body corporate, as the context or the parties
hereto so require.
Contractor’s Expense
The Contractor shall at his own expense, unless it is expressly stipulated to the contrary,
provide, supply, observe, perform and do everything which, in the opinion of the City, may be
required for the setting out, the execution and the completion of the work and the fulfilling of
the contract.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 15 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Assignment or Sub-letting of Contract
The Contractor shall keep the work under his personal control, and shall not, without the
consent in writing of the City, assign or sub-let this contract or any part thereof.
If the City should consent to any such assignment or sub-letting of this contract or part
thereof the Contractor shall by reason thereof be in no way relieved from his responsibility for
the fulfillment of the work, but shall continue to be responsible for the same in the same
manner as if the said work had been performed by the Contractor himself.
Insurance Coverage
Depending on the type of service the Contractor is performing for the City, the Contractor
may be required to have one or more of the following insurance policies: Comprehensive
General Liability Insurance, Professional Liability Insurance, and Motor Vehicle Insurance.
The City will advise the Contractor as to which coverage(s) are required as part of the Special
Terms of the Contract. The following terms outline the requirements of each ty pe of
insurance and the general requirements of the City for insurance coverage.
Comprehensive General Liability Insurance
Prior to starting work on the City’s properties the Contractor must have Comprehensive
General Liability Insurance covering the term of the contract and remaining in effect for sixty
(60) days following Substantial Performance of the contract or termination of the contract,
whichever is later.
The insurance policy shall be extended to cover Broad Form Blanket Contractual Liability
including, but not limited to, Products and Completed Operations Liability, Personal Injury
Liability, Non-Owned Automobile Liability, Owner’s and Contractor’s Protective Coverage, and
Contingent Employers’ Liability.
Products and Completed Operations Liability Insurance shall be maintained for a period of
twelve (12) months from either the date of acceptance of the project by the City, or the
termination of the contract, whichever is later.
The:
The City of Maple Ridge,
City of Pitt Meadows, and
School District No. 42,
their officers and/or officials, employees, and volunteers shall be added as “Additional
Insured”, but only with respect to vicarious liability arising out of the operations of the Named
Insured for which a permit, license, agreement or contract is issued by or entered into with
the City. The policy shall also include Cross Liability, Waiver of Subrogation and Severability
of Interests clauses.
Any failure to comply with any provision of the insurance policy by the Named Insured shall
not affect coverage provided to the City.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 16 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
The amount of coverage will be set by the City based on the perceived risk involved in the
activities of the Contractor in performance of the specific contract. The minimum amount will
fall on or between $2,000,000 and $5,000,000. The exact amount required will appear in
the Special Terms of the Contract.
Professional Liability Insurance
Professional Engineers, Geoscientists and Architects must have Professional Liability
Insurance, also known as Errors and Omissions Insurance covering the term of the contract
and for a period of two (2) years following Substantial Performance of the contract or the
termination of the contract, whichever is later, in addition to the Comprehensive General
Liability Insurance required in the previous contract term.
The amount of coverage will be set by the City based on the nature of the project and the
perceived risk, but shall not be less than $250,000 per claim and $500,000 aggregate per
annum with a maximum $5,000 deductible. The exact amount required will appear in the
Special Terms of the Contract.
Primary Insurance
The policies for Comprehensive General Liability Insurance and Professional Liability
Insurance shall apply as primary insurance and not excess to any other insurance available
to the City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows and School District #42.
Motor Vehicle Insurance
The Contractor must have Motor Vehicle Insurance, including Bodily Injury and Property
Damage coverage, covering the term of the contract for all motor vehicles, whether owned,
non-owned or hired, used in the performance of the contract. The insurance policy must be
with the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (I.C.B.C.) or another insurer if pre-
approved by the City prior to the award of a contract.
The insurance policy will be in the amount of $3,000,000 per accident.
Certificates of Insurance
The Contractor shall provide to the City a copy of a Certificate of Insurance, completed in its
entirety, and signed by the Insured’s Broker, as evidence of the insurance requirements,
outlined herein, for Comprehensive General Liability and Professional Liability Insurance.
For owned motor vehicles the Contractor shall file with the City a copy of I.C.B.C.’s Form No.
APV 47 entitled “Confirmation of Insurance Coverage” and for non-owned, including hired,
vehicles, if not included in the Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, I.C.B.C.’s Form No.
APV 29 entitled “Non-Owned Automobile Policy”, as evidence of the insurance, outlined
herein, for Motor Vehicles.
Cancellation of Insurance
The insurance policies required under this contract shall provide that they cannot be
cancelled, lapsed or materially changed during the period of coverage required by the
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 17 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
contract without thirty (30) days written notice to the City prior to any change in the policy. In
the event cancellation is due to non-payment of the premium, fifteen (15)
day’s written notice to the City, prior to cancellation, is required. Written notice is to be sent
by registered mail.
Failure to Comply with Insurance Requirements
Should the Contractor neglect to obtain and/or maintain insurance as required within this
contract, or to deliver such policies to the City, then it shall be lawful for the City to obtain
and/or maintain such insurance and the Contractor hereby appoints the City his true and
lawful attorney to do all things necessary for this purpose. All monies expended by the City
for insurance premiums under the provisions of this clause shall be charged to the
Contractor.
Indemnity
The Contractor shall make good and restore and make full compensation for any injury or
damage done to or sustained by the Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge Parks & Leisure Services
Commission, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department or any person or persons or any building, premises, or any other property
whatsoever and shall settle all claims in respect thereof and shall indemnify, protect and
save harmless the Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge Parks & Leisure Services Commission, City of
Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department therefrom and
from and against all claims, demands, suits, or actions of every kind, description and nature
whatsoever arising out of or any way connected with the fulfillment of this contract, or
brought against the Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge Parks and Leisure Services Commission, City
of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department in respect of
anything done, suffered or omitted in the execution of or in connection with the work. The
Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department shall be at liberty to settle or compromise any such claim, demand, suit or action
and any damages, compensation and costs paid or incurred by the Pitt Meadows, the
Commission, the City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department all such claims, demands, suits or actions recoverable from the Commission, the
City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department or
the property of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District
42 and/or the Department shall be a debt due to it from the Contractor, and recoverable by
action or by set-off against any money due from or to the Contractor.
Claims Against and Obligations of the Contractor or Subcontractor
The Contractor agrees to keep the construction site and all property of the Commission, City
of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department free and
clear of all builders liens and agrees to forthwith, following receipt of notice by the
Commission of any such liens, cause the same to be discharged, whether the liens or claims
in respect thereto are valid or not valid. The Contractor agrees with the City that,
notwithstanding any provisions of this agreement to the contrary, the Commission, the City of
Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department shall not be
obliged to pay any monies whatsoever to the Contractor during the time that any builders’
liens or other liens are registered or filed against the construction site or property owned by
the Commission, the City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or
the Department.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 18 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Safety Precautions
The Contractor shall take all measures required to ensure the safety of his employees, sub -
contractors, the general public and the employees of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge,
the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department. The Contractor shall,
when necessary, supply all men, equipment, barriers, traffic signs and control, safety
equipment, watchmen, etc., and will be fully responsible for carrying out work in a safe
manner. The Contractor will also be responsible for, when necessary, and at his own
expense, for ensuring all gas lines, hydro lines, telephone lines, water lines and sewer lines
have been safely shut off or capped by the proper authority and pose no threat or
inconvenience.
When flagging for traffic control, the latest edition of the Province of British Columbia Ministry
of Transportation and Highways Traffic Control Manual for Work on Roadways is to be used
as reference.
It is the responsibility of the Contractor to advise the Commission’s Representative of any
toxic or hazardous material that will be used by the Contractor in the performance of the
work, and to provide to the Commission’s Representative all Material Safety Data Sheets
required by the WHMIS regulations prior to commencing the work. The City reserves the right
to refuse permission for the Contractor to use a specific product or material if, in the City’s
sole opinion, the product or material will constitute an unacceptable risk to the health of the
general public and the employees of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt
Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department.
Property Damage
The Contractor will be responsible for notification to property owners if access to private
property is required. All repairs to accidental damaged to private property, i.e. fences,
landscaping, driveways, broken windows of vehicles and/or buildings etc., will be the sole
responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor will also be held responsible for the repairs to
any Municipal property damage caused by the Contractor in the performance of the work.
Damage to Work
The Contractor shall be responsible for any and all loss or damage whatsoever which may
occur on or to the works, completed or otherwise, until such time as the entire works have
been completed and accepted by the City, except that loss or damage caused solely by an
act of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42
and/or the Department or resulting from an act beyond the control of the Contractor. In the
event of any loss or damage occurring, the Contractor shall, on notice from the Commission’s
Representative, immediately put the work into the condition it was in immediately prior to
such loss or damage, all at the Contractor’s expense, except where such loss or damage was
caused solely by an act of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows,
School District 42 and/or the Department.
The Contractor shall be responsible for any and all loss or damage whatsoever which may
occur on or to the works, completed or otherwise, arising out of the negligence of the
Contractor, any sub-contractors, and any officers, employees or agents of the Contractor or
the sub-contractors.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 19 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
It is the responsibility of the Contractor to report any damage found at a work site, prior to
the start of the work, to the Commission’s Representative responsible for the specific project.
The Commission’s Representative will advise the Contractor as to the action required by the
Contractor, including, but not limited to, the repair of the damaged item by the Contractor at
the City’s expense.
Service of Notice
Any notice or other communication given by the City to the Contractor under this contract
shall be deemed to be given if left at the office of the Contractor, delivered to any of the
Contractor’s officers, employees or agents at the office listed in this contract, or posted on
the work site.
Any notice or other communication given by the Contractor to the City under this contract
shall be deemed to have been given if left at the office of the City of Maple Ridge, the City of
Pitt Meadows, Purchasing Division or delivered to the Purchasing Manager, Purchasing
Supervisor or Commission’s Representative at the office of the City of Maple Ridge listed in
this contract.
In the situation of a communication delivered by Registered Mail or Courier, delivery will be
deemed to have occurred at the time the postal or delivery receipt is acknowledged by the
party receiving the communication.
Protection of City Against Patent Claims
The Contractor shall hold and save the Commission, the City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt
Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department, their officers, agents, servants, and
employees, harmless from liability of any nature or kind, including costs and expenses for or
on account of any copyrighted or uncopyrighted composition, secret or other process,
patented or unpatented invention, articles or appliance manufactured or used in the
performance of this contract, and/or used or to be used by the City before or after
completion of the work unless otherwise stipulated in this contract, and if the Contractor
shall fail to save harmless the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows,
School District 42 and/or the Department, their officers, agents, servants, or employees in
manner aforesaid, any money collected from the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of
Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department, their officers, agents, servants, or
employees by reason of such failure shall be charged to the Contractor.
Ownership
Any and all reports, documents, computer software, or other items of any nature whatsoever,
created by the Contractor in the performance of the work for this contract, whether
completed or not, shall be the sole property of the City, and shall be delivered to the City at
the end of a specific project, the end of the contract, or upon request. The City shall own all
patents and copyrights in any work or item created by the Contractor during the performance
of the contract.
All instruction, repair and parts manuals provided by a manufacturer for equipment supplied
by the Contractor or sub-contractor under this contract shall be given to the Commission’s
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 20 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Representative at the end of the project, and the City reserves the right to withhold final
payment for the work until the manuals are received.
Software Virus
The Contractor warrants that any software supplied under this contract has been tested for,
and found to be free of, viruses. The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
City from and against any claims for loss or damages arising from delivery of, or use of
software containing viruses.
Co-operation
The Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department shall be at liberty to enter upon the site of the work with workmen and materials
to do work not comprised in this contract and the Contractor shall afford any such workmen
all reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the City. The Contractor shall arrange his work
and dispose of his materials in such a manner as will not interfere with the work or storage of
materials of the City or of others upon the work site. The Contractor shall join his work to that
of others and perform his work in proper sequence in relation to that of others to the
satisfaction of the City.
The Contractor shall co-operate with all other contractors who may be performing work on
behalf of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42
and/or the Department and workmen who may be employed by the Commission, City of
Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department on any
work in the vicinity of the project. The Contractor shall make good promptly, at his own
expense any injury or damage that may be sustained by other contractors or employees of
the Commission, the City of Maple Ridge, School District 42 and/or the Department at his
hand.
Any difference or conflict arising between the Contractor and any other contractor employed
by the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department or between the Contractor and workmen of the Commission, City of Maple
Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department with regard to their
work shall be submitted to the Commission’s Representative responsible for the project the
Contractor is engaged in and the Contractor shall abide by his decision in the matter.
Delays
If the Contractor delays in the commencement, execution or completion of the work, and the
delay is not caused by the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School
District 42 and/or the Department, the City will not accept any claim by the Contractor and
the Contractor will indemnify and reimburse the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of
Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department for all costs, expenses, damage and
losses it incurs thereby. Where a delay is clearly not the fault of the Contractor, but is the
sole fault of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42
and/or the Department, the City shall extend the Contract time, but no claims by the
Contractor for delay or damages shall be allowed and the same are hereby waived by the
Contractor.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 21 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Suspension or Termination of Work
The Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department may, in their sole discretion and without giving reasons, require the Contractor
to either terminate his execution of the work, or suspend that work for a specified or
unspecified period, by communicating written notice to that effect to the Contractor.
The Contractor, upon receiving notice of the requirement pursuant to the above paragraph,
shall immediately terminate or suspend all operations except those which, in the
Commission’s, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42’s and/or the
Department’s opinion, are necessary for the care and preservation of the work.
Compensation relating to the suspension or termination shall be in proportion to the portion
of work completed at the time of suspension.
Changes – Determination of Cost
Whenever it is necessary to determine the amount of a change in the Contract Price due to a
change in the work, or upon receipt of written notice of suspension or termination of the
work, the Contractor shall submit to the Commission’s representative a firm price quotation.
Should the City find the quotation submitted by the Contractor unacceptable, the value of the
change shall be determined from the substantiated cost to the Contractor of labour and cost
of materials incorporated in the work, plus a fixed percentage fee to cover overhead, profit
and, indirect costs.
Deviation from Contract
The Contractor shall not make any alterations or variation in, or addition to, or deviation or
omission from the terms of the contract without the written consent of the City.
Work Site Cleanup
The Contractor will maintain the work site in as clean a condition as possible, to the
satisfaction of the City, and will remove from this and the surrounding properties any debris
from his work on a daily basis. Failure to do this will result in the cleaning and removal being
instituted by the City and the associated costs being deducted from the amount owing to the
Contractor.
It is the Contractor’s responsibility to provide the necessary employees, equipment and
supplies to return the site to the same or better level of cleanliness that the site was in prior
to the commencement of the work.
Applicable Law
Each party’s performance hereunder shall comply with all applicable laws of British
Columbia, Canada. This contract shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with
the laws of the Province of British Columbia. If any part, term or provision of this Agreement
shall be held void, illegal, unenforceable, or in conflict with any applicable law, the validity of
the remaining portion of provision shall not be affected hereby.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 22 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Invoices and Payment
The Contractor shall send invoices to: Attention: Accounts Payable, City of Maple Ridge,
11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, BC, V2X 6A9.
The full name of the Commission’s Representative responsible for the specific project, and
the project number and title should appear on all invoices sent to the City.
Payment by the City shall then be made within the standard Net 30 days after the delivery to
the City’s Finance Department of properly prepared invoices, unless the payment terms
offered by the supplier are deemed an advantage to the City, or the City has deemed a
portion of payment is to be held back pending satisfactory completion of the contract.
Payments for Labour and Materials
The Contractor shall pay any and all accounts for labour, Worker’s Compensation,
Unemployment (Employment) Insurance, wage and salary deductions required by law,
services and materials used by him during the fulfillment of this contract as and when such
accounts become due and payable, and shall furnish the City with proof of payment when of
such amounts in such form and as often as the City may request. Should payment of such
accounts not be made when and as the same become due, the City shall be at liberty to pay
the same and all monies so paid by the City shall be charged to the Contractor.
Proof of payment for the items listed herein shall also be required from sub-contractors
contracted or hired by the Contractor to perform work under this contract.
Charges to Contractor
Everything charged to the Contractor under the terms of this contract shall be paid by the
Contractor to the City on demand and may be deducted by the City from any monies due or to
become due to the Contractor under this contract and may be recovered by the City from the
Contractor.
Guarantee
The work shall be guaranteed by the Contractor for a minimum period of one year from the
date of completion and acceptance of the work by the City, and shall include both materials
and labour. The Contractor shall promptly upon receipt of notice in writing from the
Commission, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department so to do, make all repairs arising out of defective materials, workmanship, and
equipment. The Commission, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42
and/or the Department are hereby authorized to make such repairs if ten days after giving of
such notice to the Contractor, the Contractor has failed to make or undertake with due
diligence said repairs; provided however, that in case of an emergency where, in the opinion
of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or
the Department, delay would cause serious loss or damage, repairs may be made without
notice being sent to the Contractor and all expense in connection therewith shall be charged
to the Contractor. This guarantee will not restrict any warranties or guarantees stipulated by
law or implied.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 23 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Warranties
The Contractor shall provide to the City copies of all warranties and/or guarantees provided
by the manufacturers of the materials and/or equipment supplied under this contract.
Inspection of Work
All work done by the Contractor shall be subject to inspection and shall meet the approval of
the Commission’s Representative, whose decision shall be final and binding upon all parties.
Should the work be defective in quality or workmanship, or fail to meet specifications as set
forth for the project in question, the Commission’s Representative shall have the right to
insist on immediate correction.
Cancellation of Contract
The acceptability of the work performed by the Contractor will be solely determined by the
City or the Commission’s Representative in charge of the specific project. If at anytime during
the contract the Contractor fails to meet the requirements and/or expectations of the City the
remainder of the contract may be cancelled by the City immediately upon written notice to
the Contractor. Either party to this contract may cancel the contract upon thirty days written
notice to the other party.
Waiver of Rights
No action nor want of action on the part of the Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of
Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the Department at any time to exercise any rights or
remedies conferred upon it under this contract shall be a waiver on the part of the
Commission, City of Maple Ridge, the City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department of any of its said rights or remedies.
General Quality
The whole of the work shall be done in the most substantial and workmanlike manner with
new materials, articles and workmanship of the latest and best quality and description and in
strict conformity with and as required by this contract. The Contractor shall upon the request
of the Commission’s Representative furnish him with all vouchers, receipted bills, and other
documents showing materials, articles, and workmanship used by the Contractor doing the
work.
Scheduling of Work
The Contractor, prior to starting a new project, shall inform the Commission’s Representative
of the Contractor’s monthly work schedule for the project. The Commission’s Representative
has final approval of the work schedule and may request changes where, in his opinion, they
are warranted by the requirements of the project. The Contractor will keep the Commission’s
Representative informed on the progress of the work and advise the Commission’s
Representative of any delays upon learning of the delay.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 24 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
Supervisor
The Contractor shall have a responsible supervisor readily available at all times for progress
meetings, inspection tours of the work, and to receive instructions from the Commission’s
Representative.
Licences, Bylaws, Permits, Regulations
All Federal, Provincial and Municipal laws, bylaws and safety regulations are to be observed
by the Contractor. The Contractor shall apply for, and obtain at his own expense, and keep
available for inspection, all necessary permits and licences required for the execution of the
work. This will include, but not be limited to, Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Business
Licences, building permits and certificates.
The Contractor shall give all necessary notices and pay all fees required by law and comply
with all laws, ordinances, rules and regulations relating to the work and to the preservation of
public health. The Contractor shall be responsible for the safety of all workers and equipment
on the project in accordance with all applicable safety legislation passed by federal,
provincial and local authorities governing construction safety.
The Contractor shall post all notices and signage required by law including, but not limited to,
the signage required by the Building Code, the Builder’s Lien Act and the WCB Regulations.
WorkSafeBC
The Contractor, any sub-contractor, or other person employed by the Contractor, or with
whom the Contractor may take any contract for the performance of any of the work, shall be
in good standing with WorkSafeBC and will comply with all conditions WorkSafeBC
throughout the duration of this contract.
The Contractor will be deemed as the “Prime Contractor” and will be solely responsible for
having all work sites secured in accordance with the WorkSafeBC safety regulations and
ensure that no danger will befall the Contractor’s employees, sub-contractors or the general
public at any time during the progress of a project under this contract.
Signs and Publicity
Neither the Contractor, his subcontractors, nor anyone directly or indirectly employed by any
of them, shall post any site signs, nor release any publicity reports, photographs, or other
information, orally or in writing, concerning the work performed or to be performed, without
the prior written approval of the Commission.
Name Badges and Uniforms
All officers, employees and agents of the Contractor, or of a Sub-Contractor employed or
contracted by the Contractor, that will be working on the Commission’s, City, City or School
District 42’s property shall wear a company shirt with the name of the Contractor or Sub-
Contractor clearly visible on the front of the shirt, or shall carry picture identification that is
attached to the outside pocket of their clothing.
GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Page 25 of 31
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
The Commission reserves the right to request and approve identification from anyone
allegedly entering Commission, City, City and/or School District 42 property for the purpose
of performing work under this contract.
The requirement for Name Badges and Uniforms will appear in the Special Terms of the
Contract.
Occupational Health and Safety Program
All Contractors working for the City are to be aware of the City of Maple Ridge Occupational
Health and Safety Program. It is the Contractor/Subcontractor’s responsibility to perform the
job in compliance with the Corporate safety standards. The Contractor/Subcontractor is
responsible for the compliance, of all employees for whom he is primarily responsible, with
all Corporate Safety Programs, WorkSafeBC Health and Safety Regulations, as well as all
other applicable regulations.
The Contractor will also be required to work with the City representative to meet all the
responsibilities outlined in the City of Maple Ridge Contractor Safety Coordination program.
Any infraction not immediately corrected, as directed by the Corporate Representative, will
result in the Contractor/Subcontractor being advised of a breach of contract, and advised of
action we will take as a result of the breach. It must be definitely established that all workers
on the job, including all Subcontractor’s employees, comply with our safety program.
Criminal Records Search
All officers, employees and agents of the Contractor, or of a Sub-Contractor employed or
contracted by the Contractor, that will be working on the Commission’s, City of Maple Ridge,
City of Pitt Meadows School District 42’s and/or the Department’s property, may require a
Criminal Records Search before being allowed to perform work on the property. Results of
the Records Search must be forwarded to the City of Maple Ridge Personnel Division before
work commences under this contract. The cost of the Criminal Records Search is the
responsibility of the Contractor or sub-contractor. Individuals are to report in person to the
nearest Police department in the area where they reside to request their Criminal Records
Search.
The requirement for a Criminal Records Search will appear in the Special Terms of the
Contract.
An exemption may be granted for a Sub-Contractor if the nature of the work being performed
by the Sub-Contractor does not require the Sub-Contractor to enter the Police buildings,
Commission, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, School District 42 and/or the
Department properties where there are children present, or where no security considerations
apply. This exemption must be obtained prior to the commencement of any work by the Sub-
Contractor and is at the discretion of the Commission. The notice of exemption must be in
writing and signed by the Commission’s Representative.
FORM OF TENDER
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
FORM OF TENDER
Business Name: ____________________________________________________________
Address: __________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Contact Name: ____________________________________________________________
Title or Position: ___________________________________________________________
Phone Number: __________________________ Facsimile ________________________
Email: ___________________________________________________________________
Date: ____________________________________________________________________
For: Project: ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming (Hereinafter referred to as the “Work”)
To: City of Maple Ridge
11995 Haney Place, Reception Desk (Main Floor)
Maple Ridge, BC, V2X 6A9
Attention: Nichole Walsh, Purchasing Supervisor
Tel: 604-466-2610
Fax: 604-466-4328
Email: nwalsh@mapleridge.ca
CONTRACT PRICE
Having fully examined the site and all conditions affecting the work, and having carefully read
and examined the tender documents, drawings and addenda____ thru __________ (list
addenda, if any issued as supplements to the tender documents, the undersigned hereby
offers to furnish all plant, tools, equipment, labour, products, material and supervision
necessary to execute the Work as per the following price break down; prices to be in
Canadian Currency, not including GST:
FORM OF TENDER
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
1.Please insert the “total cost for mowing services of all sites” from Pricing Schedule
Option A (taxes not included)
$ _____________________
2.Please insert the “total for mowing and trimming services of all sites” from Pricing
Schedule Option B (taxes not included)
$ _____________________
***REMEMBER TO COMPLETE THE ITEMIZED PRICING IN “PRICING SCHEDULE OPTION A”
AND “PRICING SCHEDULE OPTION B”. INCLUDE ALL PRICING SHEETS WITH YOUR TENDER
SUBMISSION****
CONTRACTOR NUMBERS AND STATUS
Our City Maple Ridge Business License Number: __________________________
Our City of Pitt Meadows Business License Number: _________________________
Or:
Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business License ________________________
Our WorkSafeBC Registration Number: __________________________
State whether you are able to meet the insurance requirements: Yes _______ No________
NOTIFICATION
If notified in writing by the City of acceptance of this tender within the specified acceptance
period after the tender closing date, we shall:
(a) provide, prior to commencing work, certified copies of the Contractor’s insurance
called for in the Tender Documents;
(b) provide our WorkSafeBC Registration Number and a current WorkSafeBC
Clearance Letter;
(c) supply a Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Business License Number
(d) enter into and execute a Contract Agreement for the Work;
(e) Obtain criminal records checks.
CONDITIONS
We understand and agree that:
(a) Failure to comply with and complete all items on this tender form may be cause
for rejection without consideration of the tender.
FORM OF TENDER
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
(b) This tender is irrevocable and will remain open for acceptance by the City for a
period of ninety (90) calendar day from the date of closing of tenders.
(c) Unless and until a Contract Agreement is executed, this tender together with the
written acceptance by the City shall constitute a binding contract between the
City and the undersigned. No other form of notification shall constitute a binding
contract.
3. If you are using subcontractors please list them below and detail their qualifications and
experience to perform the work:
Contractor
Contact Name
Phone
Related
Qualifications/Experience
4. Please indicate in the space below where your firm will be disposing of the vegetation
and litter from work sites? (Include name and address) If required, please include
additional pages with your submission.
Type of vegetation
(grass, trimmings, or
other)
Disposal Site Name
& Location
Contact Name at
Site
Comments
FORM OF TENDER
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
5. Please list your employees and detail your and their qualifications and experience to
perform the work: If required please include additional pages with your submission.
Employee Name Length of
Employment
Qualifications /
Experience
Additional Comments
6. Please provide a detailed list of equipment that will be used in the performance of the
work. List the make, model, year, and type of equipment. If required please include
additional pages with your submission.
Equipment
Type
Make
Model
Year
Comments
FORM OF TENDER
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
7.List a minimum of four references (date of contract, business name, contact, phone
number, nature of work): If required please include additional pages with your
submission.
Name/Contact
Person
Phone Email Scope of Services
Provided
Length of
Contract
FORM OF TENDER
ITT-PL14-67
Parks Grass Mowing and Trimming
I/We have read, understood, having carefully examined the Invitation to Tender, the
Instructions to Tenders, agree to the General and Special Terms of Contract and all other
terms and conditions contained herein, for the above stated project:
This Tender is executed this __________ day of ___________________, 2014.
Contractor:
___________________________________________________________
(FULL LEGAL NAME OF CORPORATION, PARTNERSHIP OR INDIVIDUAL)
___________________________________________________________
(AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY)
___________________________________________________________
(AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY)
End of Section
Form of Tender
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MMEETING DDATE: May 2, 2016
and Members of Council FFILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MMEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Joint Airport Mediation Next Steps Strategy
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On February 29, 2016 a joint meeting was held between Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows facilitated
by Dr. Gordon McIntosh called ‘Working Together’ Session. The purpose of the session was to
discuss two topics: 1) the airport in order to achieve a strategy for alignment with governance
expectations for the Society and 2) parks and recreation services to achieve effective transition of
the service. From this session the following three follow-ups action were provided for the CAO’s to
facilitate.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
This report is submitted for information only.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
WORKING TOGETHER SESSION NEXT STEPS
Following the facilitated session Dr. McIntosh submitted a session overview and identified five
follow up actions (Attachment A). Following is an update on the five actions identified:
1.The Mayor’s issue a ‘Working Together’ Session media release. The media release was jointly
distributed on March 2, 2016 (Attachment B).
2.The municipal Council’s use the “Cooperation Checklist” at the start of the joint sessions – at
next joint session. The check-in tool is intended to help the parties address arising mattes that
might affect cooperation efforts. It could be further developed as a protocol to guide
communication, coordination, collaboration and conflict resolution efforts.
The ‘Cooperation Checklist’ is included (Attachment C). The checklist will be included on the
agenda for the proposed May 9, 2016 joint session.
3.That the CAO’s propose a regular administrative reporting and joint quarterly elected official
session schedule for the parks and recreation service agreement termination process (and
1171
perhaps for a period afterward as well) by April, 2016. The report is to keep the municipal
partners informed of activities and progress while the quarterly sessions ensure political
alignment on policy directions required of administration.
A quarterly schedule has been drafted for the routine meeting of the Maple Ridge and Pitt
Meadows Councils (Attachment D). May 9, 2016 from 6:00 pm -8:00 pm is planned as the first
of these quarterly sessions. The CAO’s will routinely report to their respective Council’s with
verbal updates as necessary and will submit a joint update memo prior to the quarterly
meetings to keep both Council’s apprised of actions identified for follow up or further
discussion.
4. That the CAO’s assess and propose options to ensure Board quorum for the Airport Society by
April, 2016. This action is in anticipation of the upcoming urgent need to make appointments at
the 2016 Annual General Meeting (AGM).
5. That the CAO’s propose a process for Councils to create and adopt a mutually shared vision for
the Airport by June, 2016. The idea discussed was a Forum including airport resource people and
the Society Chair, lead by a facilitator, and preceded by a joint Council-orientation session
(before or at the start of the Forum) about the current operation, legislative context and Society
constitution.
CONCLUSION:
The CAO’s are suggesting a three session process to create and adopt a mutually shared vision for
the airport. The three proposed sessions as stated above are Education, Visioning and Governance.
The first of these sessions, education, is planned to occur as part of the joint session scheduled for
May 9, 2016. Following the education session a visioning session will be coordinated.
“original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Prepared by: EE.C. Swabey
CChief Administrative Officer, City of Maple Ridge
Attachments:
A. Dr. Gordon McIntosh Working Together Session Summary
B. Working Together Session media release, dated March 2, 2016
C. Cooperation Checklist
D. Draft 2016 Schedule for Quarterly Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Council Sessions
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
ATTACHMENT D
Draft 2016 Schedule for Quarterly Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Council Sessions
Host Date Time Location
Maple Ridge Monday May 9, 2016 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. Blaney Room
Pitt Meadows Monday July 25, 2016 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. TBA
Maple Ridge Monday November 7, 2016 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. Blaney Room
Pitt Meadows Monday January 30, 2017 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. TBA
May June July
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 26 27 28 29 30 1 2
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
29 30 31 1 2 3 4 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 31 1 2 3 4 5 6
August September October
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
31 1 2 3 4 5 6 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 25 26 27 28 29 30 1
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
28 29 30 31 1 2 3 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 30 31 1 2 3 4 5
November December January
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
30 31 1 2 3 4 5 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
27 28 29 30 1 2 3 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 31 1 2 3 4
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5 6 7 8 9 10 11