Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-07-04 Committee of the Whole Agenda and Reports.pdf City 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 Outcomes of the Corporate Energy Management Program Presentation by the Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning and the Research Technician 2. PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council Agenda: 1101 2015-130-RZ, 21668 and 21680 Dewdney Trunk Road, RS-1 to RM-1 Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7255-2016 to rezone RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit future subdivision into a 6 unit townhouse site be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules C, D and E of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision application. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA July 4, 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 July 4, 2016 Page 2 of 4 1102 2016-191-RZ, 11939 240 Street, CS-1 to C-2 Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7257-2016 to rezone from CS-1 (Service Commercial) to C-2 (Community Commercial) to permit future construction of a multi-tenant commercial development be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules C and D of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. 1103 2016-159-DVP, 23821, 23827, 23831, 23837, 23843, 24849, 23855, 23861, 23867, 23873, 23876, 23879, 23882, 23885, 23888 103A Avenue and 10296, 10317 and 10325 Wynnyk Way Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2016-159-DVP to reduce rear yard setbacks. 1104 2014-024-SD, 5% Money in Lieu of Parkland Dedication, 24990 110 Avenue Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that the owner of land proposed for subdivision at 24990 110 Avenue, under application 2014-024- SD, shall pay to the City of Maple Ridge an amount that is not less than $56,000. 1105 2015-343-SD, 5% Money in Lieu of Parkland Dedication, 12240 228 Street Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that the owner of land proposed for subdivision at 12240 228 Street, under application 2015-343- SD, shall pay to the City of Maple Ridge an amount that is not less than $37,600. 1106 Townhall Public House Liquor License Application Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that the application by Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge Ltd., be approved and that a copy of the resolution be forwarded to the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch. 1107 Bus Rapid Transit Study Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that participation by the City of Maple Ridge in the Bus Rapid Transit Study be endorsed and that the $15,000 be contributed to the study from Accumulated Surplus. Committee of the Whole Agenda July 4, 2016 Page 3 of 4 3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police) 1131 4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES 1151 Master Agreement on Cooperation for the Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending that staff be directed to work with the City of Pitt Meadows and the Board of Education, School District No. 42 to amend and renew the Master Agreement on Cooperation for the Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services. 1152 Pitt Meadows Request for Sport Field Maintenance Staff report dated July 4, 2016 recommending the continuation of sport field maintenance services to the City of Pitt Meadows for a period of two years on a full cost recovery basis and that consideration be given to providing one additional year of field maintenance services if requested by the City of Pitt Meadows prior to November 2017. 5. ADMINISTRATION 1171 6. CORRESPONDENCE 1181 7. OTHER ISSUES 1191 Committee of the Whole Agenda July 4, 2016 Page 4 of 4 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: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-130-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: First Reading Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7255-2016 21668 and 21680 Dewdney Trunk Road EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject property located at 21668 and 21680 Dewdney Trunk Road, from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit future subdivision into a 6 unit townhouse site. To proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. Pursuant to Council Policy 6.31, this application is subject to the Community Amenity Contribution Program. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7255-2016 be given first reading; and That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules C, D and E of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision application. DISCUSSION: a)Background Context: Applicant: GCN Enterprises Ltd. (Pardeep Mangat) Owners: Pardeep Mangat GCN Enterprises Ltd Legal Descriptions: Lot 5, except: part dedicated road on plan 73511, D.L. 247, Group 1, New Westminster District Plan 8772, and Lot 6, D.L. 247, Group 1, New Westminster District Plan 8772 OCP: Existing: Urban Residential Zoning: Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Proposed: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Single Family Residential and Multi Family Residential Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) and RM-4 (Multiple Family Residential District) Designation: Urban Residential 1101 - 2 - South: Use: Single Family Residential Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Urban Residential East: Use: Pre-School Zone: P-2 (Special Institutional) Designation: Institutional West: Use: Single Family Residential Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Urban Residential Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Multi Family Residential Site Area: 933 and 963 m2 / total 1896 m2 (0.47 acres) Access: Dewdney Trunk Road Servicing requirement: Urban Standard b) Site Characteristics: The subject properties, located at 21668 and 21680 Dewdney Trunk Road, are approximately 1896 m2 (0.47 acres) in total area. The properties are generally flat and are bounded by single family residential property to the south and west, as well as Dewdney Trunk Road, single family and multi family residential to the north, and a preschool institution to the east (see Appendix A and B). c) Project Description: The current application proposes to rezone the two subject properties from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential), to permit a future subdivision into a 6 unit townhouse development. Access to all units is proposed to be from Dewdney Trunk Road, with double car garages and two visitor parking stalls on the north side, plus a hammerhead turnaround on the south side. 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 (OCP): The OCP designates the subject properties Urban Residential, and development of the properties is subject to the Major Corridor infill policies of the OCP. These policies require that development is compatible with surrounding neighbourhood, with particular attention given to the site design, setbacks and lot configuration with the existing pattern of development in the area. The proposed rezoning to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) is in compliance with the Urban Residential designation and infill policies. - 3 - Zoning Bylaw: The current application proposes to rezone the subject properties from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit future subdivision into a 6 unit townhouse site (see Appendix C). The minimum lot size for the current RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) zone is 668 m2, and the minimum lot size for the proposed RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone is 557 m2. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance Permit application. The current proposed site plan shows a rear setback of the properties of 6.7m to the projected houses, where a 7.5m setback is required (see Appendix D). If road dedication for Dewdney Trunk Road should be required, the front setback might need to be varied as well. This will be the subject of a future report to Council. Development Permits: Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the OCP, a Multi-Family Development Permit application is required to ensure the current proposal enhances existing neighbourhoods with compatible housing styles that meet diverse needs, and minimize potential conflicts with neighbouring land uses. Advisory Design Panel: A Multi-Family Development Permit is required and must be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel prior to second reading. e) Interdepartmental Implications: In order to advance the current application, after first reading, comments and input, will be sought from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below: a) Engineering Department; b) Operations Department; c) Fire Department; d) Licenses, Permits and Bylaws; e) School District; f) Utility companies; g) Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure; and h) 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. We anticipate that this evaluation will take place between first and second reading. f) Development Applications: In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as re quired by Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999 as amended: - 4 - 1.A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule C); 2.A Multi-Family Residential Development Permit Application (Schedule D); 3.A Development Variance Permit (Schedule E); and 4.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. It is recommended that Council not require any further additional OCP consultation. 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. ________________________________________ Prepared by: Therese Melser Planning Technician _______________________________________________ Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning _______________________________________________ Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services _______________________________________________ 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. 7255-2016 Appendix D – Proposed Site Plan "Original signed by Terese Melser" "Original signed by Christine Carter" "Original signed by Frank Quinn" "Original signed by E.C. Swabey" City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: May 14, 2015 FILE: 2015-130-RZ BY: PC CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTIES ´ Scale: 1:2,000 21668/80 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD DEWDNEY TRUNK RD APPENDIX A City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: May 14, 2015 FILE: 2015-130-RZ BY: PC CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTIES City of Maple Ridge´ Scale: 1:2,000 21668/80 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD DEWDNEY TRUNK RD APPENDIX B CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 7255-2016 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. 7255-2016." 2.Those parcel (s) or tract (s) of land and premises known and described as: Lot 5 EXCEPT: Part dedicated Road on Plan 73511; District Lot 247 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 8772 Lot 6 District Lot 247 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 8772 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1680 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential). 3.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the day of , 20 READ a second time the day of , 20 PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20 READ a third time the day of , 20 APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this day of , 20 ADOPTED, the day of , 20 _____________________________ ____________________________ PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER APPENDIX C 119 AVE.217 ST.DONOVAN AVE.216 ST.217 ST.EVANS ST.2165621663216682163321733216832166521593/83 11939 21649 21670216312170621673216172169011941 12032 216801195211968 11945 12020 11953 11939 11938 2170711936 216912169711944 2173412036 1197721714 11938 11951 12049 P 31180217552170512048 21671216472165111 9 4 2 2171111935 2169821638/441196521722 58 LOT 1 2 65 1 J Rem 62 C Rem BRem 1 5 132 48 131 47 139130 4 67 219 Rem Rem 7 134 Rem 37 A 126 63 140 6 142 Rem 129 59 141 128 57 B 220 Pcl.B 1 Rem E 64 143 60 133 9 10 127 61 66 1 LMP 34020RP 61902P 28917P 29839 P 28917P 28262 P 62886 P 28917LMS 246P 67685 P 31180 P 29839 P 28917P 22204 RP P 27224 P 28262 P 8772 P 29839LMP 42013 NWS 2813 P 62886P 23837P 8772 P 29839P 87747NWS 2037 P 28917 P 28262 P 76831 12487 P 8772RW 40703LMP 42012RW 74780 RW 74359 RP 73402 RP 73720 RP 73430RP 73507 LMP 42014LMP 25434RP 73527 RP 73511RP 78870 RP 73655 DEWDNEY TRUNK RD.216 ST.´ SCALE 1:1,500 MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From: To: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) 7255-20161680 APPENDIX D City of Maple RidgeCity of Maple RidgeCity of Maple RidgeCity of Maple Ridge TO:TO:TO:TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETINGMEETINGMEETINGMEETING DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO:FILE NO:FILE NO:FILE NO: 2016-191-RZ FROM:FROM:FROM:FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING:MEETING:MEETING:MEETING: C of W SUBJECTSUBJECTSUBJECTSUBJECT: First ReadingFirst ReadingFirst ReadingFirst Reading Zone Amending Zone Amending Zone Amending Zone Amending Bylaw No.Bylaw No.Bylaw No.Bylaw No. 7257725772577257----2016201620162016 11939 240 Street11939 240 Street11939 240 Street11939 240 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject property, located at 11939 240 Street, from CS-1 (Service Commercial) to C-2 (Community Commercial) to permit future construction of a multi- tenant commercial development with approximately 2,787-3,252 m2 (30,000-35,000 ft2) of commercial floor space. To proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. This project is not subject to the Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) program as there is no residential component to the development. RECOMMENDATIONS:RECOMMENDATIONS:RECOMMENDATIONS:RECOMMENDATIONS: That Zone Amending Bylaw That Zone Amending Bylaw That Zone Amending Bylaw That Zone Amending Bylaw No. No. No. No. 7257725772577257----2016 2016 2016 2016 bbbbe given first reading; ande given first reading; ande given first reading; ande given first reading; and That the applicant That the applicant That the applicant That the applicant provideprovideprovideprovide further information as described on further information as described on further information as described on further information as described on Schedules Schedules Schedules Schedules C and DC and DC and DC and D of the of the of the of the Development Procedures BylawDevelopment Procedures BylawDevelopment Procedures BylawDevelopment Procedures Bylaw No. 5879No. 5879No. 5879No. 5879––––1999199919991999.... DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION: a)a)a)a) Background Context:Background Context:Background Context:Background Context: Applicant: Platform Properties Ltd. Owner: Valley Auto Wrecking (1992) Ltd Legal Description: Lot 1, Section 16, Township 12, Plan NWP1676 OCP: Existing: Commercial Zoning: Existing: CS-1 (Service Commercial) Proposed: C-2 (Community Commercial) Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Vacant Zone: CS-1 (Service Commercial) (under rezoning application 2016- 039-RZ) Designation: Commercial South: Use: Single Family Residential Zone: CD-1-93 (Amenity Residential District), RS1-b (One Family (Medium Density) Residential) Designation: Urban Residential 1102 - 2 - East: Use: Vacant Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Designation: Agricultural (in the Agricultural Land Reserve) West: Use: Single Family Residential Zone: R-1 (Residential District) Designation: Urban Residential Existing Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Commercial Site Area: 0.946 ha. (2.3 acres) Access: 240 Street Servicing requirement: Urban Standard b)b)b)b) Site Characteristics:Site Characteristics:Site Characteristics:Site Characteristics: The subject property was used as a former auto-wrecking business that is bordered by existing single family lots directly west and south and a vacant lot to the north currently under rezoning application for a Tim Hortons drive-through use. Lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve are located across the street from the subject property on the east side of 240 Street. In this vicinity, 240 Street is the dividing line between the Urban Area Boundary on the west side and rural land to the east. The subject property has been vacant since 2013. c)c)c)c) Project Description:Project Description:Project Description:Project Description: The applicant proposes to rezone the property and construct a multi-unit commercial unit development. The preliminary commercial floor space is in the range of 2,787 -3,252 m2 (30,000- 35,000 ft2), which is likely to be distributed between one larger anchor tenant and several smaller commercial units. A preliminary site plan is attached as Appendix D. 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. dddd)))) Planning Analysis:Planning Analysis:Planning Analysis:Planning Analysis: Official Community PlanOfficial Community PlanOfficial Community PlanOfficial Community Plan:::: The subject property is located within the Urban Area Boundary and is currently designated Commercial. The OCP identifies the intersection of Dewdney Trunk Road and 240 Street as one of three Community Commercial Nodes in the city. The OCP further states that these nodes “are comprised of commercial or mixed use developments and typically serve several neighbourhoods; provide a wider range of services; and also serve as a focus for the community.” Typically, Community Commercial Nodes are less than 7,000 m² (75,350 ft²) in area, but may increase to 9,290 m² (100,000 ft²) over the long-term. The current commercial floor space at Dewdney Trunk Road and 240 Street is approximately 3,110 m2 (33,456 ft2), and this proposal will increase the commercial floor space to approximately 6,362 m² (68,480 ft2). The anticipated commercial floor space is within the range prescribed in the OCP. It is noted that there are two other commercial rezoning projects in the Dewdney Trunk Road and 240 Street node, at 11951 240 - 3 - Street and at 12040 240 Street. The C-2 (Community Commercial) zone aligns with the Commercial designation and the Community Commercial Node. In accordance with OCP Policy 6-12, an Agricultural Impact Assessment and Groundwater Impact Assessment are required prior to second reading due to the subject property’s adjacency to the Agricultural Land Reserve. Zoning Zoning Zoning Zoning BylawBylawBylawBylaw:::: The Community Commercial Node in the Commercial land use designation aligns with both the CS-1 (Service Commercial) zone and the C-2 (Community Commercial) zone. The applicant is pursuing rezoning to the C-2 (Community Commercial) zone because the permitted principal uses reflect the anticipated mix of neighbourhood serving businesses. The current application proposes to rezone the subject property located at 11939 240 Street from CS-1 (Service Commercial) to C-2 (Community Commercial) to permit future construction of a multi- tenant commercial development. The minimum lot size for the current CS-1 (Service Commercial) zone is 929 m2, and the minimum lot size for the proposed C-2 (Community Commercial) zone is 2,500 m2. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance Permit application. Development PermitsDevelopment PermitsDevelopment PermitsDevelopment Permits:::: Pursuant to Section 8.5 of the OCP, a Commercial Development Permit application is required to address the current proposal’s compatibility with adjacent development, and to enhance the unique character of the community in accordance with the following key development permit guidelines: 1. Avoid conflicts with adjacent uses through sound attenuation, appropriate lighting, landscaping, traffic calming and the transition of building massing to fit with adjacent development; 2. Encourage a pedestrian scale through providing outdoor amenities, minimizing the visual impact of parking areas, creating landmarks and visual interest along street fronts; 3. Promote sustainable development with multimodal transportation circulation, and low impact building design; 4. Respect the need for private areas in mixed use development and adjacent residential areas; 5. The form and treatment of new buildings should reflect the desired character and pattern of development in the area by incorporating appropriate architectural styles, features, materials, proportions and building articulation. Important design considerations for this development include the interface between the proposed commercial building and adjacent single family homes, prioritizing pedestrians in building siting and parking lot considerations, and ensuring the adequate provision of stormwater management elements through permeable surfaces and tree canopy. Advisory Design PanelAdvisory Design PanelAdvisory Design PanelAdvisory Design Panel:::: A Commercial Development Permit is required and must be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel prior to second reading. - 4 - Development Information MeetingDevelopment Information MeetingDevelopment Information MeetingDevelopment Information Meeting:::: A Development Information Meeting is required for this application. Prior to second reading the applicant is required to host a Development Information Meeting in accordance with Council Policy 6.20. e)e)e)e) Interdepartmental Implications:Interdepartmental Implications:Interdepartmental Implications: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) Licenses, Permits, and Bylaws Department; c) Operations Department; and d) Fire Department. The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application progresses, to liaise with agencies and departments not listed above. Engineering Department:Engineering Department:Engineering Department:Engineering Department: The Engineering Department has conducted a preliminary rezoning assessment and has identified that access from 240 Street to the commercial lands south of Dewdney Trunk Road will be limited. Access to the commercial lands will be through a series of right-in/right-out access with a full movement at the south connected together through a cross-access easement. The property in question is the southern boundary of the commercial lands, and will be required to provide a full access and register an easement with an alignment consistent with the lands to the north. In addition, the existing laneway to the south will need to provide pedestrian access into the lands but will not provide vehicular access. Applications are not forwarded to the Engineering Department for detailed rezoning comments prior to first reading; therefore, an evaluation of servicing requirements has not been undertaken. This evaluation will take place between first and second reading. f)f)f)f) Development Applications:Development Applications:Development Applications: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 C); 2. A Commercial Development Permit Application (Schedule D); The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the assessment of the proposal progresses. g)g)g)g) Alternatives:Alternatives:Alternatives:Alternatives: On September 30, 2014 Council endorsed the Housing Action Plan. This plan contains a number of action items to protect existing and create new rental housing stock in the City. One key component is to create new rental units above commercial developments. Currently, this practice is being negotiated on an individual basis during the development process, including recently approved and in-stream applications at 240 Street and 112 Avenue, 203 Street, Dogwood Avenue, 232 Street and Silver Valley Road, and 248 Street and Dewdney Trunk Road. Similar commercial developments with rental housing units in the C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) and C-2 (Community Commercial) zones range between two and 16 rental housing units depending on the scope of the project. - 5 - This project is of a suitable scale and a desirable location to incorporate apartments. Provision of apartments in this part of the community would help to achieve a better mix of housing types, can utilize available school capacity, and increase density on along a Major Corridor without detracting from the expected commercial potential. The provision of some rental apartments in addition to the proposed commercial floor space on the subject property would not only assist in implementing the future Housing Action Plan, but would also achieve the following OCP policies: Policy 3-31 Maple Ridge supports the provision of rental accommodation and encourages the construction of rental units that vary in size and number of bedrooms. Maple Ridge may also limit the demolition or strata conversion of existing rental units, unless District-wide vacancy rates are within a healthy range as defined by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Policy 3-32 Maple Ridge supports the provision of affordable, rental and special needs housing throughout the District. Where appropriate, the provision of affordable, rental, and special needs housing will be a component of area plans. Additionally, the Community Commercial Node policies of the OCP support mixed-use development. To this end, staff have discussed the opportunities to include some rental apartment units in the current proposal. The applicant is not currently interested in a residential component in the proposed development. CONCLUSION:CONCLUSION:CONCLUSION: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. “Original signed by Amelia Bowden” _______________________________________________ Prepared byPrepared byPrepared byPrepared by:::: Amelia BowdenAmelia BowdenAmelia BowdenAmelia Bowden Planning TechnicianPlanning TechnicianPlanning TechnicianPlanning Technician “Original signed by Christine Carter” _______________________________________________ Approved byApproved byApproved byApproved by:::: Christine Carter, M.Christine Carter, M.Christine Carter, M.Christine Carter, M.PPPPLLLL, MCIP, MCIP, MCIP, MCIP, RPP, RPP, RPP, RPP Director of PlanningDirector of PlanningDirector of PlanningDirector of Planning “Original signed by Frank Quinn” ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by:Approved by:Approved by:Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Frank Quinn, MBA, P. EngEngEngEng GM: Public Works & Development ServicesGM: Public Works & Development ServicesGM: Public Works & Development ServicesGM: Public Works & Development Services “Original signed by E.C. Swabey” ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Concurrence:Concurrence:Concurrence:Concurrence: E.CE.CE.CE.C SwabeySwabeySwabeySwabey Chief Chief Chief Chief Administrative OfficerAdministrative OfficerAdministrative OfficerAdministrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A – Subject Map Appendix B – Ortho Map Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7257-2016 Appendix D – Preliminary Site Plan DATE: Jun 3, 2016 2016-191-RZ BY: JV PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY Dewdney Trunk Rd ´ Scale: 1:2,500 11939 240 StLegend Stream Indefinite Creek River Centreline Major Rivers & Lakes APPENDIX A DATE: Jun 3, 2016 2016-191-RZ BY: JV PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY Dewdney Trunk Rd ´ Scale: 1:2,500 11939 240 St Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2015 Legend Stream Indefinite Creek River Centreline Major Rivers & Lakes APPENDIX B CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 7257-2016 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. 7257-2016." 2.That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: South Half Lot 1 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 1676 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1681 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to C-2 (Community Commercial). 3.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the 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 240 ST.119B AVE. 119A AVE.239 ST.DEWDNEY TRUNK RD.LANE118A AVE.239 ST.119 AVE.2393811966 2385511875 2395523892118452388223962 11840 11868 23895238312388911939 11918 118112398211951 11980 23956239272397211970 24079/2408511942 238902402211960 239812388523925238992394323997239392405411818 11930 11968 2397911856 2389811893 23970238802399 4 11869 119242388123894 2389711852 11954 238932392011828 11950 11857 2398111948 11972 11922/54 23886118212396211913 2407223996 23957239832393223860238132 3 9 9 2 11829 118612387911877 23928239712386723908238912389811804 11846 11940 11960 11936 11816 1184923840 239952398811930 2395211837 11888 2399823864 238302384323969238802382211880 11806 2394011853 239671190123942 2389523825239782389111903 239532392223925240092403611907 26 6 34 Rem 7 4 5 27 46 7 5 4 4 N1/2 13 S 1/2 Pcl 1 9 2 40 8 7 7 6 14 39 5 6 2 1 of B 33 6 20 3 10 A 18 22 12 4 5 Rem15 2 5 10 9 Rem 2 6 Rem A Rem 12 Rem A 31 52 38 W 1/2 2 3 28 11 49 1 of 13 6 1917 2 5 1 N 1/2 1 1 35 15 32 25 37 6 21 10 S 1/2 3 2 2 A of B 45 3 23 41 4 1 2 11 36 Rem N 1/2 4 29 16 50 24 37 8 3 A 4 39 51 30 13 43 4 8 8 44 3 Rem 21 3 5 42 11 7 P 7893 LMP 1144 EP 12537LMP 18051 18051 LMP 18051P 1676 P 1676 LMP P 1973 LMP LMP 18051 LMP 18051 LMP 18051P 67082 P 23165 P 7893 P 83677P 7528EP 11375 LMP 18051 1144 (P 21864) LMP 806 LMP 1641 LMP 1641 BCP 45642P 76536P 7893 LMP 33117P 88032 LMS2315LMP 14766P 25968P 20898P 7893 P 86310 RP 13881LMP 18051 RW 8 3 6 7 8 BCP 45643 LMP 30401 RP 85321 RP 57056BCP 7213LMP 29899RW 83679RW 86310 LMP 54074 LMP 33118RW 30273 LMP 1145 LMP 1642 BCP 41049BCP 7213 LMP 38196 LMP 33118RP 84994 DEWDNEY TRUNK RD. ´ SCALE 1:2,500 MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From: To: CS-1 (Service Commercial) C-2 (Community Commercial) 7257-20161681 Urban Area Boundary Urban Area Boundary APPENDIX D City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-159-DVP FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW SUBJECT: Development Variance Permit 23821, 23827, 23831, 23837, 23843, 23849, 23855, 23861, 23867, 23873, 23876, 23879, 23882, 23885, 23888 103A Avenue 10343 and 10347 238A Street 10296, 10317, and 10325 Wynnyk Way EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Development Variance Permit application 2016-159-DVP has been received to reduce the rear yard setbacks for 20 single family lots, previously subdivided under application number 2011-081-SD. The requested variances are as follows: 1.To reduce the rear yard setback for 23821 through 23885 103A Avenue, and 10343 and 10347 238A Street, from 8 metres (26 ft.) down to 6 metres (19.7 ft.); 2.To reduce the rear yard setback for 10296, 10317, and 10325 Wynnyk Way and 23882 and 23888 103A Avenue from 8 metres (26 ft.) down to 7.6 metres (24.9 ft.); and 3.To reduce the rear yard setback for 23876 103A Avenue from 8 metres (26 ft.) down to 6.8 metres (22.3 ft.). It is recommended that Development Variance Permit 2016-159-DVP be approved. RECOMMENDATION: That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2016-159-DVP respecting the properties located at 23821, 23827, 23831, 23837, 23843, 23849, 23855, 23861, 23867, 23873, 23876, 23879, 23882, 23885, 23888 103A Avenue; 10343 and 10347 238A Street; and 10296, 10317, and 10325 Wynnyk Way. DISCUSSION: a)Background Context Applicant: Ryan Lucy, Morningstar Homes Ltd. Owner: Morningstar Homes Ltd. Legal Descriptions: Lots 11 through 24, lots 49, 50, 62, and 66 through 68, District Lots 405, Plan EPP56457 OCP : Existing: Urban Residential Zoning: Existing: R-2 (Urban Residential District) 1103 - 2 - Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Park and Single Family Residential Zone: R-1 (Residential District) Designation Conservation and Urban Residential South: Use: Single Family Residential Zone: R-2 (Urban Residential District) Designation: Urban Residential East: Use: Park Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Designation: Conservation West: Use: Park and Single Family Residential Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and R-2 (Urban Residential District) Designation: Conservation and Urban Residential Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential Access: 103A Avenue, 238A Street, and Wynnyk Way Servicing: Urban Standard Lot Sizes: Range from 315m² to 545m² Previous Applications: 2011-081-RZ/SD/VP/DP b)Project Description: The subject properties, located at 23821, 23827, 23831, 23837, 23843, 23849, 23855, 23861, 23867, 23873, 23876, 23879, 23882, 23885, 23888 103A Avenue, 10343 and 10347 238A Street, 10296, 10317, and 10325 Wynnyk Way, were subdivided under a previous application 2011-081-SD (see Appendices A and B). The developer is requesting to reduce the rear yard setback requirements for the identified lots to allow for larger homes. The lots off 103A Avenue and 238A Street back onto park area. The developer states that the reduced setback will not have a significant impact on the useability of the backyard or the neighbouring properties. Other requested setbacks are for lots that are located adjacent to a curvature in the road which would benefit from being pushed back to enhance the street presence. These rear yard setback reductions were not requested at the time of the rezoning and subdivision applications. c)Variance Analysis: Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 establishes general minimum and maximum regulations for single family development. A Development Variance Permit allows Council some flexibility in the approval process. The requested variances and rationale for support are described below (see Appendix C): Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985, Part 6, Section 601B R-2 Urban Residential District, D a) 2.: To reduce the minimum rear yard setback from 8.0 metres (26 ft.) from the rear lot line to: 1.6.0 metres (19.7 ft.) for 23821 through 23885 103A Avenue, and 10343 and 10347 238A Street; 2.7.6 metres (24.9 ft.) for 10296, 10317, and 10325 Wynnyk Way and 23882 and 23888 103A Avenue; and 3.6.8 metres (22.3 ft.) for 23876 103A Avenue. - 3 - The proposed variances may be supported because they are minor in nature and are not expected to have a negative impact on the surrounding area, as most of the properties with the proposed reduced rear yards back onto park areas. Five of the properties back onto adjacent properties; however, the houses are not yet built, and the proposed reduction is minor (0.4 metres or 1.3 ft.) for those properties. Should Council not grant approval for the requested variances, the developer would need to design the homes to meet the rear setback required by the Zoning Bylaw. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: In accordance with the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, notice of Council consideration of a resolution to issue a Development Variance Permit was mailed to all owners or tenants in occupation of all parcels, any parts of which are adjacent to the properties that are subject to the permit. CONCLUSION: The proposed variances may be supported because they are minor in nature and are not expected to have a negative impact on the surrounding area, as most of the properties with the proposed reduced rear yards back onto park areas. Five of the properties back onto adjacent properties; however, the houses are not yet built, and the proposed reduction is minor (0.4 metres, or 1.3 ft.) for those properties. It is therefore recommended that this application be favourably considered and the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Development Variance Permit 2016-159-DVP. “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 Frank Quinn”_______________________ 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 – Example Building Plans DATE: Jun 22, 2016 FILE: 2016-159-VP BY: PC PLANNING DEPARTMENT´ Scale: 1:2,500 LOTS 11 - 24, 49, 50, 62, 66, 67 & 68 EPP56457 Legend Stream Canal Edge Ditch Centreline Edge of River Edge of Marsh Indefinite Creek River Centreline Canal Lake or Reservoir Marsh River APPENDIX A City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Jun 22, 2016 FILE: 2016-159-VP BY: PC PLANNING DEPARTMENT´ Scale: 1:2,500 LOTS 11 - 24, 49, 50, 62, 66, 67 & 68 EPP56457 Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2015 APPENDIX B APPENDIX C -1 - City of Maple Ridge TO:Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read DATE:July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO:2014-024-SD FROM:Chief Administrative Officer ATTN:C of W SUBJECT:5% Money in Lieu of Parkland Dedication 24990 110 Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The subject property, located at 24990 110 Avenue (see Appendices A and B), is proposed to be subdivided into 5 single family residential lots (see Appendix C). This subdivision is subject to the provisions of the Local Government Act regarding Parkland Dedication or payment in lieu of dedication. It is recommended that Council require payment in lieu of parkland dedication for the property located at 24990 110 Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Local Government Act,Section 510, regarding 5% Parkland Dedication or payment in lieu, be it resolved that the owner of land proposed for subdivision at 24990 110 Avenue, under application 2014-024-SD, shall pay to the City of Maple Ridge an amount that is not less than $56,000.00. DISCUSSION: Section 510 of the Local Government Act requires the provision of parkland, without compensation, as a condition of subdivision, subject to some exceptions. The land, not to exceed 5% of the area proposed for subdivision, may be acquired in a location acceptable to the City, or a payment equal to 5% of the market value of the area proposed for subdivision is required. Section 8.9, Watercourse Protection Development Permit Area, of the Official Community Plan states that where watercourse protection areas are identified on the lands, the area is to be dedicated into public ownership as Park, where possible, for the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourses and riparian areas. These areas also provide large vegetated areas in urban neighbourhoods that provide corridors for wildlife and passive park areas for residents. Where there is either no watercourse protection areas, or no suitable lands are identified for park dedication, then 5% of the market value of the lan d is paid to the City. These funds are 1104 -2 - placed into a special Parkland Acquisition Reserve Fund, for the purpose of acquiring parkland, and is typically used where the ability to achieve parkland through development is limited, such as the Blaney Bog. In this particular instance there is no watercourse protection area or suitable lands present and it is therefore recommended that money in lieu of parkland dedication be provided. In keeping with past practice, the City has requested that an appraisal be p rovided for the 5% market value of the development site. This appraisal is based on zoned but not serviced land. A report from a qualified real estate appraiser has determined that the market value of the land is $1,120,000.00 which indicates that the 5%value of this property is $56,000.00. CONCLUSION: As there are no watercourse protection areas and no suitable lands on the property for parkland dedication, it is recommended that Council require payment in lieu of parkland dedication as prescribed in the appraisal. “Original signed by Adam Rieu” _______________________________________________ Prepared by:Adam Rieu Planning Technician “Original signed by Christine Carter” _______________________________________________ Approved by Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Approved by:Frank Quinn, P. Eng., PMP 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 –Subdivision Plan City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Apr 4, 2014 FILE: 2014-024-RZ BY: PC CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY ´ Scale: 1:2,000 24990 110 AVENUE APPENDIX A City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Apr 4, 2014 FILE: 2014-024-RZ BY: PC CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY District of Maple Ridge´ Scale: 1:2,000 24990 110 AVENUE APPENDIX B APPENDIX C - 1 - City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read DATE: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-343-SD FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: C of W SUBJECT: 5% Money in lieu of parkland dedication 12240 228 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The subject property located at 12240 228 Street is proposed to be subdivided into 4 single family residential lots and a lane, and is subject to Council’s Policy regarding parkland dedication or payment of money in lieu. At the Council meeting held on October 14, 2014 second reading was given to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6891-2011 to rezone the property from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), and it was determined that the applicant will pay to the City an amount that equals the average market value of 5% of the land. The applicant has submitted an assessment report, by West Coast Appraisals, dated April 11, 2016, which was received by the City on June 10, 2016. Due to the escalating housing market, there is concern with the age of the appraisal, and the staff recommendation is that the appraised amount be adjusted to more accurately reflect the market value. Based on this concern, the estimated value on the lot has been increased from the appraised value of $602,000.00 to $752,000.00. The applicant is in agreement with the revised value. The amount as derived by this independent appraisal review must be approved by Council, and the 5% payment in lieu ($37,600.00) must be paid by the applicant prior to subdivision approval. RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Local Government Act, Section 510, regarding 5% Parkland Dedication or payment of Money in Lieu, be it resolved that the owner of land proposed for subdivision at 12240 228 Street, under application 2015-343-SD, shall pay to the City of Maple Ridge an amount that is not less than $37,600.00. DISCUSSION: An independent appraisal by West Coast Appraisals was done on April 11, 2016, regarding the property located at 12240 228 Street (See Appendix A and B). The appraisal is based on zoned but not serviced land. The market value reflected in the assessment report is based on the ‘Direct Comparison Approach’ method, and comes to $40.00 per square foot x 15,041 square feet = $602,000.00 (rounded). Given the escalating housing market there are concerns with establishing parkland contribution using an appraisal that is approaching 3 months old. The Property & Risk 1105 - 2 - Manager reviewed the appraisal and suggests this appraisal number is considered low, relative to the current market values. In the current market place, a range of $50.00 - $55.00 per square foot would be a more accurate reflection of the market value, which would translate into an overall value between $752,000.00 and $827,255.00, compared to $602,000.00 as identified in the appraisal. These estimated findings have been confirmed by an independent appraiser the City works with. Section 510(6)(a) of the Local Government Act identifies that if an owner is to pay money for parkland purposes, value may be determined by agreement between the owner and the local government. Based on the above staff worked with the applicant to come to a mutual agreement, and established a current market value of $752.000,00. ALTERNATIVE: Should Council not be comfortable with the adjusted lot value of $752,000.00, the alternative would be to require the applicant to submit an updated appraisal. CONCLUSION: It is recommended that the market value of the land located at 12240 228 Street be established as $752,000.00. As a requirement stated in the Preliminary Review Letter, dated February 3, 2016, the applicant will pay 5% of the value of the property, resulting in the amount of $37,600.00 to be paid prior to subdivision approval. _______________________________________________ Prepared by: Therese Melser Planning Technician _______________________________________________ Approved by Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP Director of Planning _______________________________________________ Approved by: Frank Quinn, P. Eng., PMP GM: Public Works & Development Services _______________________________________________ Concurrence: E.C. Swabey Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A – Subject Property Map Appendix B – Ortho Map "Original signed by Therese Melser "Original signed by Christine Carter" "Original signed by Frank Quinn" "Original signed by Kelly Swift for" City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Jun 23, 2016 FILE: 2015-343-SD BY: PC PLANNING DEPARTMENT228 ST.123 AVE.FULTON ST.GREENWELL ST.ROGERS AVE. 123 AVE. 122 AVE. STOREY AVE. 122 AVE. EAGLE AVE.228 ST.12354 22897121512272512287 12316 12218 12325 2291412166 2293112178 2287312287 12306 22908229112279212203 12253 22933228812291112296 2288512154 12274 12230 12240 2293612222 12298 22880228782276512195 12180 12184 3 2275512141 12290 2288212302 2277212258 22939228702288212238 12169 7 2283612229 2291812161 228722287422881229212274412276 12194 12344 12303 12167 1 12265 12183 1 12216 2274512192 12288 12240 12211 2294412275 2290212301 2292312182 12152 12261 12255 228182288012304 2287112301 2292412185 12347 12194 12208 12208 12314 2292212318 2289122806228832289712313 2292012162 1227822775 1227822735 2290822824228752292412201 2290122787228722292712308 12191 12258 12314 2288512157 2291012161 228332293412148 12331 22913228122287312224 12313 2293212243 228982291212313 12228 12330 22888227302287112170 5 12166 229352294112293 12273 SUBJECT PROPERTY ´ Scale: 1:2,000 12240 228 STREET APPENDIX A City of Pitt Meadows District of Langley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Jun 23, 2016 FILE: 2015-343-SD BY: PC PLANNING DEPARTMENT228 ST.123 AVE.FULTON ST.GREENWELL ST.ROGERS AVE. 123 AVE. 122 AVE. STOREY AVE. 122 AVE. EAGLE AVE.228 ST.12354 22897121512272512287 12316 12218 12325 2291412166 2293112178 2287312287 12306 22908229112279212203 12253 22933228812291112296 2288512154 12274 12230 12240 2293612222 12298 22880228782276512195 12180 12184 3 2275512141 12290 2288212302 2277212258 22939228702288212238 12169 7 2283612229 2291812161 228722287422881229212274412276 12194 12344 12303 12167 1 12265 12183 1 12216 2274512192 12288 12240 12211 2294412275 2290212301 2292312182 12152 12261 12255 228182288012304 2287112301 2292412185 12347 12194 12208 12208 12314 2292212318 2289122806228832289712313 2292012162 1227822775 1227822735 2290822824228752292412201 2290122787228722292712308 12191 12258 12314 2288512157 2291012161 228332293412148 12331 22913228122287312224 12313 2293212243 228982291212313 12228 12330 22888227302287112170 5 12166 229352294112293 12273 SUBJECT PROPERTY ´ Scale: 1:2,000 12240 228 STREET Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011 APPENDIX B Page 1111 of 3333 CityCityCityCity of Maple Ridgeof Maple Ridgeof Maple Ridgeof Maple Ridge TO:TO:TO:TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETINGMEETINGMEETINGMEETING DATE:DATE:DATE:DATE: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO:FILE NO:FILE NO:FILE NO: FROM:FROM:FROM:FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING:MEETING:MEETING:MEETING: COW SUBJECTSUBJECTSUBJECTSUBJECT: Townhall Public House Liquor License Application EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:SUMMARY:SUMMARY:SUMMARY: The Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) have received a liquor primary licence application from Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd. located at 200 – 20690 Lougheed Highway. Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd. operates under the name of Townhall Public House which operates as a licenced restaurant and currently holds a Food Primary Licence which is in effect from 9:00am to Midnight for 212 occupants with no restrictions on allowing minors in the restaurant. The Townhall Public House has applied to the LCLB for a Liquor Primary Licence, which if approved, will be in effect from 9:00am to 2:00am, Monday to Sunday and would allow minors until 10:00pm. The total person capacity/occupant load would stay the same, at 212 occupants. One of the considerations utilized by the LCLB in reviewing an application for a liquor primary licence is a resolution from the local government. A number of regulatory criteria must be addressed in the Council resolution as well as comments pertaining to the views expressed by area residents. Council may choose to support the application, not support the application or indicate they do not wish to comment. In compliance with the public input requirement, 373 letters were sent to owners and occupants of property within 200 metres of the subject site. Five (5) responses were received, all opposed to the proposed amendment. RECOMMENDATION(S):RECOMMENDATION(S):RECOMMENDATION(S):RECOMMENDATION(S): 1.1.1.1. That the application That the application That the application That the application by by by by Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd.Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd.Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd.Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd. at at at at 200 200 200 200 –––– 20690 Lougheed20690 Lougheed20690 Lougheed20690 Lougheed HigHigHigHighhhhwaywaywayway Maple Ridge, BC Maple Ridge, BC Maple Ridge, BC Maple Ridge, BC forforforfor a liquor primary licencea liquor primary licencea liquor primary licencea liquor primary licence, be approved, be approved, be approved, be approved based on the informationbased on the informationbased on the informationbased on the information contained in the Council report dated contained in the Council report dated contained in the Council report dated contained in the Council report dated July 4July 4July 4July 4, 2016, 2016, 2016, 2016.... 2.2.2.2. That a copy of the resolution be forwarded to the That a copy of the resolution be forwarded to the That a copy of the resolution be forwarded to the That a copy of the resolution be forwarded to the Liquor Control and Licensing BranchLiquor Control and Licensing BranchLiquor Control and Licensing BranchLiquor Control and Licensing Branch inininin accordance with the legislative requirements.accordance with the legislative requirements.accordance with the legislative requirements.accordance with the legislative requirements. DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION: a)a)a)a) Background Context:Background Context:Background Context:Background Context: On April 19, 2016, Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd. through the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch submitted an application to replace their Food Primary Licence with a Liquor Primary Licence. 1106 Page 2222 of 3333 LCLB has completed their initial review of the application and have determined applicant suitability and eligibility for the establishment type. The Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw does permit a liquor primary establishment at this location and the business has a current and valid Business Licence. The second phase of the application process is the gathering of public input on the application request. The LCLB guidelines request a specific Council resolution commenting on the application in terms of community impacts which may occur as a result of the proposed change to the establishment operations as a result to the proposed change. Part of the process requires Council to gather views of the residents who may be affected by the establishment of the liquor primary license in their neighbourhood. In following the public input requirement, 373 letters were sent to owners and occupants of property within approximately 200 metres of the subject site with the vast majority of the recipients being residents and the rest of the property owners showing as registered companies. Of the 373 letters sent to surrounding property owners and occupants, there were 5 responses opposed to the proposed amendment. The City also posted a Public Notice in the local newspaper running in two separate editions; May 13 and May 18, 2016. Notwithstanding the few responses received, it is acknowledged that residents in the area have previously raised concerns regarding the interface of the restaurant with the adjoining residential neighbourhood. The residents in the area have voiced concerns previously about the imposition caused by non resident parking. The Maple Ridge RCMP Detachment was asked for their input on this matter and they have advised that although there have been 31 calls for service at this location within the last year (calls ranging from false alarms to causing a disturbance); they do not have any operational issues with this application. The Townhall Public House is located in an area boarding multiple family residential properties. There are 5 townhouse complexes located on the street behind this business. While there is adequate parking on the subject property to satisfy and meet municipal parking requirements for this proposed change, there is a possibility that there could be an overflow into the surrounding residential area. The three closest liquor primary licensed premises to the subject property are: •Shooters Bar – 20644 Dewdney Trunk Rd •Dartford Social House – 11232 Dartford St •Haney Motor Hotel – 22222 Lougheed Highway b)b)b)b) Desired Outcome(s):Desired Outcome(s):Desired Outcome(s):Desired Outcome(s): That Council supports the application from Townhall Holdings (Maple Ridge) Ltd. to change their Food Primary Licence to a Liquor Primary Licence. Page 3333 of 3333 c)c)c)c) Intergovernmental Issues:Intergovernmental Issues:Intergovernmental Issues:Intergovernmental Issues: Both local government and the provincial government have an interest in ensuring that liquor regulations are followed and that licensed establishments listen to the needs of the community. d)d)d)d) Citizen/Customer Implications:Citizen/Customer Implications:Citizen/Customer Implications:Citizen/Customer Implications: The review of this application has taken into consideration the potential for concerns from surrounding properties in terms of parking, traffic and noise generation as well as the proximity of schools and similar establishments. e)e)e)e) Interdepartmental Implications:Interdepartmental Implications:Interdepartmental Implications:Interdepartmental Implications: The Licences Permits and Bylaws Department has coordinated in the review process and solicited input from the public, other municipal departments as well as the RCMP. f)f)f)f) Alternatives:Alternatives:Alternatives:Alternatives: To not approve the application and provide conditions to the approval in the form of recommendations to forward to the LCLB. CONCLUSIONS:CONCLUSIONS:CONCLUSIONS:CONCLUSIONS: Townhall Public House has applied for a Liquor Primary Licence. The City of Maple Ridge has conformed to the Liquor Control and Licencing Branch requirements in processing the application. This report recommends that the application be supported. “original signed by Robin MacNair” _______________________________________________ PreparedPreparedPreparedPrepared bybybyby:::: RobinRobinRobinRobin MacNairMacNairMacNairMacNair Manager of BylawManager of BylawManager of BylawManager of Bylawssss and Licencing and Licencing and Licencing and Licencing “original signed by Frank Quinn” ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by:Approved by:Approved by:Approved by: Frank Frank Frank Frank Quinn, MBA, P.EngQuinn, MBA, P.EngQuinn, MBA, P.EngQuinn, MBA, P.Eng General ManagerGeneral ManagerGeneral ManagerGeneral Manager,,,, Public Works and Development ServicesPublic Works and Development ServicesPublic Works and Development ServicesPublic Works and Development Services “original signed by Ted Swabey” ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Concurrence:Concurrence:Concurrence:Concurrence: E.C.E.C.E.C.E.C. SwabeySwabeySwabeySwabey Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer /jd Attachments:Attachments:Attachments:Attachments: Appendix I – Application for a Liquor-Primary Licence APPENDIX 1 City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: July 04, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO: 16-8660-01 FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW SUBJECT: Bus Rapid Transit Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The provision of adequate transportation options throughout Metro Vancouver and especially in outlying suburbs such as Maple Ridge is one of the Region’s most significant challenges. In 2014 the Mayors Council developed a Vision document that proposed a suite of transportation improvements across the Region that included rapid transit, buses, roads, cycling and walking as well as system management. A small number of projects comprise the majority of funding, namely the Broadway Corridor rapid transit, Skytrain to South Surrey and the Patullo Bridge replacement. For Maple Ridge, the improvements include improved West Coast Express service, a new B-Line bus to Coquitlam, improved bus service as well as funding for major road upgrades. The B-Line, or Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) to Coquitlam noted in the Mayors Vision was also identified in the City’s Strategic Transportation Plan adopted in 2014, and the City undertook a study of Light Rail Transit along the Lougheed Highway corridor in 2007. The implementation of a BRT route to Coquitlam along Lougheed Highway requires considerable planning and evaluation to determine not only the route itself but the potential locations for stations as well as potential land use changes in the vicinity of stations, evaluation of various transit options, the ability to implement the preferred solution in different stages, identify potential areas of conflict or constraints along the proposed corridor. Maple Ridge initiated discussions with Pitt Meadows, Port Coquitlam, Coquitlam as well as Translink to ascertain the level of interest in partnering to undertake a BRT evaluation study on Lougheed Highway to connect to the Evergreen Line in Coquitlam. All parties expressed an interest in participating in the study and the City has developed a Request for Proposal document that has been reviewed by and agreed to by all parties. The project budget for the BRT Study has been established at $120,000, half of which would be funded by Translink, with the remainder to be split equally between the four municipalities. While there has been no formal agreement established to date, all parties have indicated a willingness to participate financially to some degree, and Translink has confirmed their contribution. City staff will act as the project manager for the BRT Study although an inter-agency Liaison Committee will be created for the duration of the project. 1107 The study will result in a report that should form the basis for swift implementation of the BRT service once funding becomes available from higher levels of government. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s support for the BRT Study and approval of up to $15,000 as the City’s contribution to the study budget. RECOMMENDATION(S): THAT the City of Maple Ridge participate in the Bus Rapid Transit Study for the Lougheed Highway Corridor in partnership with the Cities of Pitt Meadows, Port Coquitlam and Coquitlam as well as Translink, and THAT the City of Maple Ridge contribute $15,000 to the funding of the Bus Rapid Transit Study from Accumulated Surplus and that the Financial Plan be amended accordingly. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: In early 2014 the Metro Vancouver Mayors Council on Regional Transportation (Mayors Council) was tasked by the provincial government to confirm its vision for improving the transportation networks in the Region. The Mayors Council developed an expansive Vision for the next 30 years that identified a suite of integrated transportation improvements ranging from road improvements, rail and rapid transit, increased bus service as well as improved cycling and walking facilities. The components of the Mayors Vision that are relevant to Maple Ridge include: • A new B-Line, or BRT service to Coquitlam Centre to access the new Evergreen Line • Five new rail cars to augment the existing train capacity with a future new locomotive with five cars • Funding for major road upgrades • Increased bus service • Improved walking and cycling facilities around bus stops and train stations The Mayors Vision was put to the public in a plebiscite in June of 2014, based upon funding the Vision through a regional sales tax but was voted down by a wide margin. The provision of a B-Line, or BRT service from Maple Ridge through neighbouring communities to Coquitlam Centre and the new Evergreen Line is an important component in the effort to lessen the dependency upon the single occupancy vehicle. The Mayors Vision document indicates the timing of the new BRT service to be in the first five years of the program but it is not included in the recently announced funding. That said there is significant benefit in undertaking an exercise to verify: • The contemplated BRT corridor • Appropriate technologies • Potential station locations • Possible staging strategies • Land use considerations • Viability of expanded or new park-n-ride facilities • Possible constraints, especially around intersections and river crossings • Development of typical road cross-sections at various locations along the corridor A Liaison Committee including all parties would be formed to provide feedback throughout the duration of the project. Maple Ridge has offered to project manage the study through to completion. City staff have created a Request for Proposal (RFP) document that has been circulated to the other municipalities along the proposed BRT corridor – Pitt Meadows, Port Coquitlam and Coquitlam – as well as Translink, and all parties have reached consensus on the scope of work and deliverables. All parties have also indicated a willingness to provide a financial contribution although this would have to be confirmed prior to issuing the RFP. b) Desired Outcome(s): The provision of a BRT service along Lougheed Highway is important to Maple Ridge as it provides residents an option to utilize a reliable transit service and connect into the new Evergreen Line rather than rely upon the single occupancy vehicle. There are a number of elements to be considered prior to the implementation of a BRT service and undertaking this study would assist in the identification of concerns or constraints as well as the development of solutions so that when the funds are made available the implementation time should be minimised as the majority of issues should have been addressed. c) Strategic Alignment: Improved transit options, both local and regional services will assist in reducing the reliance upon single occupancy vehicles while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: The BRT service along Lougheed Highway will provide Maple Ridge residents with options when seeking to travel around the Region by connecting into the new Evergreen Skytrain line. Council and staff will continue to lobby for additional transit services for Maple Ridge as it is clearly established that the current transit coverage is sadly lacking both in area coverage as well as levels of service. e) Interdepartmental Implications: The Engineering Department will be the lead department and will project manage the study but there will be a significant contribution from the Planning Department, especially with regards to land use along the proposed BRT corridor. f) Business Plan/Financial Implications: As stated previously the City is expecting each of the municipal partners to contribute $15,000 to the study and Translink will be contributing $60,000 to the study. The BRT Study is not currently funded in the Financial Plan so it is recommended that the City’s contribution of $15,000 be funded from the Accumulated Surplus and the Financial Plan amended accordingly. g) Alternatives: Should the BRT Study not proceed at this time then no work on the feasibility of the BRT corridor would be undertaken until such time as funding becomes available and this would obviously extend the timeline for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The BRT service is an important transit linkage for Maple Ridge as it will provide fast, reliable service to Coquitlam to tie into the Evergreen Skytrain line. Undertaking the study will not only identify issues for consideration but provide solutions around the appropriate technologies, corridor layout, station locations and potential staging. The study will result in a report that should form the basis for swift implementation of the BRT service once funding becomes available from higher levels of government. “Original signed by David Pollock” Prepared by: David Pollock PEng. Municipal Engineer “Original signed by Frank Quinn” Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBC, PEng. General Manager, Public Works & Development Services “Original signed by E.C. Swabey” Concurrence: E.C. Swabey Chief Administrative Officer DP:dp 1 City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO: FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW SUBJECT: Master Agreement on Cooperation for the Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On October 31, 2016 the Joint Leisure Services Agreement between the City of Maple Ridge and the City of Pitt Meadows will conclude and each City will move forward with the independent provision of parks, recreation and cultural services to their citizens. Given this change, the Master Agreement on Cooperation for Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services (Master Agreement) between the City of Maple Ridge and the City of Pitt Meadows acting together through the Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Parks and Leisure Services Commission (Commission) and the Board of Education, School District No.42 (SD42), which provided a foundation for collaboration in the past will become obsolete. As both Councils and the Board of Education have expressed strong interest in maintaining a cooperative and collaborative working relationship as we move forward, staff are recommending that both Cities and SD42 amend and renew the Master Agreement to establish clear principles and processes for how we will work together in the future. RECOMMENDATION: That staff be directed to work with the City of Pitt Meadows and the Board of Education, School District No.42 to amend and renew the Master Agreement on Cooperation for the Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services. DISCUSSION: a)Background Context: The City of Maple Ridge has enjoyed an excellent working relationship over many years with the City of Pitt Meadows and SD42, which has benefited area residents. The Master Agreement has been a foundational document that articulates the key principles of this cooperative relationship. It outlines a process for the parties to work together, and forms the Steering Committee which ensures regular communication on significant projects and timely discussion on upcoming opportunities. Past examples include the acquisition, construction and operation of community amenities on joint park/school sites. (Master Agreement attached). Parties to the agreement are the City of Maple Ridge and the City of Pitt Meadows acting together through the Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Parks and Leisure Services Commission and the Board of Education, School District No.42. Due to the pending dissolution of the Commission, it is timely to update the Master Agreement so that the benefits that have been derived from this agreement can continue to be achieved. The agreement is also somewhat 1151 2 dated and a review will provide an opportunity to refine it into a concise and useful document that will guide staff from each organization regarding how we work together in the future. While the Master Agreement outlines expectations between the three parties to the agreement regarding the principles and approaches that we will use when working together, it is the sub- agreements (listed in Appendix B of the Master Agreement) that form legally binding contracts that outline the roles, responsibilities and specifics related to each particular project. Looking ahead, the Master Agreement can continue to provide an effective vehicle to articulate the expectations of cooperation that Council discussed in a ‘Working Together’ session with Pitt Meadows Council on February 29, 2016. For example, principles of cooperation and communication related to policy, fee setting and program development can be enhanced. In addition, the Master Agreement also delineates the process that each City and SD42 would undertake when more formal agreements are required. For example, this would include collaboration on future joint/park and recreation sites with SD42, and if needed, agreements around topics such as a shared field and facility allocation function and joint marketing initiatives with the City of Pitt Meadows and/or SD42. However, before establishing new sub-agreements such as this, staff recommends that the Master Agreement be updated to reflect the evolution of the relationship between the parties and confirmation of the principles and processes that we are agreeing to. On June 22, 2016, staff met with City of Pitt Meadows and School District No.42 staff to discuss the value of the Master Agreement and confirmed support at a staff level for the recommendation in this report. Having said that, there are a number of changes that staff will be proposing regarding the structure and content of the agreement if Council approves this work to proceed. b)Desired Outcome: To establish agreed upon principles and processes that will provide a foundation of cooperation and collaboration between the two municipalities and SD42 to gain efficiencies or improve services to citizens. c)Citizen/Customer Implications: Citizens will benefit from the renewal of this agreement due to the benefits that can be achieved. d)Business Plan/Financial Implications: The Master Agreement does not impose a financial obligation on any party. Principles that would be maintained are the ability of each party to control and manage the financial implication of any commitment and a focus on ensuring the efficient use of taxpayers’ resources. e)Alternatives: If Council chooses not to amend and renew the Master Agreement it will become less effective over time. To terminate the agreement would require one year’s written notice to the other parties. Staff’s recommendation is that the agreement be updated and renewed so that staff have clear direction from Councils and the Board of Education regarding how we will work together in the future. 3 CONCLUSIONS: If Council endorses the recommendation in this report to direct staff to work with the City of Pitt Meadows and the Board of Education, School District No.42 to update the Master Agreement on Cooperation for the Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services, staff anticipate that a similar recommendation will then be brought forward to Pitt Meadows Council and the Board of Education, based on recent discussions with staff from those organizations. “Original signed by Kelly Swift” Prepared by: Kelly Swift, General Manager, Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services “Original signed by Ted Swabey” Concurrence: E.C. Swabey Chief Administrative Officer :ks Master Agreement on Cooperation and Joint Use of Public Facilities and Coordination of Services 1 City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: July 4, 2016 and Members of Council FILE NO: FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW SUBJECT: PITT MEADOWS REQUEST FOR SPORT FIELD MAINTENANCE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the May 2, 2016 Workshop, Council received a request from Pitt Meadows Council to continue to provide sportsfield maintenance service for the City of Pitt Meadows commencing November 1, 2016. This item was referred to staff to review and bring back to Council. RECOMMENDATIONS: That staff be directed to continue to provide sport field maintenance services to the City of Pitt Meadows for a period of one year on a full cost recovery basis, including a 15% administration fee that may be incurred through the provision of this service; and, That consideration be given to providing one additional year of field maintenance services if the City of Pitt Meadows requests a one-year extension of this service prior to November 2017. DISCUSSION: a)Background Context: Parks and Leisure Services staff has been maintaining the Pitt Meadows sports fields for the last twenty-one years as part of the Joint Leisure Services Agreement. As a result, the City of Pitt Meadows does not currently have in house expertise or the necessary equipment required to look after their fields in the short term and, they have requested that Maple Ridge Parks staff continue to maintain their fields to the same standards that have been applied in the past for a period of up to two years. The maintenance that will be required includes, but is not limited to activities such as: The mowing of sports fields twice per week during the growing season Irrigation system maintenance and repair, as well as spring set up and winterizing Water management per Metro Vancouver regulations Fertilizer applications four times per growing season Inspection of field surfaces for defects and repair Deep core aeration once per year (minimum) Slit tine aeration one to two times per year Lime application once per year Marking fields for lining once per year Maintenance of the PMSS synthetic sport field 1152 2  Top dressing fields once per year (where necessary)  Make recommendations to Pitt Meadows staff for capital repairs  Moving/removing goals  Maintain dugouts  Vacuuming turf fields as necessary (when excessive growth occurs) b) Desired Outcome: To ensure that the transition to an independent parks and recreation services model is as seamless as possible for community sport groups. By continuing to provide sport field maintenance services to Pitt Meadows in the short term, it will reduce the likelihood of any disruption to the playability or availability of existing play field inventory. c) Strategic Alignment Although the decision was made to end the Joint Leisure Services Agreement, considerable effort has gone into making the transition as smooth as possible, so that current maintenance standards and services to our community sport groups and associations remains consistent. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: In most cases our sport groups are named either “Meadow Ridge” or Ridge Meadows” sport associations, which serve citizens in both communities. If this request was denied it has the potential to cause a negative impact on both Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows sports participants. e) Interdepartmental Implications: It is anticipated that there will continue to be some Maple Ridge support services such as purchasing and finance that would support Parks and Facilities in this regard, and a 15% administration charge should be applied to cover these costs. f) Business Plan/Financial Implications: The parks and facilities business plan has not yet been developed for 2017 and could likely accommodate continuing to complete this sport field maintenance function in Pitt Meadows until they acquire the necessary equipment and hire staff to complete this work themselves. g) Policy Implications: Staff do not anticipate that there will be any need or desire to be involved in any policy, reporting or administrative functions for Pitt Meadows in this regard; the service levels would be that which is applied to Maple Ridge Sports fields on a full cost recovery basis. h) Alternatives: The alternative would be to decline the request. The City of Pitt Meadows could retain the services of contractors to complete this work in the interim, or could establish their own sport field maintenance division sooner rather than later. 3 CONCLUSIONS: Generally the sports community have been satisfied with the level of maintenance of sports fields in both Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows. The City of Maple Ridge has invested in an appropriate level of specialized equipment over the last several years allowing for the safe playable surfaces. Many of the field maintenance implements that Maple Ridge has acquired could be a significant cost, and may take some time for Pitt Meadows to obtain. Given adequate notice and full cost recovery, staff would be able to continue the provision of sport field maintenance for an additional one to two year period. “Original signed by David Boag” Prepared by: David Boag Director, Parks and Facilities “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 Attachment: Letter from City of Pitt Meadows – April 20, 2016