HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-04-08 Council Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL MEETI/VG AGENDA
April 8, 2014
7.•00 p.m.
Counci/ Chamber
MEET/NG DECORUM
Council would like to remind all people present tonight that serious issues are
decided at Council meetings which affect many people's lives. Therefore, we ask that
you act with the appropriate decorum that a Council Meeting deserves. Commentary
and conversations by the public are distracting. Should anyone disrupt the Council
Meeting in any way, the meeting will be stopped and that person's behavior will be
reprimanded.
Note: This Agenda is also posted on the Municipal Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The purpose of a Council meeting is to enact powers given to Council by using bylaws
or resolutions. This is the final venue for debate of issues before voting on a bylaw or
resolution.
100 CALL TO ORDER
200 MOMENT OFREFLECT/ON
300 /NTRODUCT/ON OFADD/T/ONAL AGENDA /TEMS
400 APPROI/AL OF THEAGENDA
500 ADOPT/ONAND RECE/PT OFM/NUTES
501 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 25, 2014
502 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of March
20, 2014
600 PRESENTA T/ONS A T THE REQUEST OF COUNC/L
Page 1
Council MeetingAgenda
April 8, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 2 of 7
700 DELEGA T/ONS
701 National Volunteer Week
Ashley Singh, Volunteer Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Coordinator
800 UNF/N/SHED BUS/NESS
900 CORRESPONDENCE
1000 BYLAWS
Bvlaws for Final Readin�
1001 RZ/013/10, 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue
Staff report dated April 8, 2014 recommending final reading
1001.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 6724-2010
To amend conservation boundaries, add a neighbourhood park and
relocate an equestrian trail
Final reading
1001.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6725-2010
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and CD-3-98
(Comprehensive Development) to R-1(Residential District), R-3 (Special
Amenity Residential District), RST (Street Townhouse Residential), RS-1b
(One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential) and P-1 (Park and
School) to permit the future subdivision of 76 lots in two phases for the
development of single family residential, street townhouse, one agricultural
lot and a neighbourhood park
Final reading
COMM/TTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDA T/ONS
1100 COMM/TTEE OF THE WHOLE
1100 Minutes - N/A
The following issues were presented at an earlier Committee of the Whole meeting with
the recommendations being brought to this meeting for Municipal Council consideration
and final approval. The Committee of the Whole meeting is open to the public and is held
in the Council Chamber at 1:00 p.m. on the Monday the week prior to this meeting.
Council MeetingAgenda
April 8, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 3 of 7
Pub/ic Works and Deve%pment Services
1101 2013-087-RZ, 23500 and 23550 Larch Avenue, RS-3 and RS-2 to RM-1
and P-1
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 7068-2014 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RM-1
(Townhouse Residential) and P-1 (Park and School) to allow development
of 19 townhouses and allocate land for a future neighbourhood park and
conservation be given first reading and that the applicant provide further
information as described on Schedules A, C, D and G of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999.
1102 2013-107-RZ, 24009, 24005 and 24075 Fern Crescent, RS-3 and RS-2 to
RS-1, RS-1b and R-2
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban - Medium Density
Residential) and R-2 (Urban Residential District) to permit a subdivision of
34 single family lots be given first reading and that the applicant provide
further information as described on Schedules A and B of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information required for a
Subdivision application
1103 2013-016-RZ, 20178 Chatwin Avenue, RS-3 and RS-1 to RS-1b
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7069-2014 to include the subject
site within the Urban Area Boundary, to change land designations and to
designate conservation lands around a creek be given first and second
readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6978-2013 to permit a subdivision of approximately
13 single family lots be given second and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1104 2012-102-RZ, 25638 112 Avenue, RS-3 to RS-2
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that second reading of
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013 be rescinded and that
amended Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013 to rezone
from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential) to permit a subdivision into four RS-2 Lots and one RS-3 lot
Council MeetingAgenda
April 8, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 4 of 7
remaining in the Agricultural Land Reserve be given second reading and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
1105 DVP/013/10, 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal DVP/013/10 to reduce road right-of-way and
carriage widths, to increase maximum building height for the RS-1b (One
Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential), R-1 (Residential District) and
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) lots and to reduce rear yard
setbacks for the R-1 lots backing onto park land.
1106 DP and DVP/107/10, 23657 AND 23651 132 Avenue
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal DVP/107/10 to vary setbacks, storeys and
heights of units and the maximum height of two retaining walls and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DP/107/10 to permit
construction of 69 townhouse units in the RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
zone and a single family home in the south-east corner in the RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential) zone.
1107 DP/013/10, 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal DP/013/10 to permit two four-plex Street
Townhouse buildings zoned RST (Street Townhouse Residential) and an
Intensive Residential Development Permit for 16 R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) zoned lots.
1108 2013-048-DP, 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal 2013-048-DP to reconfigure a drive-through
route to create a dual order station setup for the existing Tim Hortons
located at 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road.
Council MeetingAgenda
April 8, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 5 of 7
Financia/ and Corporate Services (including Fire and Po/ice�
1131 Adjustments to the 2013 Collector's Roll
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 submitting information on changes to the
2013 Collector's Roll through the issuance of Supplementary Roll 12.
For information only
No motion required
1132 2014 Community Grants
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that an allocation of grants
for 2014 and funding from Gaming Revenues to accommodate the Maple
Ridge Concert Band's request to support a Bandstand Birthday Bash be
approved.
Communitv Deve%pment and Recreation Service
1151 Ridge Meadows Seniors Society Governance Review
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 providing an update on the implementation
of the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society Governance Review.
For information only
No motion required
1152 Festival Support Recommendations
Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommending that a request for funding
for the Maple Ridge Concert Band Bandstand Fundraising event to referred
to the Community Grant Review Committee.
Correspondence
1171
Other Committee /ssues
1181
Council MeetingAgenda
April 8, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 6 of 7
1200 STAFFREPORTS
1300 RELEASE OF/TEMS FROM CLOSED COUNC/L
1400 MA YOR'S REPORT
1500 COUNC/LLORS' REPORTS
1600 OTHER MA TTERS DEEMED EXPED/ENT
1601 Reconsideration of Resolution No. 2014-133 "That Bylaw No. 6968-2013
be given first, second and third readings and be forwarded to the Minister
of Health for approval" defeated at the March 25, 2014 Council Meeting.
Staff report dated March 17, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge
Smoking Bylaw No. 6968-2013 be given first, second and third readings
and be forwarded to the Minister of Health for approval.
1700 NOT/CES OFMOT/ONAND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEET/NG
1800 QUEST/ONS FROM THE PUBL/C
Council MeetingAgenda
April 8, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 7 of 7
1900 ADJOURNMENT
QUESTION PERIOD
The purpose of the Question Period is to provide the public with an opportunity to
ask questions of Council on items that are of concern to them, with the exception of
Public Hearing by-laws which have not yet reached conclusion.
Council will not tolerate any derogatory remarks directed at Council or staff
members.
Each person will be permitted 2 minutes to ask their question (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 individual
members of Council. The total Question Period is limited to 15 minutes.
Council reserves the right to defer responding to a question in order to obtain the
information required to provide a complete and accurate response.
Other opportunities are available to address Council including public hearings,
delegations and community forum. The public may also make their views known to
Council by writing or via email and by attending open houses, workshops and
information meetings. Serving on an Advisory Committee is an excellent way to
have a voice in the future of this community.
For more information on these opportunities contact:
Clerk's Department at 604-463-5221 or clerks@mapleridge.ca.
Mayor and Council at mayorandcouncil@mapleridge.ca.
Checked by:
Date:
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITfEE
MINUTES
March 20, 2014
Mayor's Office
I�: � ��►��
Ernie Daykin, Mayor
Chairman
Paul Gill, Acting Chief Administrative Officer
Member Catherine Schmidt, Recording Secretary
1. KEATING, Frederick and Rosemary
LEGAL: Lot 2, Section 20, Township 12, New Westminster District,
Plan 77749 •
LOCATION:
OWNER:
REQUIRED AGREEMENTS:
22791-125A Avenue
Frederick and Rosemary Keating
Sanitary Sump Pump Covenant
THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING
DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO KEATING, Frederick and Rosemary.
CARRIED
P�u4�Gill, Acting Chief Administrative Officer
Member
'`�1'l '�
393
68621
7
8
22754
N
22760
395
/N
��
�W
P 77
49
N N
� ti �
�M ��
�
•.-
,
370
22735
22747
371 �
� N
372 �
12553
6� 5 4 3 2
� � �
�
N N N N N
N N N N
125A AVE.
133
P 29383
�
District of
Langley
�
0
�
N
N
N\
�o�
5
P ��
8
�
1 7 � �'�
� ti �� �
12477
SUBJECT PARCEL
20
12522
12516
21
12510
22
12504
0
N
�
21N
P 77
1
21
1
1'
1
1�
SANITARY SUMP PUMP COVENANT
22791 125A AVE.
•--•-� • •
� �
MAPLE�RIpGE" � � �
� BritishGolumhia• " � '
Scale: 1:1,000 � '�`��� _ �� DATE: Mar 17, 2014 FILE: Untitled BY: ML
�
7
• � �� -�� District of Maple Ridge
�::s;�. :,;�;. ,
T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 8, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: RZ/013/10
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Final Reading:
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6725 - 2010
22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Bylaws 6724 - 2010 and 6725 - 2010 have been considered by Council and at Public Hearing and
subsequently were granted third reading. The applicant has requested that final reading be granted.
The purpose of the rezoning is to permit a subdivision of 75 lots.
Council considered rezoning application RZ/013/10 and granted first reading for Zone Amending
Bylaw No. 6725-2010 on March 23, 2010. Council granted first and second reading for Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724-2010 and second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No.
6725-2010 on November 27, 2012. This application was presented at Public Hearing on December
11, 2012, and Council granted third reading on December 11, 2012. Council granted a first
extension on December 10, 2013.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010 be adopted; and
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6725 - 2010 be adopted.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Council considered this rezoning application at a Public Hearing held on December 11, 2012. On
December 11, 2012 Council granted third reading to Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010 and Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6725 - 2010 with the stipulation
that the following conditions be addressed:
Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of
the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
Amendment to Part VI, Figure 2(Land Use Plan), 3A (Blaney Hamlet) and Figure 4(Trails
/ Open Space) of the Silver Valley Area Plan of the Official Community Plan;
iii. Road dedication on 132 Avenue, as required;
1001
iv. Park dedication as required, including construction of walkways, trails and emergency
access road;
v. Consolidation of the development site;
vi. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office
which addresses the suitability of the site for the proposed development;
vii. Department of Fisheries and Oceans approval for in-stream works and creek crossing in
the southwest corner of the site, if required;
viii. Approval from the appropriate authorities for septic disposal for the agricultural lot;
ix. The developer provide a voluntary monetary contribution for the future development of
an equestrian trail connection between 132 Avenue and the east/west trail being
developed in Blaney Hamlet to the north of the ALR boundary;
x. Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management Act,
the Developer will provide a Site Profile for the subject lands.
The following a�plies to the above:
1. A Rezoning Servicing Agreement has been registered as a Restrictive Covenant and the
required security has been provided;
2. Amendments to Figures 2, 3A and 4 of the Silver Valley Area Plan are included in Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010, and will be amended with the final
approval of this application;
3. Road dedication on 232 Avenue was acquired when subdivision application 2011-085-
SD was approved in February 2013. That subdivision separated the ALR land from the
development site.
4. The Park dedication plan has been approved by the Approving Officer;
5. The site was consolidated on the road dedication plan approved with subdivision
application 2011-085-SD in February 2012;
6. The Geotechnical Report has been registered as a Restrictive Covenant;
7. The applicant has provided the District with proof of notification to the Department of
Fisheries and Oceans for wetland and in-stream works;
8. Septic approval was provided for the lot in the ALR with subdivision application 2011-
085-SD in February 2012;
9. The developer, Insignia Homes, has contributed $60,000.00 to the Parks Department for
future development of an equestrian trail connection between 132 Avenue and the
east/west trail being developed in Blaney Hamlet north of the ALR boundary;
10. A Site Profile has been provided.
'r�
CONCLUSION:
As the applicant has met Council's conditions, it is recommended that Final Reading be given to
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010 and Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6725 - 2010.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
Prepared by: Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Jim Charlebois" for
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- Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010
Appendix C- Bylaw No. 6725 - 2010
Appendix D- Subdivision Plan for ALR land
Appendix E- Subdivision Plan for 75 lots
3-
N
District of
Langley
� 22830/50 & 22942 136 AVENUE
0
.�
�
�
o �t CORPORATION OF
�� THE DISTRICT OF
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Scale: 1:3,000 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Feb 20, 2014 FILE: DP/013/10 BY: PC
APPENDIX B
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6724 - 2010
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Section 10.3. Part Vl - Silver Valley Area Plan,
Figures 2, 3A and 4 of the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6724 - 2010."
2. Figures 2, 3A and 4 are hereby amended for those parcels or tracts of land and
premises known and described as:
Lot 2 Block 6 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 14756;
West 7.8 chains of NE 1/4 Section 29 Township 12 except part subdivided by Plan 32932,
New Westminster District;
Lot 76 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP27885
Lot 80 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP27885
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 792, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby redesignated as shown.
3. Figure 4 is hereby amended for those parcels or tracts of land and premises known
and described as:
Lot 2 Block 6 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 14756;
West 7.8 chains of NE 1/4 Section 29 Township 12 except part subdivided by Plan 32932,
New Westminster District;
Lot 76 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP27885
Lot 80 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP27885
1001.1
and shown in heavy black line on Map No. 844 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms
part of this Bylaw, as added or removed from Horse Trail.
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.7060 - 2014 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 27t" day of November, A.D. 2012.
READ A SECOND TIME the 27t" day of November, A.D. 2012.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 11t" day of December, A.D. 2012.
READ A THIRD TIME the 11t" day of December, A.D. 2012.
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 2014.
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.
Ma p No.
Purpose:
6724-2010
792
To Designate as shown below on Figures 2& 3A
Q Conservation � Neighbourhood Park 0 Eco Cluster
And To Designate as shown below on Figure 4
Q Conservation � Neighbourhood Park
N
SCALE 1:6,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6724-2010
Ma p No. 844
Purpose: To Amend Figure 4 as shown below
- — — — Add Trail Delete Trail
N
SCALE 1:6,000
APPENDIX C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6725 - 2010
A Bylaw to amend the text and Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended.
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in
open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
3
and
C!
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6725 - 2010."
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 76, Section 32, Township 12, Plan BCP27885 New Westminster District
Lot 80, Section 32, Township 12, Plan BCP27885 New Westminster District
Lot 2, Section 29, Township 12, Plan 14756, New Westminster District
West 7.80 Chains of the North East Quarter, Section 29, Township 12, Except: Part
Subdivided by Plan 32932, New Westminster District
are hereby rezoned as shown on Map No. 1476, a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this bylaw.
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 23rd day of March, A.D. 2010.
READ a second time the 27t" day of November, A.D. 2012.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 11th day of December, A.D. 2012.
READ a third time the 11t" day of December, A.D. 2012.
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of
, A.D. 2014.
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 1OO1.Z
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6725-2010
Ma p No. 1476
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and CD-3-98 (Comprehensive Development)
To: � RST ( Street Townhouse Residential) Q R-1(Residential District)
� R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) � P-1(Park and School)
� RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
N
SCALE 1:6,000
Status: Filed Plan #: EPP27906 App #: CA3058941 Ct�l #: 136-2523987 RCVD: RQST: 2073-04-29 0820.64
Page 1 of i
IX D
XE
T0:
FROM:
e RID9E
�
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
District of Maple Ridge
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
FILE N0: 2013-087-RZ
MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7068-2014
23500 and 23550 Larch Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties located at 23500 and 23550
Larch Avenue from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) and P-1 (Park and School), to allow future development of
approximately 19 townhouses with 0.53 ha (1.3 acres) allocated for a future neighbourhood park
and conservation lands.
This application was deferred at the November 18, 2013 Committee of the Whole meeting. Since
that time, staff have had further discussion with the applicant. As a result, the applicant has revised
the development proposal to reflect a larger combined neighbourhood park and conservation land
parcel that is more reflective of the land use designation areas, site characteristics, and Parks,
Recreation, and Culture Master Plan guidelines for neighbourhood park size.
The park area shown on the attached site plan (see Appendix C) will be divided for two separate
purposes. Lands designated Conservation due to steep slopes, approximately 0.19 ha (0.47 acres)
of the subject properties, will be required to be dedicated to the District of Maple Ridge as a
condition of zoning approval. The remaining amount, approximately 0.34 ha (0.84 acres), is
proposed for a future neighbourhood park site. The land for the neighbourhood park is not required
to be dedicated to the District of Maple Ridge. It will be purchased at fair market price with the
portion of development cost charges revenue allocated for park acquisition. As these areas are
adjacent to one another, the conservation area will complement the neighbourhood park site as
passive green space.
The Parks and Leisure Services Department has reviewed the revised site plan and are satisfied with
the amount of land allocated for a future neighbourhood park. Although the proposed
neighbourhood park area is approximately half of the area that is designated for Neighbourhood
Park, when that area is combined with the adjacent conservation land of 0.19 ha (0.47 acres), the
resulting area is a sufficient park size.
An OCP amendment will be required to re-align the existing land use designations. This OCP
amendment will result in an increase in Medium/High Residential designated land and a reduction
in Neighbourhood Park designated land by approximately 3,447 m2. Consequently, this OCP
amendment would allow approximately 2,073 m2 (22,314 ft2) of additional floor space under the
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) density of 0.6 times the net lot area to be constructed. The larger
area of Medium/High Density Residential land proposed will allow more residential floor space to be
constructed than the existing residential land designation. No changes to the Conservation
designated land area are proposed.
1101
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act, requirement for consultation during the
development or amendment of an Official Community Plan, Council must consider whether
consultation is required with specifically:
i. The Board of the Regional District in which the area covered by the plan is located, in the
case of a Municipal Official Community Plan;
ii. The Board of any Regional District that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iii. The Council of any municipality that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iv. First Nations;
v. School District Boards, greater boards and improvements district boards; and
vi. The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies.
and in that regard it is recommended that no additional consultation be required in respect of this
matter beyond the early posting of the proposed Official Community Plan amendments on the
District's website, together with an invitation to the public to comment, and;
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7068-2014 be given first reading; and
That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules A, C, D and G of the
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Descriptions:
OCP:
Bernard Mottet
KBK No 108 Ventures Ltd.
Lot: 4, Section: 28, Township: 12, Plan: NWP24142
Lot: 38, Section: 28, Township: 12, Plan: NWP40978
Existing: Medium/High Density Residential, Neighbourhood Park,
Conservation,
Proposed: Medium/High Density Residential, Neighbourhood Park,
Conservation
Zoning:
Existing:
Proposed:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential)
RM-1(Townhouse Residential), P-1(Park and School)
Use:
Zone:
Designation
-2-
Single Family Residential, Vacant
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Medium/High Density Residential
South:
East:
West:
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing requirement:
b) Site Characteristics:
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Medium/High Density Residential,
Conservation
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), RS-2
(One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Medium/High Density Residential
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), RS-2
(One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Conservation, Neighbourhood Park
Single Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential, Neighbourhood Park
1.17 ha (2.9 acres)
Larch Avenue
Urban Standard
The subject site is comprised of two properties located in the River Village of the Silver Valley Area
Plan. A single family home is currently located on each property, and both properties are rural
residential in nature with significant vegetation and tree cover. The properties slope gradually
towards the south west corner, where the topography is at its steepest. An existing trail is located
along Larch Avenue and an equestrian trail as designated in the Official Community Plan (OCP) is
proposed through the conservation area to the south west of the development site.
c) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the site in order to construct approximately 19 townhouse units
accessed via a private strata road. Approximately 0.53 ha (1.3 acres) of land is being proposed by
the applicant for a future neighbourhood park site and park dedication for conservation purposes.
The exact amount of neighbourhood park land that the District of Maple Ridge will purchase will be
determined prior to second reading of the zoning bylaw.
The park area shown on the attached site plan (see Appendix C) will be divided for two separate
purposes. Lands designated Conservation due to steep slopes, approximately 0.19 ha (0.47 acres)
of the subject properties, will be required to be dedicated to the District of Maple Ridge as a
condition of zoning approval. The remaining amount, approximately 0.34 ha (0.84 acres), is
proposed for a future neighbourhood park site. The land for the neighbourhood park is not required
to be dedicated to the District of Maple Ridge. It will be purchased at fair market price with the
portion of development cost charges revenue allocated for park acquisition. As these areas are
adjacent to one another, the conservation area will complement the neighbourhood park site as
passive green space.
The revised development proposal that is the subject of this report is different from both the earlier
proposal and the existing land use designation boundaries.
-3-
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the OCP and
provide a land use assessment only. The proposed townhouse project has not been reviewed in
terms of zoning compliance. 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 and development variance permits.
d) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The development site comprises of two properties totalling 1.17 ha (2.9 acres), and is located in the
River Village in the Silver Valley Area Plan. The development site is designated 16% Conservation
(0.19 ha/0.47 acres), 26% Medium/High Density Residential (0.30 ha/0.74 acres), and 58% (0.68
ha/1.68 acres) Neighbourhood Park.
The development proposal that is the subject of this report (see Appendix C) proposes to re-align the
existing land use designation boundaries under an OCP amending bylaw. The proposed
amendments have implications for both the Medium/High Density Residential and Neighbourhood
Park land uses. The land area designated Conservation will not be impacted with this development
proposal. Land use implications are detailed below.
Medium/High Density Residential Implications:
The Medium/High Density Residential designation aligns with the RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
zone and the townhouse form of development. The proposed area allocated for residential
development is approximately 6,455 m2. In order to permit the development as proposed by the
applicant, an OCP amendment will be required to re-designate approximately 3,447 m2 of land from
Neighbourhood Park to Medium/High Density Residential (see Appendix D). This OCP amendment
would result in approximately 2,073 m2 (22,314 ft2) of additional floor space under the RM-1
(Townhouse Residential) density of 0.6 times the net lot area. The larger area of Medium/High
Density Residential land proposed will allow more residential floor space to be constructed than the
existing residential land designation. The River Village contains the highest residential densities in
the Silver Valley Area Plan. The proposed increase can be supported for this application.
Neighbourhood Park Implications:
The Neighbourhood Park designation aligns with the P-1 (Park and School) zone. The proposed area
allocated for purchase by the District of Maple Ridge for a future neighbourhood park site is
approximately 3,353 m2 (see Appendix D). In order to permit the development as proposed by the
applicant, and OCP amendment would be required to re-designate approximately 3,447 mz from
Neighbourhood Park to Medium/High Density Residential. This OCP amendment would result in a
reduction of 3,447 m2 of land from the area currently designated for neighbourhood park. The
smaller area of Neighbourhood Park land proposed will allow more residential floor space to be
constructed on land that is designated for a future neighbourhood park.
In comparison with the proposal reviewed by Council earlier, the revised proposal submitted contains
a substantially larger park area. The neighbourhood park and conservation area has been increased
by 0.5 ha (1.2 acres) in the current development plan from the previous design but is still
approximately 0.3 ha (0.8 acres) smaller than the current OCP designation.
'�
During the creation of the Silver Valley Area Plan, the community identified a number of principles to
guide development in the area. Amongst other things, the community noted a preference for smaller
local parks within walking distance to residents. The resulting plan reflected this, and Figure 3C
River Village of the OCP illustrates that neighbourhood parks are at the centre of each
neighbourhood, and are within a two minute walk of residents (see Appendix D). Policy 5.3.4
Neighbourhoods reads as follows:
(a) A Neighbourhood is a subset of a Hamlet, generally defined by a 200 metre, 2-minute
walking radius from a central local community and/or park space and a transit stop.
The subject site contains the designated neighbourhood park land for this particular neighbourhood.
The function of neighbourhood parks as defined in Section 5.3.8 Parks and Schools is as follows:
(e) Neighbourhood Parks are 0.2 ha (0.5 acres) to 0.6 ha (1.5 acres) in size and should be
within a 2-5 minute walk from a dwelling. These parks should provide an opportunity
for social gathering, and will require appropriate amenities, i.e., benches, pathways,
community mailboxes, and should include small playground structures where
appropriate.
Due to the sloping nature of the site, a larger park area than the policy minimum of 0.2 ha (0.5
acres) was designated to accommodate active park uses such as play equipment. The proposed
reduction in size of the neighbourhood park is supported by the Parks Department.
Zoning Bvlaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the properties located at 23500 and 23550 Larch
Avenue from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential). This will permit development of approximately 19 townhouses with
0.53 ha (1.3 acre) allocated for a combination of future neighbourhood park and conservation lands.
Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance
Permit application.
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.
Pursuant to Section 8.10 of the OCP, a Natural Features Development Permit application is required
for all development and subdivision activity or building permits for:
All areas designated Conservation on Schedule "B" or all areas within 50 metres of an
area designated Conservation on Schedule "B", or on Figures 2, 3 and 4 in the Silver
Valley Area Plan;
All lands with an average natural slope of greater than 15 %;
All floodplain areas and forest lands identified on Natural Features Schedule "C"
to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of the natural environment and
for development that is protected from hazardous conditions.
-5-
Advisory Design Panel:
A Multi-Family Development Permit is required and will be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel
prior to second reading.
Development Information Meetin�:
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) Interdepartmentallmplications:
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) Licenses, Permits, and Bylaws Department;
d) Fire Department;
e) Parks Department;
f) School District; and
g) 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 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.
The Parks and Leisure Services Department has reviewed the revised site plan and are satisfied with
the amount of land allocated for a future neighbourhood park. Although the proposed
neighbourhood park area is approximately half of the area that is designated for Neighbourhood
Park, when that area is combined with the adjacent conservation land of 0.19 ha (0.47 acres), the
resulting area is a sufficient park size.
f) Early and Ongoing Consultation:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act for consultation during an Official Community
Plan amendment, it is recommended that no additional consultation is required beyond the early
posting of the proposed OCP amendments on the District's website, together with an invitation to the
public to comment.
g) 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. An OCP Application (Schedule A);
2. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule C);
3. A Multi-Family Residential Development Permit Application (Schedule D); and
4. A Natural Features Development Permit Application (Schedule G).
'�
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 not in compliance with the existing land use designation areas of the
OCP's Silver Valley Area Plan. The area for residential development is greater than currently
designated. However, an OCP amendment to re-align existing land uses can be justified due to
constraints presented by topography and conservation land dedication opportunities. Furthermore,
the combined area of conservation and neighbourhood park land will meet both Parks, Recreation,
and Culture Master Plan and OCP minimum requirements for neighbourhood park areas.
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. Additionally, it is expected that once complete information is
received, Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7068-2014 will be amended.
"Original signed by Amelia Bowden"
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Jim Charlebois" for
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 7068-2014
Appendix C- Proposed Site Plan
Appendix D- Land Use Designation Area Reconciliation
Appendix E- Neighbourhood Park Walking Distance
-7-
� �s �3 BCS�577 13332 W 213335 W 13336
��' 32 �o� 2 33s 13336/40 � 13330 26
?346g � � � �, � 13331 13332
234 33mV �� 2 1332s ry�,h� �� 3327 13328 � �� 13325 13326
62 �33j 9 13321 13322 �� �6 19 13320
34 � 3 9 8
234ss PARK v 1 Rem 3 13317 13318 �� 1 315 13312
33 � 14
23 35 4 1330g3 P 3007 13313 13312 22 23 � 2
`�4qs� PP X4138 613309 1 N w W � �
4 LM P 50153 5 13305 ���'w �� W N N
�G� � 5 13305 "'s� `r�j °��` `9
� PARK N 13301 2 8� s
10 P 2145 � 6 RRem A8 � PW w��s��' �p&zGNP��� 27
� 9 _I 8� w U, .� 13295
v v � 7 � °' � � �
M �n c�s, v�n N 289
N N N M I� M
`V � "' `V ��13283
� m
LARCHAVE. 24 N 25 26 w332��
0 0
°D o 0
� � �
M M l(�
N N M
P 13167 " Subject Properties
1 37 4 38 39
P 40978 P 24142 P 409 8
210
P 131 7 P 37 22
Z°Z 3 30 31 32 33
*PP159
2
� � �
� �,
M M
N N M M
N N
132 AVE.
W
M
N
Cit f Pitt
Mea ows ' ��`�
-� ,
�- � � �
��� �� q�� � � , �17��_,
l��l i�rlini� �� Iy�l���ha il il ���''11�
�
���I�ii �i� Iv� ul�)e"F
, �. �
,� �, _ �, ,
, ��
., � �� �
District of �
N Langley
Scale: 1:2,000 �
13260
�
�
�
35 N
N 13227
�
�
M 13215
� 34
*PP157
�
�
M
N
13165
P 1105
I
; 23500/23550 Larch Ave
,�
i ��
i�
� � � CORPORATION OF
��� - THE DISTRICT OF
j� MAPLE RIDGE
; -.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
��
DATE: Sep 6, 2013 2013-087-RZ BY: JV
APPENDIX B
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7068-2014
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2
3
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7068-2014."
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 4 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 24142
Lot 38 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 40978
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1613 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-1(Townhouse Residential)
and P-1 (Park and School).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the
READ a second time the
PUBLIC HEARING held the
READ a third time the
ADOPTED, the
day of
day of
day of
day of
day of
,20
,20
,20
, 20
, 20
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
Fro m:
7068-2014
1613
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
P-1 (Park and School)
N
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX C
/� CJ I J
— ` � ` x_� � ` � E7i191A0H A7 iN�ERf . i0P Oi �
x 7�9 f � � -� �x
� ea UF�U� � � � ` � � _ �_ -� � � -�
� ------- — �-- � H
�
N_ _ - ------ ---
� �ne��� I F __ _ �
i.a7 � �� ^�..� `J'[1 � J�� 1� _
T ' . �` . �-J�n �'��
�. x � .. . - " i �
� x � � � x - , X .,� •
a, � 5ectian 1 � x, �, � x 3; 5ectian 1
� 5 - - - - - ---- -- - - - - � - � -- — - --
� `�
1 N � '
N� x � �-- x �� •. ;� All Elnits are:
� � , v,� x x � 1, �� 3 Srm. 2.5 baths.
' ' • � � � 2 car garage
E� o x X X r� of� ,'� I
�`� 8ank � X f : a� 2,7fifl sq.F1.
Q c� � —� G 9 � �i
` o x Except LiniFs
T� x x f l x t,2.sa,a:
� � x
N i x f �� � � ' 3 Srm, 2.5 ba[hs,
�.
4 7 ;� x x x � X 1 � � i � t car gara ge
�' � � 2,175 sq.ft.
LL �- , ; ,
� � � f x � -
�
a� � � ctian � � ��� s - � � Sectian 2
�� -- - - - - -��� - -� �9 ,- � -X -
�—
c[ � x x K X 1—�: ,�: - -_
a x
�o x x � \ �
� �
� 9 x � . t•. �
ai �° x x � • ' °& 1
� N X x 7( • x � p X '`.� , 1}
� � .
� ] ■ ■ '
�/ --C�
Q 7 x Q Of- -
� O x �. � \ a8 * "'
L ❑ X i �&' . ''� J!' � �
� z x x 4' : � �
Y
p m x ',C �� g �` %� X -
u-, n 5ectian 3 � 4 s� 9 ��� ; Secti�n 3
� � _ . -�. .� _ _ _-- - - - � az _ _ _ _ x-
N a � x — � � � -
�� X x X X - � y`"y
a x
(� c 6 �
a � y� 67. as � �
E�f? a X x
�� ❑edicated Park Area: 1.3Q acres Townhouse Area: 1.fi0 acres �
M
District of
Langley
Larch Neighbourhood Park
� CORPORATION OF
�' THE DISTRICT OF
• � MAPLE RIDGE
- FINANCE DEPARTMENT
SCale: 1:1,511 � ��� ����'�`���-��(� DATE: Mar28, 2014 FILE: Larch_Park2.mxd BY: DT
�
__ i `
, f ;> _ — � ,`
' I o z '�
r i� ■ o '♦
HAMLET �
CENTRE ..
♦ ,
♦
, + ♦
♦
♦� �
i �
.
� i . , _ .
1 �
v
^
I •
I
♦
�
` � ♦
• _ _
�
.` — j
•` Subject Site % � ♦ �
� i�. � ` /
'� % � �
'`,`.` , �
� � �
- -- _ �� �� -
�
♦ ��
�� , •�
�'a�' �� � � ,. �` 1, i `� •` �
i � , '', `y �` � -
�, I� ♦ 1
APPENDIX E
ECO CLUSTERS
I LOW DENSITY URBAN
I I LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
� MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
- MED/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
- HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
� COMMERCIAL
� NEIGHBOURHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
, , civic
I CONSERVATION
TOURIST
— — SECONDARY TRAIL
� � • HORSE TRAIL
WATERCOURSE
Re-adopted by Bylaw No. 6425-2006 Nov. 14, 2006
OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN
PART VI
A - SI LVER VALLEY
FIGURE 3C RIVER VILLAGE HAMLET
BYLAW: 6067-2002 REVISED: Feb. 27, 2012
ADOPTED: OCT. 22, 2002 BYLAW REVISION: 68742011
DRAWN BY: T.M.
� CORPORATION OF �
' THE DISTRICT OF
, � MAPLE RIDGE
Planning Dept N
i:n000
�
�
District of Maple Ridge
T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 2013-107-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014
24009, 24005 and 24075 Fern Crescent
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the Committee of the Whole meeting of February 3, 2014, Council considered a first reading
report for the subject sites (Appendix A) requesting a rezoning to support a future subdivision of 44
single family lots. The developer was seeking an OCP amendment to increase the density by
eliminating the "Low-Medium Density" designation and re-designating it to "Medium Density
Residential". After discussions with the area residents, and taking into consideration Council's
feedback at the Committee of the Whole meeting, the developer decided to revise the proposal to
meet the density and designations of the Silver Valley Plan. The proposal has now been revised and
the applicant is seeking first reading for Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014.
The three properties under consideration in the Horse Hamlet of the Silver Valley Area Plan, have
three OCP designations (i.e. Low Density; Low-Medium Density; and Medium Density), in varying
proportions. The developer has revised the lot layout to meet the permitted density as per the
existing OCP designations for the site. The proposal now shows 34 single family lots to be rezoned
from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban- Medium Density Residential) and R-2 (Urban
Residential District). An OCP amendment, however, will be required to re-distribute and re-configure
the designations to achieve an efficient road pattern and lot layout (Appendix D).
To proceed further with this application additional information from the applicant is required as
outlined below.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act, requirement for consultation during the
development or amendment of an Official Community Plan, Council must consider whether
consultation is required with specifically:
i. The Board of the Regional District in which the area covered by the plan is located, in the
case of a Municipal Official Community Plan;
ii. The Board of any Regional District that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iii. The Council of any municipality that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iv. First Nations;
v. School District Boards, greater boards and improvements district boards; and
vi. The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies.
1102
and in that regard it is recommended that no additional consultation be required in respect of this
matter beyond the early posting of the proposed Official Community Plan amendments on the
District's website, together with an invitation to the public to comment, and;
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014, be given first reading with the following conditions:
That the applicant provide further information as described on schedules A and B of the
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999, along with the information required for a
Subdivision application.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: CIPE Homes Inc.
Owner: 0733497 BC LTD.
Legal Description: North 126 Feet parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772); Lot 15,
Section 22, Township 12, NWD Plan 9364; Parcel "A"
(Reference Plan 13772); Lot 15 Except North 126 feet;
Section 22, Township 12, NWD Plan 9364; and Lot 30,
Section 22, Township 12, NWD Plan 24120.
OCP:
Zoning:
Existing: Low Density Residential; Low-Medium Density Residential and
Medium Density Residential
Proposed: Low Density Residential; Low-Medium Density Residential and
Medium Density Residential
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential)
Proposed: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential), RS-1b (One Family
Urban- Medium Density Residential) and R-2 (Urban
Residential District)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use:
Zone:
South
East:
West:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Single Family Residential and vacant lots
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Neighbourhood Park and Medium-High Density Residential
Single Family Residential and Fern Crescent
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Low Density Residential, Low-Medium Density Residential
and Estate Suburban Residential
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Low Density Residential; Low-Medium Density Residential and
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential and Fern Crescent/240th Street
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Low Density Residential, Low-Medium Density Residential
and Estate Suburban Residential
-2-
Existing Use of Properties:
Proposed Use of Property:
Consolidated Site Area:
Access:
Servicing requirement:
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
2.34 Hectares (5.78 acres)
Fern Crescent/240t" Street
Urban Standard
b) Site and Project Characteristics:
The three properties (Appendix A), in the Horse Hamlet of the Silver Valley Area Plan, are located
south of 128th Avenue and east of Fern Crescent, within the 200 metres (2 minute walking) radius of
the Horse Hamlet centre. The topography around the subject sites is fairly flat with gradual slope
down from the north-east to the south-west corner. The three properties will need to be consolidated
and subdivided.
The original proposal that Council considered on February 03, 2014, with 44 lots was seeking an
OCP amendment and did not meet the densities permitted in the Silver Valley Area Plan. This
proposal has been revised to comply with the permitted densities and now shows a total of 34 single
family lots as depicted in the preliminary subdivision sketch attached to this report (Appendix D). Of
the proposed 34 lots, 14 of them are proposed to be rezoned to R-2 (Urban Residential District); 17
of them are proposed to be rezoned to RS-1b (One Family Urban- Medium Density Residential) and 3
of them are proposed to be rezoned to RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) as shown in Appendix D
attached to this report. Access to the proposed subdivision is from Fern Crescent via a new 18.0
metre wide road right-of-way that can accommodate sidewalk and parking on both sides. Except for
the three lots facing the southern dip of Fern Crescent, all the proposed lots will face a new looping
municipal road right-of-way built and serviced to urban standards. A narrower 15.0 metre wide road-
right-of-way will also be built south of the "Neighbourhood Park" along the northern boundary of the
subject site. The proposed road pattern could be replicated on the east of subject sites when they
develop in the future. The resulting road pattern follows the Silver Valley road plan and provides
efficient access to surrounding lands.
The properties under consideration are in the Fraser Sewer Area. Fern Crescent is identified as an
arterial standard road and 128t" Avenue has been identified as a collector standard road. All the
standard off-site road and servicing upgrades abutting the development site will be required as a
condition of final reading.
On the north of subject sites are two parcels designated "Neighbourhood Park". The eastern parcel
(0.405 hectares or 1 acre) is owned by the District. The purchase of the western parcel (24050
128th Avenue) was recently completed by the District. The actual building of this park may take time
but the future residents of the proposed subdivision will be able to participate in the public
consultation process conducted by the Parks Department and benefit from this neighbourhood park.
The subject sites are not located in or near a known archeological resource according to Provincial or
local records. At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance
with the Official Community Plan and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and
comments will need to be made once full application packages have been received. A more detailed
analysis and a further report will be required prior to Second Reading. Such assessment may impact
proposed lot boundaries and yields, Official Community Plan designations and Bylaw particulars, and
may require application for further development permits.
-3-
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan - Silver Valley Area Plan:
Within the Silver Valley area, the Horse Hamlet, located in the east sector, is anticipated to contain a
total of 240 units in a tightly compacted, neighbourhood scaled residential area. In October 2013,
Council gave third reading to a development proposal on Mill Street (north of subject sites) for 16
single family lots to be rezoned from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential) to R-2 (Urban Residential District). Since the adoption of the Silver Valley
Area Plan, this proposal is the second in the Horse Hamlet area and will add up to a total of 50 units
in the Horse Hamlet area, after final approval of this application.
The development proposal is subject to Silver Valley Area Plan policies and densities permitted
within the Horse Hamlet. It is important to note that within Silver Valley Area, the Horse Hamlet has
the lowest relative densities and the subject sites are not impacted by any watercourses or steep
slopes.
The three properties (Appendix A), in the Horse Hamlet of the Silver Valley Area Plan, have varying
proportions of three OCP designations, i.e. Low Density Residential; Low-Medium Density Residential;
and Medium Density Residential, as shown in Appendix B and the table below:
Address OCP designation Proportion
1 24005 Fern Crescent Low Density Residential 0%
Low-Medium Density Residential 92%
Medium Density Residential 8%
2 24009 Fern Crescent Low Density Residential 19%
Low-Medium Density Residential 76%
Medium Density Residential 5%
3 24075 Fern Crescent Low Density Residential 8%
Low-Medium Density Residential 60%
Medium Density Residential 32%
Policy 5.3.9 specifies maximum densities in terms of units per net hectare permitted in the above
mentioned designations, as stated below:
(a) Medium to medium-low densities, ranging from 15 to 40 units per hectare, will be located
adjacent to schools, commercial uses and civic uses.
(b) Low densities, ranging from 8 to 18 units per hectare, are located at the fringes of the 5
minute walking distance from the centre.
The subject sites are located within the 200 metre (2 minute walking) radius of the Horse Hamlet
centre. Based on the location of the subject sites and the policies above, the densities are required
to step down from medium to low between 128th Avenue and Fern Crescent (north to south).
The developer is proposing a total of 34 single family residential lots; 14 of which are proposed to be
rezoned to R-2 (Urban Residential District); 17 of which are proposed to be rezoned to RS-1b (One
Family Urban- Medium Density Residential) and 3 of which are proposed to be rezoned to RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential), facing Fern Crescent to continue with the existing pattern along Fern
Crescent (Appendix D). The resulting total lot yield of 34 lots is in compliance with the densities
'�
permitted in the existing designations of the Silver Valley Plan for the subject sites. The proposed RS-
1 zone correlates with the "Low Density Residential" designation; the proposed RS-1b zone
correlates with the "Low-Medium Density Residential" designation and the proposed R-2 zone
correlates with the "Medium Density Residential" designation of the Silver Valley Area Plan. However,
some designations are being adjusted to achieve an efficient road pattern. Some designated
proportions will need to be revised requiring an OCP amendment. Appendix B attached to this report
shows the current and the proposed OCP maps for the subject sites. This will be discussed in greater
detail in the second reading report.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject properties (Appendix A) from RS-3 (One
Family Rural Residential), and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban- Medium Density Residential) and R-2 (Urban Residential
District).
Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zones will require a Development Variance
Permit application. There are no known variances identified at this stage. This will be assessed prior
to proceeding with second reading.
Development Information Meetin�:
A Development Information Meeting will be required for this application. Prior to Second Reading the
applicant is required to host a Development Information Meeting in accordance with Council Policy
6.20.
d) Interdepartmentallmplications:
In order to advance the current application, after First Reading, comments and input, will be sought
from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below:
a) Engineering Department;
b) Operations Department;
c) Building Department;
d) Fire Department;
e) Parks Department;
f) School District.
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 formally to the Engineering Department for comments at
this time; therefore, an evaluation of servicing requirements has not been undertaken. A preliminary
discussion with Engineering regarding the proposed road layout and road right-of-way standards
within the proposed subdivision confirms that the proposed layout is supportable. It was confirmed
that a 18.0 metre road right-of-way (Local Residential 2 road standard in the Silver Valley Area Plan)
will accommodate two travel lanes (8.0 metre each), street trees, street lights, sidewalk and parking
on both sides, while the 15.0 metre road right-of-way along the northern edge of the subject site
(south of the future neighbourhood park) will be adequate to accommodate sidewalk and parking on
one side.
-5-
Road standard for Fern Crescent:
Council and staff have received some correspondence expressing concerns raised by the residents
of this neighbourhood regarding the road standards for Fern Crescent. Currently the section of Fern
Crescent fronting the proposed subdivision is less than the standard Urban Collector 20.0 metre
road right-of-way; however the existing carriageway is constructed to a service level that provides the
required two travel lanes. Currently, pedestrians and equestrians use the gravel shoulder along this
leg of Fern Crescent. Any future development applications will be required to provide the additional
road dedication and construct the urban standard services (including parking and improved
pedestrian connectivity through sidewalks) to the applicable Silver Valley Local Collector road
standards (i.e. a 20.0 metre road right-of-way with two travel lanes of 8.0 metre each, shallow
grassed drainage swale on each side of the road, limited street lighting and parking on one side). A
detailed evaluation of road standards and servicing upgrades for this application will take place
between first and second reading.
e) Early and Ongoing Consultation:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act for consultation during an Official Community
Plan amendment, it is recommended that no additional consultation is required beyond the early
posting of the proposed OCP amendments on the District's website, together with an invitation to the
public to comment.
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. An Official Community Plan Application (Schedule A);
2. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule B);
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 developer has revised their initial proposal and the resulting lot layout (Appendix D) meets the
densities for the existing designations of the subject sites, identified in the Silver Valley Area Plan.
However, an OCP amendment will still be required to re-distribute and re-configure the existing OCP
designations to achieve an efficient road pattern and lot layout. The Engineering Department is in
support of the proposed road pattern and standard. Details of the OCP amendment will be discussed
�
in the second reading report. It is, therefore, recommended that Council grant first reading to Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014 (Appendix C), subject to conditions outlined in this report.
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 District of Maple Ridge's Approving Officer.
"Original signed by Rasika Acharya"
Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B-Arch, M-Tech, UD, LEEDO AP, MCIP, RPP
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 Paul Gill" for
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- Existing and Proposed land use designation maps
Appendix C- Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014
Appendix D- Proposed preliminary subdivision sketch
-7-
N
District of
Langley
� 24005/09/75 FERN CRESCENT
0
.�
�
�
o �t CORPORATION OF
�� THE DISTRICT OF
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Scale: 1:2,500 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Nov 8, 2013 FILE: 2013-107-RZ BY: PC
M
N
District of
Langley
� 24005/09/75 FERN CRESCENT
0
.�
�
�
o �t CORPORATION OF
� � THE DISTRICT OF
�
° • � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SCale: 1:2,500 � ��� ����'�`���-��(� DATE: Mar4, 2014 FILE: ProposedOCP2.mxd BY: DT
APPENDIX C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7053-2014
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2
3
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014."
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
North 126 Feet Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772) Section 22 Township 12 New
Westminster District Plan 9364;
Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772) Lot 15 Except: North 126 Feet, Section 22
Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 9364
Lot 30 Section 22 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 24120
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1606 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban-Medium Density Residential), and R-2 (Urban
Residential District).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the
READ a second time the
PUBLIC HEARING held the
READ a third time the
ADOPTED, the
day of
day of
day of
day of
day of
,20
,20
,20
, 20
, 20
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 7053-2014
Map No. 1606
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
To: � RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
� RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) � R-2 (Urban Residential District)
N
SCALE 1:2,500
� � ��� l �
55i+'f� r � � i �`✓� 1
!
r.....��� � - _ � —. � � � � � �. —�
N
�
?7� ,� �. � � �.. 2�
.�Sfb �
�
APPENDIX D ��� �
---- -- - _- - .-� _
Q
T � — " � � }P•u
(P 714�� � � 9 lo II �
Z -
I a'a
I �� I 1 I I ➢
1
1
�3� - ' - - - -
� _ — Z�� 2'� 1
� � i
� 5�, � � ` I � I � � � li
�,� � �
` G� '� l3 � f4 J [S I� � �1
I ����� �� I {
— � � � il.m
�� �
.� � � , �
� R� � _> �. _
��� Z� -- _ -i
e� 2� Z� 2j �� � •o
; ��, � �
' I, , , �
, ,
� i
' _ {
i
_ __ — �
{
�s� � �$ , ��� �
, � ��a�� ,
1 � �
�� �� ��� ��� .
j -
�
�
�
�
District of Maple Ridge
T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 2013-016-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First and Second Reading
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7069-2014
Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6978-2013
20178 Chatwin Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On March 19, 2013, Council granted first reading to the Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6978-2013. The
proposal is to rezone the subject property (Appendix A) from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential
zone) and RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential zone) to RS-1b (One Family Urban Residential-
Medium Density zone) to permit a future subdivision of approximately 13 single family lots with lot
sizes not less than 557 m2 each.
The proposed RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) zoning aligns with the Official
Community Plan designation, however an OCP amendment is required as described below.
The subject site (Appendix A) is currently designated "Agricultural", "Urban Residential" and "Park in
the ALR" on the Schedule B of the Official Community Plan. Official Community Plan amendments to
Schedules B and C are required for the following reasons:
1. To include the subject site (whole site) within the Urban Area Boundary (Schedule B);
2. To change the designation of land to the east of extended 201 Street from "Agricultural"
to "Urban Residential" and "Conservation"(Schedule B);
3. To amend and re-designate the portion of the land west of extended 201St Street from "Park
in the ALR" to "Neighbourhood Park" (Schedule B); and
4. To amend Schedule C to designate conservation lands around the Creek.
The proposal also involves the acquisition of the "Neighbourhood Park" lands by the District. This is
anticipated to be finalized prior to final reading of the above stated bylaws.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That in accordance with Section 879 of the Local Government Act opportunity for early and on-
going consultation has been provided by way of posting Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw
No. 7069-2014 on the municipal website and requiring that the applicant host a Development
1103
Information Meeting, and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any further consultation
opportunities, except by way of holding a Public Hearing on the bylaw;
1. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7069-2014 be considered in
conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
2. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.7069-
2014 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
3. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7069-2014 as identified in
Appendix B, be given first and second readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
4. That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6978-2013 as attached to the staff report dated
March 18, 2013, be amended as identified in Appendix C attached to this report, be given
second reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and
5. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading.
i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure;
ii. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt
of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
iii. Amendment to Official Community Plan Schedule "B" and "C";
iv. Park dedication for conservation as required;
v. 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;
vi. Registration of a Statutory Right-of-Way plan and agreement at the Land Title Office
for the widening of the existing sanitary trunk sewer statutory right-of-way (NWP
62664);
vii. Removal of the existing buildings;
viii. An Engineer's certification that adequate water quantity for domestic and fire
protection purposes can be provided;
ix. 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; and
x. Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management
Act, the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s).
-2-
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description:
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning:
Nick & John Faber, Jent Construction Ltd.
Jacqueline T Amato and Janis M Foerster
Lot: 2, D.L.: 263, Plan: NWP13328; Group 1, Except Plan
16202, EXC PCL A EP14836 & PCL A PL BCP24879;
Agricultural, Urban Residential, Parks in the ALR
Urban Residential, Neighbourhood Park, Conservation
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), 66% and
RS-1(One Family Urban Residential), 34%.
Proposed: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and
RS-1b (One Family Urban Residential -Medium Density)
Surrounding Uses:
North
South
East:
West:
Use: Single Family Residential (active rezoning proposal 2013-039-
RZ for single family residential use and conservation)
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Agricultural (in the ALR)
Use: Single Family Residential, Park in the ALR and 201St Street
Zone: RS-1b (One Family Urban Residential -Medium Density)
Designation: Park and Urban Residential
Use: Single Family Residential and 202nd Street
Zone: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), 46% and RS-1(One Family
Urban Residential), 54%.
Designation: Urban Residential, Park in ALR and Agricultural
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing requirement:
Companion Applications
Single Family Residential accessed from Chatwin Avenue
Single Family Residential; Municipal Neighbourhood Park and
Conservation
2.648 Hectares (6.54 acres)
new north-south 2015t extension and new cul-de-sac (123A
Avenue) for the proposed new lots (1-13) and Chatwin
Avenue for the existing single family house (lot 14)
Full Urban Standard
2013-016-SD; 2013-016-DVP; 2013-016-SP and
2013-016-W PD P
-3-
b) Site Characteristics:
The subject site (Appendix A) is located in the western Maple Ridge area, close to the Pitt Meadows
boundary. The development proposal is within 50 metres from the Katzie Slough and a minor
tributary, on the north and east (Appendix F). This triggers a Watercourse Protection Development
Permit application, the purpose of which is for the preservation, protection, restoration and
enhancement of watercourse and riparian areas. A 15.0 metre environmental dedication, on both
sides of the creek will be required, resulting in approximately one acre (4075 m2) area of land being
dedicated back to the District for conservation purpose.
There is an existing sewer right-of-way in the north-south direction through the subject site, which
runs along the back yards of the existing single family neighbourhoods on the north. Originally this
right-of-way ran through the undeveloped agricultural land and was adequate at the time but the
proposed single family urban residential use will require this right-of-way to be widened by one metre
on either side. The preliminary subdivision plan showing 16 lots had to be revised after comments
were received from the Engineering Department. The proposed revised subdivision sketch now
shows the new north-south 2015t Street extension aligned with the existing sanitary trunk sewer
statutory right-of-way (NWP 62664), giving 13 single family lots zoned RS-1b (One Family Urban
Residential -Medium Density). The portion west of the new north-south 201St Street extension will
need to be acquired by the District for a municipal park (Appendix E). This will be finalized prior to
final reading of the bylaws.
The subject property is within the Fraser River floodplain. The Provincial mapping shows the flood
construction level (FCL) for the subject site at 5.9 (without the 0.6m free-board). A Section 219
Flood Plain Restrictive Covenant will be required as a conditon of final approval of the proposed
subdivision, to ensure that all the habitable spaces for all the proposed 13 lots are above the
estalished FCL. Based on the Geotechnical Report recommendation, structural fill must be placed
and compacted in advance of the building construction. This will allow all settlement to occur prior to
building construction.The developer is seeking a"Soil Deposit Permit" to place structural fill on
proposed lots 1-13 to achieve the required FCL for the footprints of the future single family houses.
As a condition of the Soil Deposit Permit and prior to any site alterations, an archaeological permit;
finalizing an ersosion sediment control plan and the required refundable security must be finalized.
The subject site (Appendix A) is also flagged as an archaeological site, so the developer was required
to submit an "Archaecological Impact Asessment" Report. An Archaeological Permit had to be
acquired from the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource operations prior to submitting a
Soil Deposit Permit application. The role of the Archaeology branch is not to prohibit or impede land
use and development, but rather to assist the Provincial Government and private sector in making
decisions that will ensure effective management of archaeological resources as well as optimal land
use. Their procedures section mentions that in cases where damage is unlikely, the referral agency
or proponent will normally be advised that the Archaeology branch does not object to the
development proceeding as proposed. It is rare that the Ministry will prohibit a development
because of the presence of an archaeological site, however, some modifications to development
plans may be recommended. If a site is significant enough that its preservation is considered more
important than a proposed development, the Ministry will work with the property owner to find a
reasonable compromise, and make sure any financial impact is kept to a minimum. The developer
'�
has acquired a"Site Alteration Permit" from the Ministry (Permit No. 2014-0020) dated January 29,
2014 and valid until March 31, 2017. The Katzie First Nations have been notified of this application
and have had discussions with the developer.
c) Proposed land use, road standards and subdivision:
With respect to the proposed subdivision plan (Appendix E), the new north-south 2015t Street
extension is proposed to be a local road (two travel lanes of 8.6 metre wide pavement, with sidewalk
on both sides and parking on one side) within an 18 metre road right-of-way. This matches the
existing road to the south, but given that the east side of the road will be adjacent to a
neighbourhood municipal park, the Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw requires a 20
metre collector standard road-right-of-way. The applicant is seeking a variance by proposing an 18.0
metre road right-of-way which is supported by the Planning, Engineering and Parks Departments. A
Variance Permit application has been received and this will be discussed in a future Council report.
As shown in Appendix E, the proposed 13 lots will be accessed via the 18.0 metre wide new north-
south 2015t Street extension branching into a new cul-de-sac (123A Avenue) within a 15.0 metre
road right-of-way. Proposed lots 6-13 will have an environmental buffer from the lands to the north
(Appendix E and F). The proposed lot sizes for lots 1-13 vary in size from 557 m2 to 1524 m2. Some
lot width variances are anticipated to accommodate the wedge shaped lots within the cul-de-sac
area. Proposed lot 14 facing Chatwin Avenue is approximately 1700 m2 in size and hosts the
existing single family house that is anticipated to be retained.
A preliminary Geotechnical Assessment Report by "Golder Associates Ltd." dated July 30, 2013 and
a revised version dated March 10, 2014 confirms that the land is safe for the proposed use,
provided recommendations for the fill and foundations are followed. A Section 219 Restrictive
Covenant with a consolidated Geotechnical Report will be registered on title as a condition of final
reading of rezoning.
d) Planning Analysis:
Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy:
The subject site (Appendix A) was removed from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) in 2003.
During the Regional Growth Strategy review, the property was designated "General Urban" and
placed within the Region's Urban Containment Boundary. The parcel is also within the Greater
Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District's Fraser Sewer Area so it can be serviced with municipal
sanitary sewer. No Regional approvals are required for this development.
Official Community Plan:
The subject site (Appendix A) currently has multiple designations of "Agricultural" (59%), "Park in the
ALR" (39%) and "Urban Residential" (2%).
The following Official Community Plan amendments are required:
-5-
1. To include the subject site (whole site) within the Urban Area Boundary (Schedule B);
2. To change the designation of land to the east of extended 201 Street from "Agricultural"
to "Urban Residential" and "Conservation"(Schedule B);
3. To amend and re-designate the portion of the land west of extended 2015t Street from "Park
in the ALR" to "Neighbourhood Park" (Schedule B); and
4. To amend Schedule C to designate conservation lands around the Creek.
Item 1 above will align "Schedule B" of the Official Community Plan with the Regional land use
designations identified in the Regional Context Statement.
Item 2 above will make the designation consistent with what exists in the neighbourhood. The
proposed RS-1b (One Family Urban Residential-Medium Density) zone aligns well with this
designation and is consistent with the predominant zone within this neighbourhood.
Item 3 above will reflect that the site has been excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).
The western part of the property (10,217 m2) designated "Park in the ALR" will be slightly reduced in
size to 8,880 m2 and remain a municipal park as a continuation of "Boundary Park" which exists on
the west of 201St Street, south of the subject site. This portion of the site needs to be re-designated
to "Neighbourhood Park" as it has already been excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).
The proposed 2015t extension is aligned to the existing sanitary trunk sewer statutory right-of-way
(NWP 62664) as explained above. The Golden Ears Bridge right-of-way exists on the western
boundary of the subject property. Due to the existing site constraints outlined above, it is not
possible to meet the current OCP proportion of the "park" designation. The proposed
"Neighbourhood Park" designation will be slightly lesser than existing (Appendix D). The intention
here is not to reduce the designated park area. The developer has done his best to meet the
designation, under the circumstances. The existing "Boundary Park" on the south along with the
proposed "Neighbourhood Park" through this application will be adequately large to serve the
existing and future residents of this neighbourhood. This is supported by the Parks Department.
Items 2 and 4 above are amendments to Schedules B and C of the Official Community Plan to re-
designate lands for Conservation around Katzie Slough and the tributary and re-designate portions
to be protected through dedication. A 15.0 metre environmental dedication is recommended on
both sides of the creek. The conservation boundary will be adjusted based on an Environmental
Assessment Report and the District's assessment of the site. Approximately one acre of the property
will be dedicated as "Conservation" around the Katzie Slough and the tributary.
Policy 6-12(b) of the Official Community Plan states:
"Maple Ridge will protect the productivity of its agricultural land 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".
Given that the lands to the north; a) have been excluded from the ALR; b) are within the Region's
Urban Containment Boundary and designated "General Urban" in the Metro Vancouver Regional
Growth Strategy; c) are not currently in agricultural production, and d) have an active single family
�
residential use development application (2013-039-RZ); this requirement is recommended to be
waived. Council granted first reading to the rezoning application 2013-039-RZ for the property on
the north (20208 Mclvor Avenue) in September 2013. It is also noted that a 15.0 metres
conservation dedication is proposed along the northern boundary (Appendix E) and the same will be
expected of the development application 2013-039-RZ along the southern edge.
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985:
The RS-1b (One Family Urban Residential - Medium Density) zone requires a minimum lot area of
557 m2; a minimum lot width of 15 metres and a minimum lot depth of 27 metres. The proposed
13 single family lots are greater than 557 m2 and comply with the minimum depth required for each
lot. It is anticipated that some lots may seek lot width variances as outlined below.
Subdivision and Development Services Bylaw No. 4800-1993:
Any urban residential single family development is required to comply with the Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw to provide the municipal servicing and road standards. The developer
is seeking a road width variance as described below.
Proposed Variances:
The developer is requesting the following variances to the Subdivision and Development Servicing
Bylaw and the Zoning Bylaw (RS-1b zone) in support of the proposed subdivision:
• 201 Street width:
Particular to the location of this site, the Subdivision Servicing and Development Servicing Bylaw
requires a collector road standard of a 20 metre road-right-of-way for the north-south extension of
2015t Street (fronting on to the neighbourhood park). As explained earlier in this report, the proposed
width of 201St Street extension is 18.0 metres, so a variance of 2.0 metres is being sought. The
Engineering, Parks and Planning departments are in support of this variance as all the required
urban services can be accommodated within the proposed 18.0 metre road right-of-way.
• Lot width:
It is anticipated that lot width variances may be required for a few lots to accommodate the wedge
shaped lots around the proposed new cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac arrangement pinches the front of
some of the lots making the widths smaller than the minimum required. These lots meet the area
and depth required by the zone. The lot width variances are minor in nature and this practice is
consistent with other applications serviced by a cul-de-sac. The above stated variances will be
discussed in detail through a future Council report.
-7-
Development Permits:
The development proposal is within 50 metres from the Katzie Slough and a minor tributary, on the
north and east (Appendix F). Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse
Protection Development Permit application is required for the subject site to ensure the
preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourse and riparian areas around
the tributary of the Katzie Slough and the Creek. This application has been received and is being
processed. A 15.0 metres environmental dedication, on both sides of the creek will be required,
resulting in approximately one acre (4075 m2) area of land being dedicated back to the District for
conservation purpose.
A three-tier storm water management system designed in accordance with the District's
Watercourse Protection Bylaw 6410-2006 and incorporating the following three components, is
required.
i. Rainfall Capture (Source Control), for Tier A events (the small rainfall events that
are less than half the size of a mean annual rainfall (MAR), 90% of all rainfall
events are Tier A events);
ii. Runoff Control (Detention) for Tier B events (the large rainfall events that are
greater than half the size of a MAR. but smaller than a MAR, about 10% of all
rainfall events are Tier B events); and
iii. Flood Risk Management (contain and convey), for Tier C events (the extreme
rainfall events exceeding a MAR, a Tier C event may or may not occur in any given
year)
A Storm Water Management Plan is being reviewed for the proposed subdivision and will be required
to be finalized prior to the final subdivision approval.
Development Information Meeting:
On January 26, 2013 the developer and his team of consultants held the "Development Information
Meeting" at the Maple Ridge Christian Reformed Church at 20245 Dewdney Trunk Road from 7:00
to 8:00 p.m. As per Council Policy 6.20, invitations were mailed to qualifying property owners,
advertisements were placed in the local paper and a notice was attached to the development sign
on site. All the proposed drawings were displayed for all interested residents. This meeting was
attended by approximately 25 people who were supportive of the proposed land use and mainly had
the following concerns summarized below:
• Some expressed concerns about the amount of fill placed on the subject site and the
finished grades of the future houses in comparison to the existing single family houses on
the north and south;
• Some had questions on the number of trees being cut and the number of new trees that
would be added to the development;
• Some had questions about the road layout, traffic congestion during pre-loading and
construction and about any speed calming on 201St Street;
• Some had questions about the existing retaining walls on the southern property boundary
and if they will be repaired, removed or maintained;
�
• Some had questions regarding the existing right-of-way along the north side of the house to
be retained, facing Chatwin Avenue;
• Some had questions regarding the timing of the building of the "Neigbourhood Park" by the
District;
• Some had questions regarding the type of houses that may be built and the fencing
treatment along the southern boundary of the subject site; and
• Some had questions around the timing of the proposed subdivision approval and phasing.
e) Environmentallmplications:
Approximately one acre (15.29%) of the land will be dedicated as park for conservation purposes. A
Watercourse Protection Development Permit is being processed in support of this proposal which
will include enhancement, restoration and re-vegetation work within the setback areas. An
"Enhancement and Protection Agreement" outlining refundable securities to complete the works
and maintenance for 5 years including a Storm Water Management Restrictive Covenant will be
required prior to approval of the Watercourse Protection Development Permit.
f) Interdepartmentallmplications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and confirms that all the deficient off-site
services, including the required road dedication, are being provided through the Subdivision
Servicing Agreement. The proposed subdivision layout was revised to align the north-south 201St
Street extension with the existing sanitary trunk sewer statutory right-of-way (NWP 62664). The
Engineering Department has no concerns with the proposed land use and subdivision.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks & Leisure Services Department have reviewed the proposed subdivision plan and are in
support of the neighbourhood park location. The District will need to acquire the portion designated
as "Neighbourhood Park" (8,880 m2). This is anticipated to be finalized prior to final reading on the
bylaws. Any new street trees along the north-south 201St Street extension and the new cul-de-sac
(123A Avenue) will be added to the Street Tree inventory. This will be finalized prior to the final
subdivision approval.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and comments have been provided to the applicant.
The applicant has ensured that all these will be addressed through the Building Permit drawings.
The Fire Department has no concerns with the proposed land use and subdivision.
�
Building Department:
The Building Department has reviewed the proposal and comments have been provided to the
applicant. The applicant has ensured that all these will be addressed prior to final approval of the
proposed subdivision.
The suject property is within the Fraser River floodplain area. The Provincial mapping shows the
flood construction level (FCL) for the subject site at 5.9 metres (without the 0.6m free-board).
Building Department is in support of the established FCL. The existing adjacent single family houses
in the neighbourhood are at a lower FCL, (i.e. 5.35 metres). A Section 219 Flood Plain Restrictive
Covenant will be required as a conditon of final approval of the proposed subdivision, to ensure that
all the habitable spaces of each single family house on the proposed 13 lots is above the estalished
FCL for the site.
g) School District Comments:
A referral was sent to the School District 42 office. No comments were received.
h) Intergovernmentallssues:
Local Government Act:
An amendment to the Official Community Plan requires the local government to consult with any
affected parties and to adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section
882 of the Local Government Act. The amendment required for this application (housing-keeping
amendment to the Urban Area Boundary and Park designations; and Conservation boundary
adjustments); is considered to be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional
consultation beyond existing procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional
District, the Council of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the
Federal and Provincial Governments.
The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste
Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and is determined to have no impact.
i) Citizen/Customer Implications:
A Development Information Meeting was conducted on January 26, 2013 where the neighbours had
an opportunity to express their concerns. This along with a future Public Hearing is considered
adequate opportunities for citizens to voice their concerns regarding the proposed development.
CONCLUSION:
The subject site (Appendix A) was excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) in 2003. The
Regional Growth Strategy designates the property as "General Urban" and the subject site is within
the Region's Urban Containment Boundary. The parcel is also within the Greater Vancouver
Sewerage and Drainage District's Fraser Sewer Area so it can be serviced with the municipal
-10-
sanitary sewer. The proposed amendments to Schedule B of the Official Community Plan will reflect
that the site has been excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) and that it is within the
Region's Urban Containment Boundary. The amendment will also ensure it is included in the Urban
Area Boundary (UAB) on Schedule B of the Official Community Plan. The western part of the property
designated "Park in the ALR" will be amended and re-designated as "Neigbourhood Park" and
acquired by the District for the extension of the existing "Boundary Park" on the south. The
developer has aligned the 201St Street extension with the existing sewer right-of-way. This
application will trigger the acquisition of additional parkland (extension of the existing "Boundary
Park") which will prove to be a significant asset for this neighbourhood.
The development proposal fits well with the existing neighbourhoods on the south, west and the
active proposed development (2013-039-RZ) on the north. An environmental dedication and
enhancement of a tributary to the Katzie Slough will add some conservation land to the District's
i nventory.
Official Community Plan amendments are required as described in this report and justification has
been provided to support the Official Community Plan amendments. Some minor variances as
described in this report will be required in support of the proposed subdivision. These variances are
supported by the Engineering, Parks and Planning Departments, and will be discussed in detail in a
future Council report. It is, therefore, recommended that Council grant first and second reading to
the OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7069-2014 (Appendix B) and second reading to the revised Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6978-2013 as amended (Appendix C), and that application 2013-016-RZ be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
"Original signed by Rasika Acharya"
Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B-Arch, M-Tech, UDC, LEEDO AP, MCIP, RPP
Planner
"Original signed by Jim Charlebois" for
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.I. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7069-2014
Appendix C- Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6978-2013
Appendix D- Proposed Neighbourhood Park area overlaid on the OCP map
Appendix E- Proposed Subdivision Plan
Appendix F- Environmental setback map
-11-
APPENDIX A
District of
Langley
�
! � 20178 CHATWIN AVENUE
i ��
;�
i�
'; o � CORPORATION OF
��� �- THE DISTRICT OF
�o
i - � MAPLE RIDGE
- PLANNING DEPARTMENT
� Scale: 1:2,000 � `� ��, __`" —�--L� '_�`--'° �(� DATE: Feb 21, 2013 FILE: 2013-016-RZ BY: PC
APPENDIX B
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7069-2014
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 desirable to amend Schedules "B" &"C" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7033-2013.
2. Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 2, Except portions in: Plan 16202; Parcel "A" (Explanatory Plan 14836);
Parcel "A" (Plan BCP24879); Group 1 District Lot 263, Group 1 New Westminster District Plan
13328
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 868, a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended to include the land within the
Urban Area Boundary; and
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 869, a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by re-designating to "Urban Residential"
and "Neighbourhood Park" and "Conservation".
3. Schedule "C" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 2, Except portions in: Plan 16202; Parcel "A" (Explanatory Plan 14836);
Parcel "A" (Plan BCP24879); Group 1 District Lot 263, Group 1 New Westminster District Plan
13328
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 870, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding to "Conservation".
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the
READ A SECOND TIME the
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the
READ A THIRD TIME the
ADOPTED, the day of
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
day of
day of
day of
,20 .
, 2014.
, 2014.
, 20 .
, 20 .
CORPORATE OFFICER
I �lyA 'LQ 6 VJ 5472 ,` V i246i N
12451 F o
� 5 @c 21 � � gg �2Q s' tio�.5 0,��`' c�
p / s, ti � a 5 10
I i2aai aa23�s8 / 32 �2pss �2gs � i2ae� 9
� 4 22 � 2 i2aeo
—— -- — — R 00�55 4'9 �A2 46 _ McivoR,avE. LMP 4 518 �
—— N i23asi i2asgZ3 T— 30 �2g3g 724q2 47 2aaa 32 33 �---
� lo �2426 �2 4g 45 o i2as� F i2aao o F
� �U izazi 24 � I 2g�2429 42849 2a z �2aso � � 31 0 34 a 8
U �m 2 izai 25 o I 12419 1pq76 BCP 058744 ° 41 0 �2a2a � �2a2srea
m I i2�aii i2aoa �I 28 50 43aia a a 30 35
26 m � 272aos �2aos i2a2i �2a22
51 42aoa 86
� 29 36
EXISTING URB N ' � P21483 �24�� �Z4o2 2�
AREA BO ND RY ; � Rem. 1 ?$399 ,24 0' � 85
�/ PROPOSED URBAN 2� 3$ a
�
AREA BOUNDARY M�2389 12392 M
I � 26383 123 29 0
� P21 �
I 25
�I 12375 40 � 41 �
I N N
� I ' � O O
��� P13328 N
II
� Rem 2 N � N � N 2�
I � P 16960 876'
Rem E � 2
I I MP 36
� 1 �,o �0 2
� � B P2 168 �S �S�
s
/ ' — — EP 8409
f — —
I� f �26 15� �14 �3 °^ �2 � P8�0 9$� EP840�\ P64317 ti°���N
I� � l�� N A R A 'o '� N N �� al �`'a w`' \� �'�0\ Rem 1 N 1
I(V i".' N N Zp1g� �5. 6�i-��°'� ^ry�L ct�6+ \ oN �O�
�2 9
�� � BO�I N DAR T� 3A�E. ,o ,ZZBo °s ��Q 4
��m 2 0 6 20�ea 5 iz2�2
i' BE REMO E 22� � 2°"s '22'3 1226610 P430
0 0
� � �22 5���` 8�� 9 � 412269 r 11 � 92 93 \ 94
s
/� � s� v 3 `� 12 0�0 'S'
I � �2262 4 Q 7 � p 963 a 12265 N �22so P 430 3� Fo
� 'z2s8 3.� �$ 19m �20 2izzsi � ��a
LMP 26080 � � �� LMP 2639 013 N 14 m M� �
I LMP 44171 �22s4 2 N N N 1 �225� N N N ry N
A �225� �2250 � �� 2�Q� TELEPAVE.
� i22ai C �1'(� �°�
� 21izzsi g v -a LMC �`� F �`� o � � 25 0 o N ° �
ZO � Z� N N C O N N �ZZ33 N N N N N
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 7069-2014
Map No. 868
Purpose: To Amend Urban Area Boundary as Shown
Existing — — — — Remove � � Proposed
N
1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
Fro m:
• �
.�.�.�.
����
7069-2014
869
Agriculture and Park InThe ALR
Urban Residential
Conservation � Park
— — Urban Area Boundary
N
1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
7069-2014
870
Purpose: To Add as Conservation to Schedule C
— — Urban Area Boundary
N
1:2,500
APPENDIX C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. No. 6978-2013
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2
3
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6978-2013."
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 2, Except portions in: Plan 16202; Parcel "A" (Explanatory Plan 14836);
Parcel "A" (Plan BCP24879); Group 1 District Lot 263, Group 1 New Westminster District
Plan 13328
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1585, a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium
Density) Residential).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 19th day of March, A.D. 2013.
READ a second time the
PUBLIC HEARING held the
READ a third time the
day of
day of
day of
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this
RECONSIDEREDAND FINALLYADOPTED, the
, A.D. 2014.
, A. D. 20 .
, A.D. 20 .
day of , A.D. 20 .
day of
, A. D. 20 .
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6978-2013
Map No. 1585
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
To: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
— — Urban Area Boundary
N
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX D
. � � I i 1411 � '-•, - -
�� 12415 � �
1 n 1 4D8 �
2�zaa� �3
"�. '� Q� 2� 1 4�B o w ��421 12
0 0 5.� 1�72405 N w
N �L J �
z I Q cn 2� 411 12
� / ^TUB RI � �
� � DGE ��
,
� , _
� -- , -
� --
,
�
� � � � ��
124 " � �
�. AVENU '� � � — -- — ' � ZS
� E', r" S� N � ----- ,
�
:� , , , �,
, �
+�
, , � -----
, � �
c� , , , , , ----------
,. �----------- � � � em
, , �- �-�--- -- -- - -
� , , .., �
�� � � � � --��_ -- �� �� ,
. !�7
� . �--------- � �
, -- ---- - -,-}�- --- -- - ------
�
;
� ---
� � � - �____ - = �
089m '� � i � o � �
;
7 2 ._ � � o o � � y�
�. �_ � i �
� �-------- , � � � � — - �
J , i � — --
� � � -- � �
� � � — --_— —' � � � i� ��F
--------, 0o I
— �oe o, so.� 'r --�
�o ;�'� ,
_ ��
` �_-� jr-
�
,. o, �--- --- � - _-�----- --� , �
� ----
--- � � � �
-- � � � o � �
__ _
, s - -__ �
---- - �
-, r, - ; _
-- ; a 2� �'
- - ,
---
- -- �—
--- - N 12383 0
_ ° - - �,
------ ,
,
-� � � � — - — - � ' ��.,
N
ESA DEDICq710N �'--'
� s,o „� ,,, ..s ay � ��� - ,5 �� 75
� a�, �, > E: �a��
� ;o
g \��5� I 19 07
� 3 � z ssi s zm, z ��� am � � i
� �� � � � r
i' 8.0 e� 4�• 'I I I
��' $ , � �� �" CHATWIN�VE �
I ��. �i
'' w _ � 23a avENUE . �� �`�� � P 1696� � �
, � am= -
,�
'� `� n R,,g Rem E � �
��i � ry 1 2 3 g -� \
i 8 0,� s�sm se isz.mz -� \
� s m, ssam= e �, P 2
-------�----------------------- i —
� ° �`, P €3�1 9 ...�
� .3 1 fi
I� fi°� 7�� f 15 ��. 14 � 3�° ��� � 7 8
� ��..A � �' � n�, 'I SUB IVISIO �';LAN BOUf�
� c _� - �$,� � �'�-a��j ry�l,�
� MUNICIPAL �231 �
� PARK �'�� � 0 �
� ,�
, ; ,� -
; i o 6 �aa 5
�� ?���rQ �Q ���s ��z2�s
i f � . � r1 A
20178 CHATWIN AVE , REM 2, TOTAL AREA 3.051 Ha PL13328
P�
> Y R
12280
12272
�o P 430
� 77��i
PROPOSED S�BDIVISION P�AN
JAN 2014
�
M
�
�
0
a �
z> w z �
00 � �w
O � w
; I - _ J �
�
- N (n
� i �� -� T------------ ---- Q(n
� � -
,
� --
, i
� 'i
�
�
`----- , � � � � � � � �
---, DGE �� '
MARI
, � - —
� , 3 SUB ION
�
� p
�
�
,
DIVIS
� 124 _ , ,
,� „
_ AVENUE', I ; I �,,' --- ;
{ __``�— -- i ,- �____ __ �=_
, �� �---- --- ��-�--
� � -- ----- �';' �
� ��- - �
� � __
, -�
- �
;-ti---- ; -_�___" �� -----------
1089
--
� ,m 2 . ,
_ �
� o - _ � � _
o'------ — , _ + '
� � � t-�--�---_ � �
� h � � � _- � �
_ __ ;
--- — --- ____ �
— ----- � � �
o ,a,s —
� 305.3
ss $ ° i - _ -- e --- -
R
zs, m � ` "-` � �
. i � _ _
� � -SA ��DICA�ION � --- �---=
���� �� � �r� s� � ,.�, 3409m2 n,. ��`�. � -
� �' ��' � � ' �' a�� z,_��r � �,� .�5.
PARK �� � i 13 z ,�m �Y�
8880m2 � � �_ s, , m s y�� i
� �� i �
ii ii,8.� � °�.", '.,�'I �ii
�� �� j 8m=
�� � � 123A �AVENUE ;m, '� ��� �
� (, -
w
� �� �� � �'�R'�A —
� � = s�9 =:� ao z �� o = �ssm� �� �
..�� le. m m m _ �
p I I �� 4 5 � c�o
N �I �I . m' m�
� sse % ��
-------�----------------------- �
I
I
� Ils �
ST. TRUNK
23 q VENUE
20178 CHATWIN AVE , REM 2, TOTAL AREA 3.051 Ha PL13328
�
�
�
.,0 23.6
I �
' ',a �
am� N
�3.4o CHATWIN AVE
�iNnRiA�v Ai��n REcoNciuA�io��
� �A��s �oEo ro R�P��AN �Ea �A� ,o �> _ ass a4m�
� � ���>> REMo�Eo �oM a�PAa�A� AREA «, ,o R3, _��, ezmz
_M�N��PA�PaaK �aaaom�
�
APPENDIX E
�
,:soo
�
OPT��N 2
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION P�AN
FEB 17 2014
APPENDIX F
� , �� � f �� � �_. � � , . .__ _ —�
1�4�+. � '� / �� { � _
� ' - 97 dGU
��_ � } � 1 _ �� ���� �_ ru�ir,�r�:, ��� -LP
,� , .
i — — — — — _ =�i�- �� - '�`'-- ��-;`—s�'- _ —'-""-- �`f *- � _
./ �� 4
— — — � 1�4�. � I �r»���� ��� � T }� � � 1��5 � y �' �
ti
; _: ,� � i i- ` w � s � � *�r� ; �� ��� r ,� -
=S
� � ic$e" I ` . �� �' I �� � '�- �� � - � c� t�
�T �� i - a�� � - Y �,� � i�aaa }f .`��', �1 {y :34
� I� � � i�41p7•y �� �' �� ,� 1��� � � 12�fi�r.
�_i I L� Cn I � 5 c� � I #�-:
� I �41" � �I I �� �� 1��1 = � � - 4 -
�^ �
PCI_ 1 III 1_ � =a���d � ���Y ' - _ �3 � ,
-- - _ _ - � _, f ' � 42 � � ~
� — , r i . 3&
� � ��"_ ��. ����
� =-- �- � . ,�:
1+Vatercouses on north � �`� s ! ��3 � 3?
�• -} � 1���
wvest sideswith 15 m setback � ALR lands - ,;� Y'� x
. 3�
��� _ � a-, •=}s:. i��s�
`�' ��`..•"`''"`�;+�. � � ¢ �= , � ,
�-- w c� �fi r ��
�
� ��� � - cv _ I 1_asz
; �.{ ;"� � I I, ,�, �_ ' � �,��
�' �.1 G5� ' ' . �� - �� ��
' �, a � I� * . ;� �9� + � � _ �F � � �
�J r .
Floo�lv�lain area � � +, ° «� s�-r . �, - �
� , �,. � � � . � , :' 13 3� 8 � � �,, � ,
'�� . � l �`�"� �; �
.. � � .-�'�i� � � �� , �
, . _ _: � Rerr�� '~� .ti.4,�� 15 matra sat�ack j
. � I � � �`� � +� �
37C � I I . , t � - �� I i
��
�''+ I I ; - = _ } ' .
'�`�� - . �i i�� 4��}V-�S _ �'ri I'J
r _ � �
� J �.. . '. .
�i'Y'�4—,� �• k +`
'�- _"•' ' —
S , . � �.• .. � _f--�•- -- - - �+' '� l ..�ti. � � �� +
�1 � s..e� +"� :J �� �1 46 Jti �L i � .' 7�.�4 �• �� • C�.U��� I� ��}
�y � *� �
�r� � wtn I C _ � ,'� � �1 � � ,� �� r ��yl
cD [V 'l.:"� ...' ti= r � �'� 4 � �� �, � � ' �'x 4 �� � � �$:-�-.�
�'+� �� sx . �Y �� • i r+ri g-, 21 � 3` �� " ' x °�' � ; � �..
: � J� E�I�T11113tE� Of I1011- " .i,,r �'� x , � � �,
�� ��, axistentwatercourses �"�r4 � �.. _ ����; ` � ��` ���-T
, �� and wetlands on south �� � . ti 2�;�� . i � �}��p •
t� '� �+ � �{y rlf'J
i � � � �' �� �f ' �y+ { NJ �d F r f�
��. '
i� -j .�� 5 �g _ � � ,� � i�v � _. fifi � 9�
�� ' - � �� ��"�� •� _ � o ' � � �` ;� 1� ,x�
I �F . � . t � + Q� � . ��� �� � � 1 .., � �P'�
; �, � . .., � �rr�!"�'.
I_�f�w1P 260�0 _ �' 13 �.; TI7a C��r���rati��n ��f tha District ��f I.I a�l� Ri���a
'� � � -� �akes no guarantee regarding the accuracy
�; LhV9P ��1 1 -�� ��
� �.. ._�F, {, 1 - ��� . or present status of the information shovt+n on
''I; � � � � � tl7is map. E
I � 1 , ��' -. .
Ci af Pi _ _ � � ��� �$ � f1��hIICy
ra �� �,��� .
�
�cale: 12.000
c ��t���t � f
Langle�r
� �ite �ontext Nl�p
.�
�
�
� �,! ��RP�RATI�f� �F
� ��. THE �I�TF�I�T �F
� f�1APLE RID�E
�_A\11v �=�A�Th'=\T
CATE : F�b �6, �01� FILE : U ntitl�� BY: RS
�
�
District of Maple Ridge
T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
FILE N0: 2012-102-RZ
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
1104
3. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading:
Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and
receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
Road dedication as required;
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;
Registration of a Tree Protection/Steep Slope Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title
Office;
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;
Entering into a Restoration and Enhancement Agreement for the unconstructed
portion of the 256 Street allowance abutting the site;
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:
Owner:
Legal Description:
OCP:
Existing:
Zoning:
Paul Hayes
Walter and Karoline Heckmann
Lot 8, Section 13, Township 12, Plan 8336
Agricultural, Suburban Residential
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
-2-
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use: Single Family Residential in ALR
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Agricultural
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Agricultural
Use: Single Family Residential in ALR
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
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.
-3-
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 Meetin�:
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.
�
• 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) Environmentallmplications:
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) Agriculturallmpact:
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) Interdepartmentallmplications:
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.
-5-
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
�
APPENDIX A
District of
Langley
�
' � 25638 112 AVENUE
i ��
;�
i�
'; o �t CORPORATION OF
��� � THE DISTRICT OF
�o
i • � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
� Scale: 1:3,000 � `� ��, __`" —�--L� '_�`--'° �(� DATE: Feb 25, 2013 FILE: 2012-102-RZ BY: PC
APPENDIX B
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6965-2013
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2
3
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6965-2013."
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 8 Section 13 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 8336
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1579 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 12t" day of March, 2013.
READ a second time the 25t" day of March , 2014
PUBLIC HEARING held the
READ a third time the
day of
day of
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this
RECONSIDEREDAND FINALLYADOPTED, the
, 2014.
, 2014.
day of , 2014.
day of
, 2014.
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
Fro m:
To:
6965-2013
1579
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
N
SCALE 1:2,500
ENDIX C
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: DVP/013/10
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW
Development Variance Permit
22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Development Variance Permit application DVP/013/10 has been received in support of subdivision
application SD/013/10 for the above noted properties in Silver Valley to develop 75 single family
and street townhouse residential lots. The requested variances are:
1. to reduce the road right-of-way and carriageway widths to meet the Silver Valley road
standards for an Eco Clusters development;
2. to increase the maximum building height to 11.0 metres for the RS-1b (One Family Urban
(Medium Density) Residential), R-1 (Residential District), and R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) lots; and
3. to reduce the rear yard setback from 8 metres to 6 metres for the R-1 (Residential District)
zoned lots that back onto park land (green belt).
It is recommended that Development Variance Permit DVP/013/10 be approved.
Council considered rezoning application RZ/013/10 and granted first reading for Zone Amending
Bylaw No. 6725-2010 on March 23, 2010. Council granted first and second reading for Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724-2010 and second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No.
6725-2010 on November 27, 2012. This application was presented at Public Hearing on December
11, 2012, and Council granted third reading on December 11, 2012. Council granted a first
extension on December 10, 2013. Council will be considering final reading for rezoning application
RZ-013-10 at the next Council meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DVP/013/10 respecting property located
at 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description
Damax Consultants Ltd.
Insignia Homes Silvervalley 2 Ltd.
Lot: 76, Section: 32, Township: 12, Plan: BCP27885
Lot: 80, Section: 32, Township: 12, Plan: BCP27885
Lot: A, Section: 29, Township: 12, Plan: EPP27906
1105
OCP:
Zoning:
Existing: Eco Clusters and Conservation
Proposed: Eco Clusters, Conservation and Neighbourhood Park
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and CD-3-98
Proposed: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District),
RST (Street Townhouse Residential),
R-1(Residential District),
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), and
P-1 (Park and School)
Surrounding Uses
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Companion Applications:
Previous Applications:
b) Requested Variance:
Single Family Residential
CD-3-98 (Comprehensive Development)
Eco Clusters, Conservation
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Agricultural, ALR
Single Family Residential, Park
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RST (Street
Townhouse Residential), R-1 (Residential District), RS-
3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Eco Clusters, Conservation
Vacant, under application for Eco Clusters
development (2013-010-SD)
R-1 (Residential District), RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential)
Eco Clusters, Conservation
Vacant, previously Single Family Residential
Single-Family Residential, Street Townhouse
Residential, Park and Neighbourhood Park
10.55 hectares (26.1 acres)
136 Avenue at Nelson Peak Drive
Urban Standard for Eco Clusters development,
RZ/013/10, 2013-116-SD, DP/013/10, 2012-089-DP
RZ/070/06, SD/070/06, SD/013/10, 2011-085-SD
1. Subdivision and Development Services Bylaw No. 4800-1993:
a. Schedule "B", Highway Classification 3. (Minor Street, Urban Standard) and
Highway Classification 4. (Cul-de-sac, Urban Standard); and
-2-
b. Schedule "C", Section 3.5 Roads, SD-R1 Urban Local Street and SD-R8 Typical
Cul-de-sacs.
to reduce the road right-of-way requirement for Nelson Peak Drive (local road) from 18.0
metres and to vary Nelson Court (cul-de-sac) from 15.0 metres, and to reduce the
required road carriageway width from 8.6 metres for both road types.
On Nelson Peak Drive the applicant is proposing road right-of-way widths of 16.2 metres
and 16.0 metres; and to reduce the road carriageway width to 8.0 metres and 7.3 metres.
On Nelson Court the applicant is proposing road right-of-way widths of 14.5 metres and
13.0 metres; and to reduce the road carriageway width to 8.0 metres and 7.3 metres.
2. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Sections 601. C.(9)(b) and (11)(b), and
601C(F.)(1,) to vary the maximum building height requirement to 11.0 metres for the RS-
1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), R-1 (Residential District), and R-3
(Special Amenity Residential District) lots.
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Sections 601. C. (11)(c)(ii) to reduce
the rear yard setback from 8.0 metres to 6.0 metres for the R-1 (Residential District)
zoned lots that back onto park land (green belt).
c) Project Description:
The subject site is an Eco Clusters development of 75 lots located southwest of the Blaney Hamlet
within the Silver Valley Area Plan and is accessed from 136 Avenue. As per the Eco Clusters
guidelines, each lot fronts and backs onto green space and pockets of development are sited to
protect existing vegetation and provide view corridors. The access for the development is a long cul-
de-sac from 136 Avenue with a neighbourhood park located at the end on the high point of the site.
The proposed roads on the site are designed to meet the intent of the Silver Valley Road
Classifications for Eco Clusters developments. Emergency access roads will connect this
development with the similar Eco Clusters developments to the east and west. The right-of-way for
the emergency access road will follow a portion of the old driveway and it will also incorporate the
equestrian trail and sanitary sewer right-of-way.
The site is bounded by Cattell Brook on the east and south sides with ponds in the southeast corner,
and setbacks of 30 metres have been established from the top-of-bank of these features. Steep
slopes surround the developable portion of the site and include the area known as Nelson Peak on
the northwest corner of the site. The watercourse setback and slope areas will be dedicated as Park
and the lands to the south are within the Agricultural Land Reserve.
Running concurrently with this application are the Rezoning and Subdivision applications; an
Environmental Development Permit for watercourse and natural features protection; a Multi-Family
Residential Development Permit for the two RST (Street Townhouse Residential) four-plex buildings;
and an Intensive Residential Development Permit for the R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
zoned lots. A Restrictive Covenant for building design will be required for the two duplex-style street
townhouse buildings.
-3-
d) Planning Analysis:
Roads:
The Silver Valley Area Plan land use designation for the developable portion of this site is Eco
Clusters. The proposed roads on the site meet the intent of the Silver Valley Road Classifications for
Eco Clusters developments. They are adapted to the site topography and are more rural in character
with a reduced right-of-way, reduced pavement widths, no parking on the parkette frontages and
parking pull-outs where suitable. The variances are consistent with the Portrait Homes Eco Clusters
development to the east (Hampstead). The following road types are proposed:
• an entry road (Nelson Peak Drive) with a 16.2 metre right-of-way, 8.0 metres pavement,
sidewalks on both sides and no parking;
• the three loop roads surrounding the Parkette areas have an 11.7 metre right-of-way, with
7.3 metres pavement width, and parking and sidewalk on the residential side only;
• the road between the "entrance loop" and the "lower loop" has a 16.0 metre right-of-way,
7.3 metres pavement width and sidewalks on both sides;
• the cul-de-sac road has a 13.0 metre right-of-way, 7.3 metres pavement width, and sidewalk
on one side. The pavement widens to 14.5 metres for pocket parking pull-outs.
Building Height:
The applicant's reasons for the requested height variance include:
• The existing slopes on the site create problems when trying to achieve the overall design
theme that Portrait Homes has used with the existing building forms in their adjacent
development;
• The requested variance relates more to increase in ceiling heights and roof forms and higher
roof pitches than increased massing of the actual building;
• The variance will eliminate the need to artificially manipulate the grades at the building
corners;
• The R-1, RS-1b and R-3 lots will have a building height consistent with the adjacent Street
Townhouse buildings, which have a maximum building height of 11.0 metres;
• The steep slopes on this site make it difficult to achieve the building type as noted above
without artificially regrading and manipulating the site with the use of extensive retaining
walls.
The applicant has provided and demonstrated that the variances will allow them to achieve a high
design standard that has been established with their Silver Ridge development. The requested
variances are consistent with other developments in the area and are supported by staff.
Rear Yard Setback:
The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 8.0 metres to 6.0 metres
for the R-1 zoned lots 1-6, 34, 35, 47, 48, 54-56 and 63-72. All these lots back onto park land or
future park land. The land to the rear of lots 63-68 will be dedicated as park when the subdivision
on that site to the west is approved. The forested areas behind the lots will provide an increased
sense of space which justifies the decrease in rear yard depth, and the reduced setback will be
consistent with the rear yard setback of 6.0 metres permitted for the R-1, R-3 and RST zones.
The Zoning Bylaw establishes general minimum and maximum regulations for single family
development. A Development Variance Permit allows Council some flexibility in the approval
process. Such flexibility can allow an applicant to sensitively fit a project to a challenging site.
�
e) Interdepartmentallmplications:
The Engineering and Fire Departments both provided input in discussions with the Planning
department and the applicant's consultants to establish road types and road widths that meet the
intent of the Silver Valley Area Plan, and to ensure that they meet safety, access and servicing
requirements. On-street parking with in the Eco Clusters development will be provided in specific
`pocket-parking' areas, and will not be permitted on some sections of road where unimpeded two-
way traffic is required. The Engineering and Fire Departments are in support of the proposed road
widths.
CONCLUSIONS:
The proposed variances for reduced road widths, increased building height and reduced rear yard
setbacks are supported by the Planning and Engineering departments, and the Approving Officer.
The proposed road variances meet the intent of the Silver Valley Road Classifications for Eco
Clusters developments and are consistent with the standards applied in other Eco Clusters
developments in the vicinity. The proposed building height and rear setback variances are
consistent with most new development in the Blaney Hamlet.
It is therefore recommended that this application be favourably considered and the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal Development Variance Permit VP/013/10.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
Prepared by: Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Charles R. Goddard" for
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 - Subdivision Plan
Appendix C - Road Variances
Appendix D- Building Height Variances
Appendix E- Rear Yard Setback Variances
-5-
N
District of
Langley
� 22830/50 & 22942 136 AVENUE
0
.�
�
�
o �t CORPORATION OF
�� THE DISTRICT OF
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Scale: 1:3,000 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Feb 20, 2014 FILE: DP/013/10 BY: PC
L�
��., . :
` �� �-� d�°� a°° APPEN DIX C
�- � — ___.�,�.�� ��� �.
i
,.. A �'-.•,_ ';��' �"J�)���tQ•'�i
1-c�-M -: , . , . . .- " °" , �..` ��--�... C 9:���k=r►1c�" c�N�.
�t��-. �°''1'c, c�f`^' �
R��aaaaa� tC`�ar�ei�$t��y4:� ���a
ld3—���8€b `Wa�� �t�n l�.w�o
�Tm�cm�rae�rte•� �.A":,.'V6�,��,�
"t'��. �P�•-�n$%'i' Y�au�: b$�•-�Y�e��
c��'t"• 1 a1 20 f'3
�► � - ,,� ,; .,
� . �'� + 4,
� � �
+—�e7�[T �L.EVATZOP!
LU7 3T
B FiOYR 96dfq�gg qpp8E9
�r��L..� '_"_""' _'"
� =°m ""
.����
�=��.--
� ��::�
�.��_—
�; = =�--• -
�—
�._ —�,-�;,���:_�
���� �LEY,�TIDP�( —
APPENDIX D
�`�it� �l� _-- _ ,�: g : � _ �
"-.--�_.. - �� ��' !'`�' � ( �
��
� �
� �
::� � W
N
-.� � O
,,� N W
J
.',� � �
��o�t � �L���-r�o�
�_ '
=�. � 3
_ = � a 3
���� �L�`�`�:TTO�!
q,�.
�. ��! ��, ��.. �
��� �t
__. _ ----._
_.� )-.�.. r .,---
___ F-+_a�
_ - - - - -
-;
� - = -
- __, . . . _ -
__- ; �
-- _ ._ _
r_ _ _ _
- - -- �.. _
� _. - _ __ �
�: ;, �,
� .�� -. .,. i; r
� � ;� ;: -
x.. ; ' f ,., � -
— -- -`�'j' ��i� - �
I A �,
°"�"°aL1�i��
FEB 2 � 1014
!l4�� r� � gipGE
- �a_RTp�iE�iT .
��� ,���,,
�PENDIX E
,� �� NELSON PEAKS PROPOSED 75 LOT SUBDIVISION �;. �, i� ,
�.�i�->� � _ i,
�?/c. �-� ..�•�--r—.�— ,�v� e ,., �� � �1'
. �-! „` '� ;,,I� I � � � ��' i
�`� `�da
; i�.'"�' • , ��c�'tl � ` � � - n rnrK - �'`, a
c `° I ha-�, t �x 3cv ,�
• s _
' � � � � �f >>Eii{ d ,, � '`, • ��� e� �� „7e s� \j ' ,n.: 1� j,
,
. ,� l
� 3
rnr ; . , ��, �\ k"' � ?' y ' {�j �Y` � !� . r �� .,.I� �
�vr � r. � -- r � t_ - 4 j, , -`\ J �,.a.Y-
/ nw _ I � �3 -1� � Y qPARI� .�-- _-- __ -. � _ _
��.a�J�,��,� � a d z g � a i a_ � a 5� �_ e � _.,. v.� _ � m /--- -- _._ . 1'
- - -• -- - •- i �,
k
� Y
• • i • � • • � • '� ��yl�?: �'� �ne � i�� � y ��,
�,a� � — L . _ / '7 �',iA�`\''Y '\`,lyhl r /�.� �4� � /�.�~ .
I - .. v � 8 � ' 9
I,w.. {q1 >�'g 1 � \ � � / %. . �
� � � � I y'e ��'�,� /� . � ._ ��� /
I � A �� :,u � \ \ a` -i� ' � . . F1fiA
V Y a10/ '�� I �•~�T h\ �/� -/
F�I; �•d �;�,;✓ %'.;��_il.:i �,f` {,: ��; �A
, / n �
� ��"�"�. .� /a � ���' S' Ly ' , t,;� ,;. .
"�. � :�� ' { i .
e � s.�
.P'.��:�. " -� - -�-- =B
(0 — ��-_-
5� - ';✓..11G-tL-,,� b2
.. iu' @ --�lun a f— E S
-yA � PAFK '? � � !''_ ��`2-a' ��I ° � PARH
— ��6, '- '�ir-s� -..
(� � "� -� '� +" _� ';. , __' 6 vP' i e � �,,y _'O'�� y, O�u �1 �
§ � G h � � .m> —'_ _ g�-�,nr1(__ � � A �
..�s ` � 's -i � "-" ___-
$ �.u1� ^rePAkN y i, ,
4 l..t� •� �7 •i`'2� i�a a C o �(i�.r-�
i �d .�, I � .s/- 1 ���. I
p • ` <
!' /. � i �� �j.( � \ 3� " .tl�, ' \ ,�, ...�
x �y�,• �� 7 _u �1 I � �? -T �, • i� �e7 �� T ,:n� �
I —� � ~2 � -4 . 4 q
l [�.�i/ � � • �w�. i -I m� � /,- �[� �1��
� ���� � eld.�_ " y � � �I � :-"�'� .� �/j � - � ��� 1
Kg�N j13 • �'i ; r ,���
�° �I .. �-�1 G� •� p \ �, >
�'--'(`� � .�� � t�: �, —�,-! —I' e I
: �4 �� —�— I I l C% '�ll� . - I \ f�/
su ""
�:' ' �' , ��a r�. • � .yl� 1 � � p� r ( e, I
;: ,.i �� �'
•- � : \ '' �-_-_-} �`�}' a( (nM �,Tx t�.lt;` �'l
I �� ea`fl3� _'I' '�%�Lle i�-`'_�u �fr[J� ;���1.l�[�� 'i,
n � � -� � � • % .
��,�w 9 ��`��. � ��1�.f.� u � .-�..
'N} q'� �° �, - '�-, al„ e. ,.
p�E<�G" PG��'';,�' � � i 1 �� �/'�5 � e I�}� �� � � � � h ��
6 1 � � 6 (i "L�
� .F% �t- � R�` ) /:[� .�t. t —y..�,__
�.,, � �, � i •hh j ( � ���9s . a i
� � - $' � y _h "o��_ � h ! �,.: ;
�� , ,,' ��s > i �
• � � '� s . , _ _ � -
\ � I ""ss �h �/ ' 1 � �, n +��
4 § " � �/ k � . t � �, J � / ��= ,y o '� v Ci I B
� �.�,� � .'/ %� { . � _
I .i% � ��:. � � i, �(a j��� ��� -�-�-�� „ \ 'on/�' r�
/i� ..n % n� c� �� i �. k� r K � ' -
I � � �` a�a� PAF% -_ - _ - ' -��,. x �. _ _ �m„ __
i ���� a �, a � y r ( �o �� �� „ �� �F�1
h +'
/.. i � 5 �' �._ F O 6'
I < ��� ,v 4� z�z 7 r�d :�
I r� ! �� /ti `< e � ^ k 41 �y �, , Q3 �( \ �
i �.^ • �'w ,� t�) •- �� a � /. �� • 'k,' ��S �.
� y5��� �� F, r, � Jr -�� s��`-
�'- J %' • � i �—,T"' j"°� '� ° \ �.- ���
� `�' * i \:'"
I � .��. � _ a i' 4- " "'#� ; `, -
I � j" i •;� n�- ��
. ,. A. . • I_ y�� h� � �:�
� , . 6 � e �j � �.� i ��;�
ap �, �•� q y� �, j-F A- a�-Y�' ; i ,
i \;,,~` .� �, - 'I'I - '!`---_ I-' _...,� � ,y� /`�\6 �
%\rvx/ .��j�Y.;;Lx"�<'�!;,�..�1�,;.1 -s'`� '���
G._ ''�. i'� 4
-- `� t�> .•-,
ior ior;iiJc r,om�i �reanrna.o ! sm,rnrm nene��aeo �i
o i+acnus i i o�� ,;;oe e=3 iou n - ss c.o
• NIIHCAIC.`. 11.qin P�iDE R-I lGiS 15 5.5 �.p
I
I P,S1 INMCniES R51 LOiS _ 12 _ 5.5 ! 6,0
esqn) irimcnu�asijb��ms i ���a � e.o
I -- ---- - _ ame dv n+ose icu ,aci n ersreicnv�
co�rNaur m[ a�ne in�e seience is � �� ��i� ��-�� C�YG•Stli�
i.tcasuRro vao�J n;E cowr.F.iit p�u;;onrer �, ��
AGRICUL7URAL L�L';D NLERL£ OOVI;DRR1
. .�. 2G1�►-'�ci�- iZESKCfL'
°��CK�.1� ��iGsP�t�- #�p�rn.
�'>'r n, �D Co1`�
�>� . 2, , � �--
�o—��.. �uRICI1LNFAl LP.ItL' RESCP.'iL 9tr.!':,}PRY
I
I'—'_ .—_ _. .__
��! �,_�_� _....������. . __�.��
A)a�a� �onsulta6�8� I.QcC.
103-1600 West Ftlt Ave.
Vancouver, B.C> V6J 1R3 �� -�' u_-._
�. .
T'QI. 224-682i Fax 689-3880 � �` " �' k `- � ` � l- '
� {,• — –_ —
�������� • ��
N
,� FEB 10 2014
MApLE RIDGE
�" ANiJIP1C� D� P-1Y�i I�rIENT
h�l�PCE RID9E
�ll�h qeyrhY
•
.�
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: DP and DVP/107/10
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Development Permit and Development Variance Permit
23657 and 23651 132 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Development Permit and Development Variance Permit applications have been received in support
of a rezoning application (RZ/107/10), for the subject site (Appendix A) consisting of a 4.88 acre
consolidated lot area. The subject site is located at 23657 and 23651 132 Avenue, just outside of
the "River Village" Hamlet Centre, within the Silver Valley Area Plan.
The proposal is to permit the future construction of 69 townhouse units in the RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) zone and a single family house in the south-east corner in the RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) zone.
The proposed design of townhouses is subject to the "Multi-Family Development Permit Guidelines"
as per Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan. This Development Permit application is to
regulate the form and character of the 69 townhouse units and the Development Variance Permit
application is to vary some setbacks, storeys and height of the units and the maximum height of two
retaining walls, as described in this report.
Council considered rezoning application RZ/107/10 and granted first reading for Zone Amending
Bylaw No. 6779-2010 on January 11, 2011. Council granted first and second reading for Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6778-2010 on January 22, 2013, and second reading for
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6779-2010 on January 22, 2013. This application was presented at
Public Hearing on February 19, 2013, and Council granted third reading on February 26, 2013.
Council granted a first extension on February 25, 2014. The final reading report on rezoning
application RZ/107/10 will be considered at the Council meeting of March 25, 2014.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DVP/107/10 respecting property located
23657 and 23651 132 Avenue; and further
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DP/107/10 respecting property located at
23657 and 23651 132 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Wayne Bissky
Michael Karton
1106
Legal Description:
OCP:
Existing:
Zoning:
Existing:
Lot: A, Section: 28, Township: 12, Plan: 23796; PID: 009-289-
941 and Lot: B, Section 28, Township: 12, Plan 23796; PID:
009-290-214
Medium-High Density Residential, Conservation and Open
Space
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential)
Proposed: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Consolidated Site Area:
Access:
Servicing requirement:
Companion Applications:
b) Site and Project Description:
and RS-1 (One Family Urban
133�d Avenue and Single Family Residential
R-1(Residential District) zone
Medium-High Density Residential
132nd Avenue and Single Family Residential
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Conservation, Low Density Residential, Open Space and
Medium-High Density Residential
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential)
Conservation, Low Density Residential and Medium-High Density
Residential
Existing Single Family Residential and future townhouse
proposal by Portrait Homes Rock Ridge Ltd.
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential); and proposed RM-1(Townhouse
Residential)
Medium-High Density Residential
Vacant
Multi-Family Residential (Townhouses), Conservation and Single
Family Residential (south east corner)
1.97 Hectares (4.88 acres).
133rd Avenue and 132nd Avenue
Urban Standard
RZ/107/10 and 2012-045-DP (WPDP)
The development site (Appendix A) is located just outside of the "River Village" Hamlet Centre, within
the Silver Valley Area Plan and consists of two legal lots with a consolidated lot area of 4.88 acres.
Consolidation of the lots has been finalized along with park dedication of the conservation lands
around Maple Ridge Park Creek, as a condition of final reading of the rezoning application
(RZ/107/10).
The site gradually slopes down from the north east corner to the south and south west corner. A
tributary of Maple Ridge Park Creek runs diagonally through the south east portion of the southern
lot. The Environmentally sensitive area around this creek is being protected through park dedication
within the 15.0 metre setback from the top of bank, on both sides of the creek. The log house on the
-2-
southern property which was within the required environmental setback area has been demolished.
The existing equestrian trail along the south side of 132nd Avenue will remain and may need
widening and upgrading when the properties on the south develop. A new multi-purpose trail
(Appendix B) will be built in future within the dedicated conservation area of the subject site. This
trail is anticipated to connect to Cedar Park (on the east) when the property on the east (23711
132nd Avenue) of subject site develops in future. The multi-purpose trail is anticipated to enhance
the pedestrian connections for all the residents within this neighbourhood.
The proposed Site Plan (Appendix B) shows main access to the site from 133rd Avenue leading
through the site to connect to 132nd Avenue on the south. A mail-box kiosk is proposed closer to
132nd Avenue (near Block 9 and the visitor parking stalls), in a visible location (Appendix F). A total of
69 townhouse units (ranging in size from 1154 ft2 to 2101 ft2) are proposed in 16 blocks. Each
block is made of 3 to 5 attached units. All the proposed units are serviced by a 6.0 metre wide strata
road with sidewalk on one side. Blocks 1, 2 and 3 facing 133rd Avenue have a street presence with
direct pedestrian walkways to the municipal road. Each unit has its own parking in either a tandem
arrangement or a two car garage, giving a total of 138 parking spaces for residents. The proposal
shows a reasonable balance of tandem and 2-car garage units (i.e. 34.78% or 24 units are proposed
with a 2-car double wide garage, while the remaining 45 units are proposed with a 2-car tandem
garage). All the units have driveway aprons of varying lengths. The visitor parking stalls (18 stalls
instead of the required 14 stalls, including three handicapped parking stalls) have been distributed
near Block 4, 8, 10, 14 and 16 (Appendix B).
Two Community gardens along with a shed and composting area are proposed near Blocks 9, 10
and 12, facing west and the mail-boxes are proposed near Block 9 close to 132nd Avenue in a visible
location (Appendix B and F). The proposed building materials include: cedar shakes, vinyl siding; vinyl
windows; cultured stone veneer; duroid roofing shingles; painted wood trims, fascia boards,
brackets, railing and skirt boards; aluminum railing and prefinished metal gutter and downspout
(Appendix C).
The site soils are not suitable for infiltration of storm water run-off due to their low permeability. As a
result, the proposed rain and storm water management scheme utilizes a combination of water
detention, reduction and quality control through rain gardens, absorbent landscaping, bio-swales,
water retention through drainage trenches (central green space between units in the back yards),
permeable pavers for the side walk of the strata road and visitor parking stalls and staggered
landscaped beds with a 45 cm top soil for ground cover. A Storm Water Management Restrictive
Covenant showing all these areas along with guidelines for maintenance by the future strata is being
registered on title. A balance of native, decorative and low maintenance planting species have been
proposed to differentiate between private, semi-private and public spaces (Appendix F). The total
proposed usable open space and common activity area (7,490.8 mz) are designed for active and
passive recreation of the future residents and meets the requirement of the proposed zone. This
amenity area on site shows resilient play surFace with mushroom seating and crawl tube play
structure and benches in and around the centrally located tot lot (Appendix F).
c) Planning Analysis:
The proposed design of townhouses will have to be consistent with the "Multi-Family Development
Permit Guidelines" for form and character as per Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan. The
purpose of a Multi-Family Development Permit is to enhance existing neighbourhoods with
compatible housing styles that meet diverse needs and minimize potential conflicts on neighbouring
land uses.
-3-
Multi-Family Development Permit Guidelines:
This proposal has been assessed with respect to the following key Multi-Family Development Permit
Guidelines:
New development into established areas should respect private spaces and incorporate
local neighbourhood elements in building form, height, architectural features and massing.
The proposed building materials such as cedar shakes, vinyl siding and windows; cultured stone
veneer; duroid roofing shingles; painted wood trims, fascia boards, brackets and railing are all
compatible with the surrounding existing and proposed development. The proposed building form,
height and massing fit well with single family houses to the north and the future townhouses on the
west. A variety of unit types (unit type A-H) along with variation in colour scheme provide well
articulated blocks. The landscaped areas on site help articulate the building massing and foster an
attractive relationship between the built and open spaces.
■ Transitional development should be used to bridge areas of low and high densities, through
means such as stepped building heights, or low rise ground oriented housing located to the
periphery of a higher density developments.
There is no higher density proposed in the vicinity. The subject site is anticipated to be surrounded
by similar townhouse units on the west and possibly on the northern portion of the eastern property.
On the west is a proposed 61 unit townhouse development in the RM-1 zone. The northern portion
of the property on the east (23711 132nd Avenue) is designated "Medium Density Residential" so it
is likely that a similar form of housing may be supported. On the north, across 133rd Avenue are
existing single family houses zoned R-1 (Residential District). Some single family and street
townhouse are proposed west of 236t" Street, further south. The proposed townhouses on the
subject site are ground-oriented units that fit well as a transition between the surrounding existing
development of small lot single family and proposed multi-family use on the west. There is a
reasonable balance of tandem (65.22% tandem) and 2-car double wide units. The architectural
features, colour schemes, and materials have been chosen in careful consideration of surrounding
existing developments and will prove to be complimentary.
■ Large scale development should be clustered and given architectural separation to foster a
sense of community and improve visual attractiveness.
A total of 16 blocks have been proposed with landscaped areas in between to avoid a monotonous
streetscape and create architectural separation between the clusters. Livability and visual
attractiveness is further enhanced by creating semi-private green spaces in the rear yards of all the
units and a common amenity area on site (Appendices B and E). This amenity area (semi-public
space) offers both active play area (tot lot) and passive recreational area for the residents of this
development. The two Community Garden along with a shed and composting area, proposed in the
western area near Blocks 10 and 12, fosters a sense of community and encourages residents to be
sustainable. A balance of native, decorative and low maintenance planting species have been
proposed to differentiate between private, semi-private and public spaces and to achieve effective
architectural separation. The entry-sign (Myron's Muse) and nine new street trees facing 133ra
Avenue are proposed to improve the streetscape and visual attractiveness of the subject site
(Appendix E).
!l'!
■ Pedestrian circulation should be encouraged with attractive streetscapes attained through
landscaping, architectural details, appropriate lighting and by directing parking underground
where possible or away from public view through screened parking structures or surface
parking located to the rear of the property.
Units facing 133rd Avenue are proposed to have individual walkways and front gate statements to
improve the street presence. Pedestrian walkways within the site, side walks on one side of the
strata road, and sidewalks along 133rd and 132nd Avenues should improve the overall pedestrian
connectivity and safety in the area. A new future multi-purpose trail within the dedicated
conservation area (Appendix B) leading to the Cedar Park will enhance the overall pedestrian
circulation in this area. New street trees along both the frontages (133rd and 132nd Avenues) will
enhance the streetscape. Appropriate landscaping and lighting is anticipated to provide for a safe
pedestrian access to all the blocks (Appendix E). Each unit has its own two car or tandem garage and
visitor parking stalls are proposed to be screened with landscaping.
d) Zoning Bylaw:
The proposed RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) is intended for low to medium density
townhouses and multi family residential buildings. A maximum density (FSR) of 0.6 times the net lot
area (plus an additional 50 m2 per unit, habitable basement area) is permitted in this zone.
Proposed total FSR for the subject site is 0.577 of the net lot area which is well within the permitted
density prescribed in the zone.
A combined usable open space and common activity area of 7,490.8 m2 is proposed for the site,
which is more than the minimum required for the RM-1 zone. The proposal meets the density,
common useable open space and common activity area requirements of the zone.
The maximum permitted height in this zone must not exceed 10.5 metres and 2 1h storeys. Some
units exceed the permitted maximum height and storeys as described below. The RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) zone specifies the following setbacks: 7.5 metres from front, rear and exterior side yard;
4.5 metres from an interior side yard for a wall with no windows to a habitable room and 6.0 metres
from an interior side yard for a wall with a balcony or a window to a habitable room.
The applicant is seeking some setback variances to the building facades as described below. The
maximum permitted height of all retaining walls in any zone is 1.2 metres and two retaining walls are
exceeding this height. The requested variances are described below.
e) Variances to the Zoning Bylaw (see Appendix D):
The applicant is seeking the following variances to the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No.
3510 -1985:
i. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the front yard setback (facing 133rd Avenue) from
7.21 metres (variance of 0.29 metres) for Block 1;
ii. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the front yard setback (facing 133rd Avenue) from
7.12 metres (variance of 0.38 metres) for Block 2;
iii. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the front yard setback (facing 133rd Avenue) from
7.05 metres (variance of 0.45 metres) for Block 3;
-5-
District) of the
7.5 metres to
District) of the
7.5 metres to
District) of the
7.5 metres to
iv. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the interior side yard setback from 6.0 metres (for a wall with a
window to a habitable room) to 3.9 metres (variance of 2.1 metres) for Unit 1 in Block
1;
v. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the interior side yard setback from 6.0 metres (for a wall with a
window to a habitable room) to 3.6 metres (variance of 2.4 metres) for Unit 69 in Block
16;
vi. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the interior side yard setback from 6.0 metres (for a wall with a
window to a habitable room) to 4.18 metres (variance of 1.2 metres) for Unit 59 in
Block 14;
vii. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the interior side yard setback from 6.0 metres (for a wall with a
window to a habitable room) to 3.96 metres (variance of 2.04 metres) for Unit 50 in
Block 12;
viii. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the interior side yard setback from 6.0 metres (for a wall with a
window to a habitable room) to 3.5 metres (variance of 2.5 metres) for Unit 43 in Block
10;
ix. Part 6, Section 602(6) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the interior side yard setback from 6.0 metres (for a wall with a
window to a habitable room) to 5.3 metres (variance of 0.7 metres) for Unit 35 in Block
09;
x. Part 6, Section 602 (7) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the maximum height from 10.5 metres to 11.02 metres (variance
of 0.52 metres) for Units 36, 37 and 38 in Block 9;
xi. Part 6, Section 602 (7) (a) of the RM-1 zone (Townhouse Residential District) of the
Zoning Bylaw, to vary the number of storeys from 2 1/z storeys to 3 storeys for Blocks 9,
10,12 and 14;
xii. Part 4, Section 403 Regulations for the size, shape and siting of buildings and
structures, subsection 8) Maximum Retaining Wall Height, to vary the maximum height
from 1.2 metres to a maximum of 2.6 metres (a variance of 1.4 metres) for the
retaining wall for the back yards of units 52-59 (Blocks 13 and 14) and back yards of
units 39-42 (Block 10).
The analysis and justification for these variances as follows:
i) Maximum Building Height and number of storeys: To allow the maximum building height
of some of the units to exceed the permitted 10.5 metres and 2 1/z storeys.
Justification: The development takes into consideration changes in site grading and lot
configuration after dedication of the conservation area. The road and units are aligned with
the conservation area in the south-east corner. Generally the blocks are stepped in order to
maintain conformance to the height envelope except for Block 9(unit 36, 37, 38- type F)
which exceeds the permitted maximum height in the RM-1 zone. These units have been
staggered and well articulated to reduce the impact. The height will comply with the new
Zoning Bylaw when measurement will be to the mid point of the roof as opposed to currently
being measured to the roof ridge. In addition to this, some of the blocks (units 35-42-type C,
F, H and units 52-58- type C) have three storey facades on one side. This is unavoidable on
sites that are sloping and consistent with other townhouse units on sloping sites. Only a few
�
units are requiring the height and storey variances for the subject site and the intention is to
work with the grades. It should be noted that the majority of the units meet the bylaw.
ii) Minimum building setbacks: To allow reduced minimum interior side yard
setback to the building fa�ade with a window to a habitable room and to allow reduced
front yard setback to the building fa�ade.
Justification: Due to the challenging lot configuration and unit orientation across the street,
some of the building corners encroach into the interior side yard setbacks (west) as shown in
Appendix D attached. The setback variances are not for the full facades of these blocks, but
only for some corners of Blocks 9, 10, 12, 14 and 16 (along the western property edge). In
addition to these similar, variances are required to accommodate end units of Block 1 and 3
(facing 133rd Avenue). From a design perspective these setback variances are minor and
have stemmed from the orientation of the units. The landscaping buffer offers some privacy
and the proposed alignment of the adjacent townhouse proposal to the west of subject site
confirms that there should not be any negative impact on that development.
The front yard setbacks (facing 133rd Avenue) are very minor in nature and proposed with an
intention of providing better street presence. It should be noted that 133rd Avenue, fronting
the subject site has an existingjog so the impact of this variance should be negligible.
iii) Maximum retaining wall height: To allow the maximum height of two retaining walls to
exceed the permitted 1.2 metres.
Justification: Two of the proposed retaining walls are required to exceed the permitted 1.2
metres, to achieve a flat usable backyard for some units (i.e. units 52-58 and units 39-42,
Appendix D)."Sierrascape vegetated retaining walls" are proposed and range in height from
1.6 metres to 2.6 metres and are recessed or sloping back (not vertical) to reduce the
impact. They are anticipated to look like green walls once they are fully vegetated, as shown
in examples attached as Appendix E.
f) Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw_
As per the Maple Ridge Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw No. 4350-1990, the RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential District zone) requires 2 parking spaces per unit for residents plus 0.2 spaces per unit
for visitors, requiring a total of 152 parking spaces (138 for residents and 14 visitor parking stalls)
for the proposed development. All the units have either a two car side by side or a tandem garage,
giving a total of 138 residential parking spaces (24 units with a 2-car double wide garage and 45
units with a 2-car tandem garage). The proposal shows a reasonable balance of tandem and 2-car
garage units and all the units have driveway aprons of varying lengths. The proposal is showing 138
residential parking spaces and 18 visitor parking spaces, resulting in four additional visitor stalls
than the minimum required. The visitor parking spaces are well distributed throughout the site
(Appendix B). The development complies with the on-site parking requirements for the zone.
g) Advisory Design Panel:
On December 11, 2012, the Advisory Design Panel reviewed the proposal for form and character.
The panel recommended this proposal moving forward with the following concerns to be addressed
by the applicant as the design develops and submitted to staff for follow-up:
• Consider providing a barrier to prevent through traffic through the site
-7-
• Consider reversing the elevation treatment on the end elevations of Building 1 and any other
buildings with similar treatment
• Consider using a consistent treatment of the cultured stone on all elevations
• Look at the corner/bottom trim at the cedar shingle panel
• Consider providing a stronger architectural detail at the entry stair and railings
• Revise the note regarding the trees in the rain garden area
• Confirm the engineered treatment of the grass in the country Lane
• Consider changing the design of the higher retaining walls with the use of a green wall system
• Consider providing a hedge along the west property line
• Consider providing outdoor patios for Units 1 through 11
• Consider reducingthe gravel areas between the building blocks
• Consider providing space for more street trees between Units 5& 6 and 9& 10
• Consider providing stepping stones through rain garden for access to community gardens
• Confirm proper landscape maintenance access for all yards
• Consider relocating street trees closer to sidewalk on 133rd Ave
• Consider means to make sidewalks continuous throughout the site
All the above stated concerns were addressed through design revisions and reviewed by the panel to
their satisfaction.
h) Interdepartmentallmplications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and confirms that all the deficient off-site
services are being provided through the Rezoning Servicing Agreement. They have no concerns with
the proposed variances.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks & Leisure Services Department have reviewed and finalized the standards and cost for the
multi-purpose trail through the dedicated conservation area (Appendix B). The existing culvert in the
conservation area was assessed by the applicant's engineer and will be removed as it may not be
safe for public use. Based on a cost estimate from the Parks Department these monies have been
collected in trust so that the multi-purpose trail can be built when the property on the east (23711
132nd Street) of the subject site develops. Approximately 18 new street trees (9 along 132nd Avenue
and 9 along 133rd Avenue) are anticipated to be added to the Street Tree inventory.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and comments have been provided to the applicant.
The applicant has ensured that all these will be addressed through the Building Permit drawings. The
Fire Department has no concerns with the proposed variances.
Building Department:
The Building Department has reviewed the proposal and comments have been provided to the
applicant. The applicant has ensured that all these will be addressed through the Building Permit
drawings. The Building Department has no concerns with the proposed variances.
�
i) Environmentallmplications:
As stated in the report earlier, a tributary of the Maple Ridge Park Creek runs diagonally through the
south east portion of the southern lot. Environmentally sensitive area around this creek has been
finalized for dedication within the 15.0 metre setback from the top of bank of the creek.
Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection Development
Permit application is being processed for this development proposed within 50 metre of the top of
bank of the Maple Ridge Park Creek. The Watercourse Protection Development Permit is being
finalized based on the environmental assessment of the site by a qualified environmental
professional. The enhancement, cleaning and re-planting works within the riparian area have been
finalized including monitoring for 5 years and a refundable security of $25,417.50, based on the
cost estimate from the environmental consultant. A Storm Water Management Restrictive Covenant
showing all these areas along with guidelines for maintenance by the future strata is being
registered on title.
j) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The mail-outs to inform residents of the proposed variances were mailed 10 days prior to the
anticipated Council Meeting date. Concerned residents in the neighbourhood have had the
opportunity to voice their opinions.
k) Financiallmplications:
In accordance with Council's Landscape Security Policy, a refundable security equivalent to 100% of
the estimated landscape cost will be provided to ensure satisfactory provision of landscaping in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Development Permit. Based on an estimated
landscape cost by Sharp and Diamond Landscape Architecture, a refundable security of
$533,255.00 has been paid by the developer. Any costs associated with maintaining the 18 new
street trees (9 trees facing 133rd Avenue and 9 trees facing 132nd Avenue) will need to be included
in a subsequent operating budget.
I) Alternatives:
Final reading to the bylaws in support of this development, i.e. Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6778-2010 and Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6779-2010 is expected on March 25, 2014.
The developer has paid all the required securities in support of the off-site servicing upgrades, on-
site landscaping work and the enhancement and re-vegetation work in the dedicated conservation
area. All the legal documents for registration have been submitted to the Land Title Office. Not
approving the Development Permit and Development Variance Permit would result in the subject site
remaining without the proposed site improvements and a zoned, consolidated piece of land
remaining vacant or the applicant having to significantly amend the current design. Council approval
is required for the Multi-Family Development Permit and the Development Variance Permit as
presented in this report prior to a Building Permit being issued.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed land use is in compliance with the land use designation of the Silver Valley Area Plan.
The design and character of this townhouse development will result in a strong street-oriented and
pedestrian-friendly environment on both 133rd and 132nd Avenue. The proposal shows a reasonable
mix of tandem and double garage units and four extra visitor parking stalls on site. Some minor
�
building height and setback variances along with retaining wall height variances are being sought as
described in this report. Recognizing the site constraints, the proposed variances to the Zoning
Bylaw are supported by the Planning department. An attractive design addresses the site's slope
issues and allows for cost-effective cutting and filling achieving usable backyards for this pedestrian-
friendly urban form of multi-family housing. The new multi-purpose trail through the conservation
area (Appendix B) should prove to improve the overall pedestrian connectivity for this
neighbourhood. The proposed variances are not anticipated to negatively impact the neighouring
properties, as they are minor in nature.
As the development proposal complies with the Multi-Family Development Permit Guidelines of the
Official Community Plan for form and character, it is recommended that DP/107/10 and
DVP/107/10 be favourably considered and approved.
"Original signed by Rasika Acharya"
Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B-Arch, M-Tech, UDC, LEEDO AP, MCIP, RPP
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 Paul Gill" for
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- Proposed Site Plan and multi-purpose trail location map
Appendix C- Proposed typical elevations and exterior materials
Appendix D - Proposed Variances
Appendix E- Examples and details of the proposed Sierrascape vegetative retaining walls
Appendix F- Proposed Landscape Plan, mail kiosk and landscape details
Appendix G- Proposed perspective/rendering of the site
-10-
__� . �` ' o ti� �`'� "�'2 ti� �
11 � 13325 13326 � g 16 `�'� ���' � �L��
� �� �
12N 16 13320 20 15 ��� �ti
3� 17319 13312 2� 14 13� ti`�� 12
13315
4 23 8 9 10 �1
212N ��2M3 4�5�6�,�M m ��,
20 w�, � � co c�o c�o � � m � cc°o c�o �
w v+ �p � m c� c+) c+) m M m m c+) c+) M
� � � W N N N N N N N N N N N N
� �
� ___
133 AVE.
P`��
� 27
� 13295
� N 13289
N �913283
26 w��2��
I 157
13245
13227
13215
13165
N
Scale: 1:2,000
29 v� 4 2a
23�
� 30 3
'� 31 23�38
23�42
23687
2
23691 32
23746
23697 33 �
APPENDIX A
23�3� M 13317 � 133
3 $ a
23741 13313 N 133
2 �
23743 �13309 133
� � 6
23745 13305 133
23747 5
3 4 13301 ^
�ity�f Pitt
Mead�ows
District of
Langley
� N
O
� �
P 26 37 N N
Rem 1
EP 13725
A
LMP
P 26 37
13�
132
N
�
M
N
I
! � 23651 /57-132 Ave
� N
i N
��
� o �! CORPORATION OF
��� � TH E DI ST RI CT O F
�o
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�
� DATE: Jan 17, 2013 RZ/107/10 BY: JV
APPENDIX B1
�_
Unll A Unit C Unit C Unit C Unit D Unit D Unit E Unit E Uni� E Unit E Unit F Unit F Unit F Unl� F Uni� G Unit G Unit G Uni� G
Unit A End 1 Unit B Unit C End 1 End 2 End 3 Unit D End 1 End 2 Unit E End 1 End 2 End 3 End 4 Unil F End 1 End 2 End 3 End 4 Unit G End 1 End 2 End 3 End 4 Unit H
Comment / Descriplion 3 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 3 eetlroom 2 Bedroom 2 eedroom 2 Bedroom 2 eearoom 2 eetlroom � eetlroam 2 gearoom 3 eetlroom 3 Bedroom 3 Betlroom 3 eedroom 3 Bedraom 3 Betlroom 3 Bedroom 3 eetlroom 3 eearoom 3 Betlraom 3 Bedroom 3 eedroom a eetlroom 3 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 3 eedroom
Elec_Closet Elea. Closet Elec_Closet Eec. Closet
GarageHrea 40.4m2 40.4m2 34.Bm2 42.6m2 42.6m2 43.2m2 42.bm2 45.]m2 46.3m2 46.3m2 42.Bm2 42.Bm2 43.4m2 43.4m2 43.4m2 41.3m2 41.3m2 41.8m2 41.Bm2 41.3m2 32.im2 32.im2 32.4m2 324m2 32.1m2 38.8m2
easemenlFoorArea�Nabitable) 312m2 312m2 462m2 3.1m2 32m2 3.im2 32m2 3im2 3.1m2 3.im2 14.Bm2 t5.im2 14.8m2 14.8m2 ia.8mz S.Bm2 6.Om2 5.8m2 5.8m2 6.om1 Sa]m2 55.im2 SSOm2 SS.Om2 55.im2 312m2 inrn1e°
Basemen�FloorHrea�NonHabitable) fi2m2 6.2m2 O.Om2 16m2 ].]m2 ]0m2 ].]m2 ].3m2 ]3m2 ].3m2 ].2m2 ]6m2 12m2 ]2m2 ).2m2 ]4m2 ]6m2 ].0m2 ].0m2 ]fim2 53m2 S.Om2 5.3m2 53m2 56m2 SSm2
Basemen� FloorArea (Habitable Area - SOm2
or5382SpFT+NonHa�IlableArea)-As 62m2 62m2 462m2 ]6m2 ]]m2 ]Om2 )]m2 ]3m2 ]3m2 ]3m2 )2m2 ]6m2 ]2m2 ]2m2 )2m2 ]4m2 ]6m2 ]Jm2 ]4m2 >6m2 100m2 10.Sm2 103m2 103m2 10.Sm2 SSm2
tleflnetl byzoning bylaw
MainFloorArea 62.3m2 fi2.3m2 2]]m2 498m2 50.2m2 504m2 50.]m2 529m2 55.4m2 53.4m2 fiA.8m2 6].Om2 68.Sm2 65.3m2 fi5.3m2 SS.Sm2 SS.Bm2 56.im2 5]6m2 SSBm2 59.3m2 59.8m2 596m2 59.fim2 59.8m2 6I.3m2 '
UpperFloorqrea�Exclutles5lair) 59Jm2 59.4m2 36.2m2 46.8m2 4].2m2 J�4m2 G]]m2 48�m2 49.3m2 49.3m2 64.5m2 66.]m2 6�.]m2 65.Om2 65.Om2 60.1m2 60.9m2 60�m2 60�m2 60.9m2 ]J4m2 ]4.9m2 ]4.9m2 ]G.9m2 ]5.Om2 60.1m2 _-
"€i
Sl�e Coverage I Uni� ]9.] m2 85.8 m2 84.3 m2 55.1 m2 SS.fi m2 55.6 m2 556 m2 Sfi.9 m2 65.4 m2 5].4 m2 69.2 m2 ]1.4 m2 ]0.9 m2 69.] m2 ]2.1 m2 64.8 m2 65.4 m2 fi54 m2 6fi.9 m2 ]1.5 m2 95.8 m2 96.3 m2 96.5 m2 9].4 m2 96.] m2 ]9.2 m2 - �
To�alGrossFloorArea(Includasbasemen�as - � �g�
aeflnetlby�M1ezanngbylew(FxGudng 128_Om2 128.Om2 110.Om2 106.1m2 1052m2 1052m2 �OB.Om2 108.9m2 1118m2 �10.Om2 136.6m2 1010m2 103.3m2 13]Sm2 13].5m2 123Dm2 1203m2 124.2m2 �25.]m2 124.3m2 1438m2 �65.2m2 104.)m2 144]m2 105.3m2 1328m2 _
Gerege, i Stalr� - ' °»
.=�E�
To�alGrossSaableArea(IncludesHatilabe �592m2 1?92m2 1100m2 10]2m2 1084m2 108.3m2 109.3m2 1120m2 115.im2 113.im2 151.3m2 156.im2 1581m2 1522m2 1522m2 1289m2 1302m2 140.im2 131.Sm2 1Q02r2 1936m2 1952m2 194Jm2 194]m2 1953m2 1600m2
BasemenlArea) 1]1qsqX 1,145qfl 1,18Jsqf� 1,1545qX 1,16]sq% 1.1665qX 1,1]65ql� 1,206sqk 1,2395qt1 1.2185ql� 1,6285qft 1,6805qX 1,]025qk 1,6395qX 1,639sqX 1,38]sqk 1,4025qX 1,OOsqfl 1.4165ql� 1 �2sqlt 2,0845qX 2.1015Q% 2,0965qfl 2,0965qX 2,1025qk 1]665qX Total#ofllnils _-
Demciry(NumbarofUnl�s) 3 1 3 B 1 1 1 B 1 2 5 3 1 1 1 ] 1 1 1 1 8 2 2 1 1 3 89unl�s =46.��BUPH = '__
To�alACNaIF5Rm2 --9�3^v
Sub-TotalofAduaIFSR 384.Om2 128.Om2 330.Om2 832.]m2 105.2m2 105.2m2 10fi.Om2 980.3m2 111.9m2 220.Om2 682.4m2 423.Om2 143.3m2 13].Sm2 131.Sm2 Bfi1.2m2 124.3m2 124.2m2 125.]m2 124.3m2 1,149.2m2 290.Sm2 289.Sm2 144.]m2 145.3m2 398.Sm2 8,6�4.2m2 =92,fi14safl -:��'-"E
To�alSitaCovaraqe g' - -
Su�-TotalofS'teCovera0e 2390m2 85.8m2 253.Om2 4JO.Sm2 SS.fim2 SS6m2 SS6m2 511.8m2 65.0m2 11J.9m2 306.2m2 2103m2 ]0.9m2 69.]m2 ]2.im2 4539m2 65.0m2 fi54m2 669m2 ]i5m2 ]666m2 192.]m2 192.9m2 9]0m2 96.Jm2 23]6m2 4,95].3m2 33.3% �
v u.�ao_2�»
LotAree(Orlglnal5lzebeforededioa�lons)= �9,J859m2=15]9M1a
LotArea (Net Developable Area akerdedications; 148]8 3 m2 = 1 088 M1a
FSR Hllowetl = 0.6 x Ne� Devel. Area = 8,92].0 m2 = 0.893 M1a = 9fi,089 5a Ft
FSRAclual= 8,6042m2=0.86M1a =92.61aSqFt
FSR �iHerence = d32.8 m2 = 3,4]0.5 sq fi -
ACNai Denslry (Max 0-6) = 0-5]83 -
Gross Area of Residenfial (Net Salable)'. 8,330.0 m2 =100,432.0 s0 fl (Inoluaes Non habitable antl M1ebl�eble basemen[s7 T
£ a' ic
Zonina Information �6 � "�
LL �3 P
e�v m
. .... . � Y �,
� � e �a„
_ _ � � w _
�z ' n�.a I ' n�s I � a� '
, 0 9 c � �. „�,., mim .. r. . � N
a-
..o. , vatiwoaa�z�nss ,- i - �
c,��e �. �.zr,�-� �
a,000se - o�se -v �aemaoso-��i ' ' � i � .
� `� -��- -----------� � �o �
-- ---�---- t - - - _ ---------- ---�= -- ----- -- -,
� -- -- - -- --- ---- --. -- ------
a � Ey ,:„ Blod< 4 Blod< 5 ���
�
o�. s,., io i - - - - - - / +c_-------�--
� ` .. "- ' -'. .. - -.
�a A�e� �, smz ,so; s4R v !�- ��- - , _ .. , � RS1 � .o
� . o n�. 9 �° w e -- �--� - -.: -o ' . . o�� --'- _ -
, i ��'� F
� o �. ti,A � � � �,; �� � � � N �/o � ������ 734 m2 d E
� �� � s�mz bss�s�an �b ,, ; _ _ � �'�' � _ ��� �i 6 i � a�
� II�
� `
Ma;ow � � so,es � v�u . ` i �� � ° �% - ---• ����/' �� �I � o
t... '
ev . � ""
Foo�aPa�Re o an�� � o s�aas,4�� Ma. FSR � `�' � � �
� �� 9 , .�� , /li�Ujli//l/� ; � �_ �
l�/O� - - - I
tie=ema��e.a� ��� �$ �Road C , � - �� ���� ��'�., I , I - , S
� ¢Q00000pooao � ���/G�i�n�,' .`e'"'� '= � I I w � > o
s��
A
L;,'�, � e�a �� . °°°aoo i c>-- A. � «�/l� � � I iv N
n Yd�Beedo m 60me�(OfdWe � `� � RIPARIAN O
s E. u,� , Gon c� o ti ZON � I o I
m � o,a,�aw�n�ow�aows�oa�ao�oa,00m \�. so ,c� �. %
s` .,naeaoo�vo.a � m 'e�� � � � :5 %> .� � I II D
v w �d� o a nae�ae e�oom
� � ��r i � v
�
=o �.
�
0 oemmo n.�rn,aa_ smeiu� .n��e�emerw�aana� .- � i• g m �, P ��° ,, T � Z
0
i
�
i
� saecerea��mam.�ree4�� sPa�as. mx� ` ; o� ' m ,g � `o .: ^. -- , I
� � u��C ' e �� , 2 �. `,S 7 i I
° � e o s ` � ���� ' � � � � •- - - I � m Y
'ro .�:� � ' /
�eea,00m��. w I � � o00000 � ss�`, � ' o� i � '�ti - h, , I'I � -
� � �� �� � ' " � �r � °pa o ' . §._,°�' . I �� � -
m �o . Z � 4E y .6q' ��' ��' F �v.a �� � _ `c _�p\� ;I I .
s mi i
Na a � mz ' � ni i Z
ra,u �s: a.a : � , r. S , h c/( � � _
� '
� :o , s�e � ¢ 3 � oa A "'9 , , s `" 4 ° � �i'�,� �
�s o� , ❑ �- - � - � - ' �� � � - - - - - - - '
Sta s 156.06m5. F L'rs ' S .' (�` � 6 nhr n _ I I .
, �
zs v �� � �
,'
na�ax � ' �rsa 3 s�a s a au s � o .'�6 I
ame o.i �5is�e s i�osmis M E�-o,s I I �_.__ __ `__._ �� z �/ /~ 4j gQ' / I �m
3. /
� ��kF ..,.: n,� ��S-) '/ . u� ; / i ,,. ,....� I I Z
%i `` �n
� o �,n � �� �� �� I. y
� weea,a��e . � � o,, v � �4�� � .,� ,. 1�,� I ¢ -a _
eea�,� �� ; .
a«e r �ne�ea,e� ��iE �ro sa` F'�o. � -.� RM1 =.,�.. \ I .. 3<2 „�,w
U', /�
8
� � J M . ���I///
, s� e o�. � � S' � �� . one /////'�, ' ��rys�,s�
� � � e„e,�,om��e�e�„ew��a ae,ee
o- o��a ��e���moe,ea a,� , . ,,� , e
__ �a�,eaw�ao,�o��a, e„�i,om��a����,��asoae9,ee u�a � a 9 �H .
m ��o�� ��a���moe�aa,� � 1 ss � � � �3 ��� 8 m2 - - �- - - - °J
a ow��ame„�„om�na��vaw,nasodes,aa � _ � " _ e
m no�ao��a��e���mee�eda�� -.._ .-.' � ---- fO� -� ------ j-� . - . - - r ---- k- , - -� E ,,oK�J ° , ---- -- _ t �. � o
- � --- 6 4 ---- - ,� - ---- - ----Road C --- I
� --- T i
� -- -- �I-Ifa�E3--�---- � � Y�HR�E-�-y- - � �----��----- -� -W-h4SE-1- - + '---- ° ,
PRELIMINARY ONLY , . a�
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ��' _ i ' -;. ° , .. i. _ `" "" " i" '. i-. i' .. -' a ° `35 �-„'°^ r,i��i<a, �. i- Propos ' Site Plart
s�„�wtiEti PR�ti,Eo o�aa�� o �36��:�a��; `
�._ o zo 3o ao so 5�som~� A1.0
APPENDIX B2
��mPaM�,�,P,mde��de�a�g � s��� �a, �
aom
`��a��om�
PRELIMINARYONLY � cc��mot��b��"�� 9 Hc m����'���ise��ii.9�eei����
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
,o�a�Ew�Ex aA�x,Eo ox aA�� o��a�s�� ,� ��ax�E
Enlar ed Site Plan with Pro osed Site Gradin
xae�.i:mo ♦
issum oenwixes
�
a ��
.� � q
E
LL _ ��
� a � �e
'`' O
C � E1 �
� � 8 8
CO ❑ � 5
C
l4
a
�
in
v
�
rn
�
�
w
��
A1.2
APPENDIX B3
issum oenwixes
�
a ��
.� � q
E
LL _ ��
� a � �e
'`' O
C � E1 �
� � 8 8
CO ❑ � 5
�
N
�
l4
C
W
��
sae r+o� �. �. �. ,. �
��mPaM�,�,P,mde��de�a�g � s��� �a, �w� w
�} Enlar ed Site Plan with Pro osed Slte Gradin p,�e„❑
" �m•s�e�'"om��Mu e n� m�.n��m��m�sn�m�.seeee�o�� saie�.,2o0 ♦
PRELIMINARYONLY � ���m"ot��b����
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m
,o�a�Ew�Ex aA�x,Eo ox aA�� o ��a�s��
,��„qx�E A1.3
9; '" Z
o;o�
�Z<
n�o
= -� z
o�
�c�
��
�� �
�Po
. T ` \\��\\ \\ \ � ` �� ` `�' \\�
-L=�---\=�-�_—`�==�--==--, -==--�
:�\� \��•E�,;`- --_�_�``,�
, i '�.,\` � , ''��,�\ 7
._;e\ ��;\\' , J
�---------=�---"� �`-'�=,-\�-'=�--�\�=.,1.���,,.I
- \��� -------- -\��I
.�\ ;� �.�� `` •��\ `I
� � . . . . . �I
,--- __
--�- ---------
-- �--
----, --
-----r--=�� _��_,
,�,�,,.�� �T�„��.� o����„ � Trail Location Mao � 69 Unit Multi-Familv �_ ._
APPENDIX 64
�-:--m.-�-�.-.�--�-�-: —
.�:: ..� ,
- --.�.�_
' S .c. � .1-.
- K.;�`:ti'-r..•.... �
."�'3fY .: iy' =��?�?:.:
�'�w-.��
� � � :' tiJ
r2 ' ; �� �
�r,� , �+ �,
.`: �.� �` ���..
� �. �
; fL<.`S • ,
'� � y l I '.�� � ! �
. �' �� . ,,
'''e ` � �: . ��'.:� �
j � �
r„�" r� 3 .
. . ,. . . -. . �`'_�'/ � .r�
�,�� � �
w�m . . � . . �.,� F
�,iw.. � ,�.r,..em � ,���.�,o,. ���
go,,,, �m o� �., -� ._. .�.i y
� � �a ��o�,. _ m m.�,� �.�,�
PRELIMINARY ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
�A ,Eoo � �a� � .._
Exterior Materials
niaw�a r�io��z�
B 3 i�o�o�, n
ie ------------
�_____
APPENDIX C1
Partial North-East Elevation of Block 13
_�
In
— is
"�
Q
�
Q �
38'-0"
I
1 I
J �{ �
38'-0"
.__ __'"""-(R',�'u�""�^'�._
����,�a�F.���oP�_��� �-- �f��_
PRELIMINARY ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
�A�wtiEtiPR�ti,EooNAR��o�36��:�a��� ` '._
East Elev�tion
APPENDIX C2
l� 1 Unit 1 E(End 1) �� Unit 2E I 3 1 Unit 3E (End 2) 1 4 1
�- �o,_z.. 20,_0„ �� z0,_z.. ,�
____ MFE�
South Elevatlon
l 4 1 Unit 3E (End 2) � Unit 2E l� I Unit 1 E(End 1) O
\/ Zp�_2�� Z��_�„ A/ Zp�_2„
,,. � ' � � ��.
� � ' � � � � - .�,,
� ---=FEj
� '� �� � �'' �
, MFE
� � �s �� ----,
� -,
_ - - ;e
�
, _ �
�;
'�, �'� � �'�, North EleU,ation
�, ' �� �.,..,�
I Exterior Materials I �, --______-
'�, °` .°` e e°' glock 01 - Buildina Exoosure and Soatlal Seoaratlon (9.10.151
�. iao nnoa�naai
M1 FacaOe 3 . m . m o/ r . a . o r,
olewlae�colour2) �Fecetle ]. m .1 m �oC/LRoea �. .o . o anr,
e�«o�o�„i mre�ane �,mz ,. m�o��Roaa s,q � o �<�.,
APPENDIX C3
/� /� ��/� �ss�EooR�w���s
Q 38�_��� � Q �� ��� �22� 12H I z�� Uo$t �3F � 3 I Un8 1�4F 1 4 1 U�8 1�5F 1 5 1 Unit 1 SF �End 2) 6�
�/ �/ A/
� ' � �'�, �.m �
�:---- � � �� �� � t.
' , ��-- ��� � � ���� �
, _ ��� � : �����
� o � � ' � It � � . � � �,, _ � �
� � 'j � � '�� .Y��" �� � .��
� '� -- _�. � ,- � ! : � '�, ,.
. _ .1. .l. 1 � " . r� ____'
� � i ��' �_I � . . . . _ � o
� �� i __ �I� �I .FL � � � ., �
_
D Do i :, o _ �� � A
,o :.
s��e3,6 �,. 00� ., o � �� ��� - �� ----� � .�eoo_�4
� � hJorth Elevahon, � O �10� � I� �, .
�«
� 0 ��- � �
_...
_
, � ,
'� '� �.. -_______'. T _
West Elevation � _
�\ �� �� a���3�,s��_,_o. m `s q
� og _
____38'-0"---- ----" _ _, Q Unit18F(End2) l 5 1 UnIt15F l 4 1 UnIt14F O UnIt13F 1 t 1 Unit12H �•' � v��,
A 1 _ _ - - _ _ B _ � g,_Z„ A/ � $�_�„ A/ 18�_�„ � 8,_�,� �/ 22,_6„ � � '
,--, __" _______________ __'__ "k\ '�, '�, '�, � � '
_ i '� '. c � � �
, - - �i � - - -' _ � � '�'� '�' � � <
__ ��, �% _ - -- ,, c°'o� $ -
% "; %'/ ----ra��
�`� � — i � � N �
c
0
i � Q � � � m ro
,�, -- � � . ��O ---- a�i
� ���
� �� w m
v �
a
� � � � Y i
� ' I . O
+F�--==- � - � � 1 � � ---- m
�.,
� ��
m II
g _---- � � I � � m
v , �
�� �� - ---
_ �s '�, _ _ - - ' ' " - ' -' "' ' East Elevation a`Ei > -
o , ��nz _
Mr ,r
�: � - - _ ' swe anc , o -
I � _ _ _ _ I Unt�ae - � rt , r ��. .. . � Y
�s�o, �s90 i ,
� � _ _ _ _ " . � �s�y i ada�� Z .
� _ � -__- '" ' ' ° e _____
� _--- ''- I ��', , Exte�rior Materials Bi k oa e id e d sp t��ei sepe�no� �9.aaae� z
�
_ - South Elevation� 'I ��, ,°���a'em � �
- - - ....� �� ,. �, �, �, �'m -
� ., '� ' �� p me�� ��� ra�aae � s a�oe e�� s Fa� �� �<d a�,w
- e�aw�dai�o�o�°zi` ,o ,
PRELIMINARY ONLY a'rOa1ao"� """"` ° a�
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ,s <. m ,. ,oRo,d . . aa�o <�.,
_ s�A�EwtiEtiPR�ti,EootiAR��o�36��;za��;`
, ,, A3.08
APPENDIX D
a
M PRELIMINARY ONLY
� NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
� .z;���- ���..
up to 2.6m high 1e'y"` "
retaining walls.
Location of Units that Require a Variance �
s��. , �oo r
� N
N
� U
Q �
O c9
� 'C
N %
�
`a3
>�
Y �
m C
Z �
��o ,
� � �a��
3 d apaw:
A7.0
��;: ��-.
��` �.�/~` �
.
,
� —� �_ :
� :�; �
r`a��i
:.R:`n.:' .
��i...�:pj;�."
r.':! ➢7�'�>
'r,i .,2
��`
,; .
APPENDIX E
Examples of Sierrascape
vegetated reta i n i ng wa I I
�ve�um
�� SIERRASCAPE CROSS SECTION
�w9�� SCALE: 125
TOPSOIL PER
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
��
4 �
3
�� GENERALSITE \�
GRADING FILL
FENCE/GUARDRAIL
BY OTHERS
_.._.._.._.._.._.. GEOGRID .._.
75mm MINUS REINFORCED BACKFILL COMPACTED TO 98 %
STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY (BACKRLL MATERIAL TO
BE APPROVED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGWEER)
MIN 450 mm DEEP, 200mm fd PVC
TUBE FlLLED WITH CONCRETE AT
SPACING DETERMINED BY CIVIL
ENGINEER
NEST UPPER BASKET W LOWER BASKET TO
� SUIT RNISHED GRADE, WHERE REQUIRED
� AS PER DETAIL 1/ DWG. 5
R
GEOGRID
„ L (SEE TABLE 1)
I _ _ _ _ _ GEOGRID _ � -�
. �.`_'.�_—
� GEOGRID
_.. .._ . . . . . . . . .
GEGGRID
:�EOGRID
GEOTECHNICAL ENGWEER
APPROVED SUBGRADE
3
� 8
SIERRASCAPE VEGETAT�D RETAINING WALL
(GALVANIZED).
TABLE 1
WALL HEIGHT (TOTAL) BURIAL GEOGRID LENGTH
H(m) g(m) L(m) (1) GEOGRID TYPE (1)
(1) GEOGRID LENGTH AND TVPE SPECIFIED IS BASED ON TOTAL
0.0 - 1.0 0.457 1.0 UX1500MSE WALL HEIGHT'H'. LENGTH AND TYPE OF GEOGRID IS TO BE
1.01 - 2.6 0.457 2.0 UX1500MSE CONSISTENT THROUGH FULL HEIGHT OF WALL.
�
N/A
ao�Ec,iowc.na. N A
�nre N/A
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
SIERRASCAPE RETAINING WALLS
Myron's Mews - Phased Multifamily Development
23657 & 23651 - 132 Avenue, Maple Ridge, BC
Michael Karton C/O Concost Management Inc.
E
x
BACKFILL IN FORMS B LOW FINISHED GRADE TO CONSIST OF 75 -
100mm DIAMETER ANG LAR GRAVEL
19mm MINUS CRUSHED ROCK COMPACTED GRANULAR BASE
COMPACTED TO 100 % SPMDD. ACTUAL DIMENSION TO BE
DETERMINED BY ENGINEER IN THE FIELD
�
LEVELTON
MG AUG 2013
DJ �E 125
PV E�o�.R713-0156-02
3
2
H
�
O
z
�a p
9
m
8
�
i �L.
N I
6
5
� 4
�
Z ` /�
W ,
Q J�OdL� . /
� J
� 3.. _
2 n
❑
1
�h. I i� a�i..,.exi� e'ii �� I i�cwna. Cwni Ra�r,Y
�. � �.
,
-------- ------- -.: --- --
I c� � � �r. �o r- � m �:: / _ -
-- rr � _ �
I �.._. � 1 1 � � 5� _.._ . j:_-. ,�� _ '.
_. — `. __ � �
� ���d �, � - 51ERRASCAPE
_ 00000�aa8pa�gd�� � WALL
�, ��,an ek
��mm�,
� .�c+���ty n�ea 6'O � i�O�n�` . ���\ r7. ..
�I r � �� - --
F� �'� �,• ' �`�'S.7 �,% i
0 5� � ' 8 �, � '^--,,,... __ RIPARIAN
� � �. .. - , ,
A s� I s� �? �. T� ����; Zd�fE
P0000 � i k�... �
6q E `� e��a�oiio�o; �:�e:. ❑� i�, ��....i
I� .;: � J r�'S esen[ !hra�qh � � •�%.
, •,� I� 'r� �L' .'� ]�
� _ 6 !i `S '�._ "fi � r � �� .. ��` ., ,�
'� (" S� I ��� .� -s
Eg � Q : ': � �l.
� ,
I E,] _� � �. �: �• S l 96, , ���, •• � . '
ye��� g8 ���q �C. 2 p9 � �
S� '�( i I
�9 �L `�i: �.T
ID i� p
c
C
� � .
J
J
%
6 R
O
2 V'sllu PSM1Mg GxrmunAy ::'Ji�.�i�i Pdekmp Coniiniin!y
WAYNE STEPIiEN 815KY �ITE PLAN
"'°'E"'°"nia3a�nr.o SIERRASCAPE RETAINIIVG WALLS
� Jl1L 23.2013 ������ Myron's Mews - Phased MultiFamily �e�elapment
"n`.�" 23&57 & 23851 - 132 R�enue, Maple Ridge, $C
,F,,, �,�.,_ r,.„,,,,�_,,..,,,r �`� Michael Karton CIO Concost HEanagemeni Inc.
n� ` �
� , �� . `� FiNl1
� �
^ ;' ���ane a
i ��
� � .�- � � I I� �:,�fl'12 . - - —
r.
9 c ,.;.] -.. RooalC
I;::..I _ --
� �������,.���n
w
N
�
❑
�
C
m
�
C
rrt
MG AIJG 2013
� cy.�N.. ❑J ru�c kT$—
W � R713-015[ 02
LEVELTQN f"'�
G
O
o ==_=_ ;;
, , . °i
� � �,��� �:r^
o�
O , !„� ��� Ifi'!.!BI�B'liiiiliisd�
. � - �
, . „ .. -� � -�-
� � �
:
�r �„�I� �° m • rm � m � m ¢'�
.
� �0 9,�, �` ;trp�n._k�� Kpo�� °��..q,a��p�e �, �p�?��i�su��t '
�i �
�_.�.���� �ne. a...
INIY�11MlIA ! pIIII�BI �,,� N . :; ,_ �_ i: i�s - . t
. ... J� -__ ...r ...� � � � � I� � � � A ti 1 {� � `71f'
`I 0 .. � �._ „�. ` �3 � \
0 ��� � � � � � � +3 m1
. . �
•'• . • .� • • a
I,1 :��:�• y . : `*,, �!�
q f
0 . .....
�IIIIIIIIIIIIlIiI!l���fl�lIIIlii � � nl�i � k � � "
� 0 ` � r [O� r � � � ! � � �� �
O , � �� Il��alllllll � �imiu..�-�" " ' " � _ �
....�, ,..:�� =i� =i P'' i I = i�I ��� �::� �
p � � lii��i II���� • p' Y r..O O,
�t; ..,�.���� � : � ��:���s �.��1� ���:��s�'�o���
o �� 0` � �! �' 7� •�,,
m ��, ,� o �� � . m
: .. .,•
� � �_,� "illllilllll9ilPi�� ' •�:!:!"
�"' IIIIII i1Y11'`
� i i e cTO�i .i�1���91�ua'art'�n'ani'"�r�' n'�Han�Ok�'�
� — � j��� ��0� �..::��.. � � � w � � � �, 0/ O ,: � Q 0
� �C'iir �°" O � ,�, ,. 0 ':in'�""��'�i"M� � �
� , � �'� ,��illll1911ii11'!!�II 11610 , � o���; � j�' � � { ���in I
� I�` 0 � �,. ��d�— � . � • / :: Q : m7
�
� � � � � � E � �� ,p • ���� : �
_ �
. .. � �
� � ' .. � � �II�..:� �_ �. � ` � � � l� ..O • �' IIII' � / - S•�
�11 � •• ..::''
lin0■II I�IIIIIIIII�IIIl�u61 a��il • ni� O' 0 � � � • �� / �
m I���� o ��O � �'r07 ; I ,� �' I m � • m; ���+ ` � � � p'�,
m , ' �,��siiiii�iiiii��i��i�i � � ��� � • / � •o �:;:= � p,�,�
� � � mnu _ ' � n
�1� �+7 ��0� �� � � • • � ��i � ��at p .
m _ � �1 �. �� • �'��� �'p� " .mAn ' o _� * m .O { � . '
m , � � m � � �/ II`` � ��'�o �
m � IlilIIII I I I ' ��n�� � "�W� s 0 � � • �� ��� , � ' 0
■ 0 i a, � �c � � / eip. .t t� �� . �m� � � .��
� r �
� 11111- � �G9.� _ i�,� . �� .,� Ili � -�"•".. 0 � �� � � ���' i
� �IIIII�� . n 0 a i � � / O � n .
� �� I�J � *� ni " � � � • � i
m — � � � / _ O' �� :� _�
�, _� �� I � . ��, . � ♦ ,d, . p • � �
� � . . . �� i�, O � O �I�"' •'. � � � � 'I eV� ��d ' � oi � �
■
� ; I � ♦ � •t� � -�� � ,��, ��O � � m , � u�'��.•
�I ' �� � ; � s
01
�I `IIIIIIIilllllllllluilll ill��� .�� ��III�I�O��� w_; „,��� • ♦ � ;' � 1 �,�.� i s � .: �
I ��f,1611111111111�IIYli7�llllll IP���� ����'�� • olk �I � : �. �'m � • ��� � 1
�i�i� ' , �: �� . ; m- . � - . �-
—
� � ' .
� : , ► �� � .
o :
��,� �� � o �H� �„�� o� • m � -m� � �
i � � � � _ '�
� �L �
.��■� 0 101 N � � _' � . ili' �� O � +•�i�. , � A
�rs�lli�!IlllllllllpiillliilE!l,,;�, : M " _
nnm �� �
�� .'0:::3l971ffi�.._:.: �N0 �!I rea*e� ■ � �� ���N i.: '✓O �- �.. ��
• "
�I� � . . � ` II -.
J� �, � ° s}, ' o � � N;
� � !' -
� , ,_: . e
:,��
, � .
4, .... . . ._ .. , .. _. _ , .; . ..... . . . _ ^0_ , , , ��� ' �'" �� �' . . � : -
a p . n •.
I .. .
. . .• •�
�
Oe M,.�,<�....aesa�,o.a�a.�.e�.�aoa_663_ao��
OEAa��N.o..�.� o 0
.�x.P<���rPE. -- — -- -- --
a..o,��.o.�,.,.. _ �
� 8 .�.e�e � eoa 663 aos, 0� � �
� � .�o�,.� i i iii � �
� B M,. �� k,, a.� ., �,a ses,�,o IIIIIII ° � ��
0 8 � o00 � � � --
oB � a � —�
DWAY
� I I
DW
GRA L
R�1
�,
+
o- �
734 I +
. � ,
�.�.�� n. �� �, � �
� B .,��me. � o.,. � � � ��r ° . ' �
.ommd,m kmm
.
�
O �< E.....� � �
0
s 8 �somo.�� a �
� � ,.� � _-- ��� I�� + ��
e w
O� �„om..e„e�.P,.o�.oA.. � Jr �M � IPARI X �
.meExrExcE n.vnxo � , '� N
c e ' �..
.•l. r � a - ' � ,
C� ��/ �, < . O
� ° + �L ZONE � �
..wo �.E
�o. �som.�er�,. � , , �
� °
�o , - �
3 s�Awo / , �
� � . , . � � > � � o � � � � i
wnom �,e. ��, a
\ ,
o.�an,�...� J�.�� e ; , � z
O � ' �
�, .,
� ,o � �
o,�wow.���.. . � i —�
� � �o,o�a �,� n,. e ���o5n�,��. jc < <D � � - �� � I �
+ `� � , �1e \
� s,rvr,e�o.,� �
� 3 a��,e � �,��,,�� �
� P ,� �
<
�
,.. � � ,� .
� � ,ve � „ �,�� ,� � � ��
� � � ,... ,�,. � , � ' + � G � . � � �' � . I
,
�.�E.a,.om�Ew.« �� " a '
� >
,.o. ��ea�a�e,,.,oP.�, ' il '
� . �F
� Ee o g
' � �h�t ,��- � ����Mf,. � (� C� � t. ��.
� , a
�P�x�.�.E..LL , � . .
0
. „ �. �
s ��ea,o,�a�aeada
Q =..e,m�.n�� o,�.�e, stg �, . ° „�e o, e� e.
.. , � �
�_ �..a,o�.w.,, o U�;ri �' `V c�
8 gs o � J� . � ej
OB ae,.,roE.�.mo�w�� o � s='z, � ��� c� ,r
2t� '���y+ i„i r - �'�, �'
� �, �s ��, �����s�Eti�� �°�"�"` � �so�s.o.ae.� oPa
OB , �eE,�,>�oEo�E ,�* � , g°'r c + ,; � �\"' ., , % �+ J� ��' / ,< . +
�D � / �, �
� � nEoo.s�a . Q �Qi��, - � , i�ii,�,i ,��� ��J
O� �.,�m,me..P,.,�. � Sl� - � Jc ° � � "„�, ; � o
h
c
���� � ��"� ,..
wo.�.aoE. r
zs �
t 'i ,
w
ol
�� C J n� c CO
��
g� � � M � �� � � ���� � � � j MYRON'S MUSE
�n/� o e . J� M� � v�
!.., e ,1 f � �� LL��". 1� 2365] 132nd Ave,
. , o. i ' a �, ,
A �
' � 7� J �� � e _"` _ � M pl Rdg B hCol;mb�a
V � � _-- _
^l
♦ 1kf
� � ,�. , � � � , __ _. ,d e »,Hd �e��.
-- - — —�. � � .— -----�--� i�0 �-= I� �'s i: amo
' - � - � { � /� � - _ - _ I\` � I � Drawn- MR/1S
z
` o� r
� 3�
rx
5
��',,.. :� YD ��cl .I �' /a c � �,_ _ ��,i ,'Re�ewea os
a � �u -
<s, .,- .. ' - - _
_.
� — �.� � � . .� R � _ _
, -4y:, -.> ��z,.- ,p,. , � „k�.:� .41�F� ^ �� ,,.� � amleccrvo. o�za�
/
I
� I
� ���
LAYOUTAND
PF%.�.� Block �, 8, 9
�� � MATERIALS PLAN
(� LAYOUT AND MATERIAL PLAN SOUTH =�� � �, SOUTH
�1 J s�aia: i:sao Z
� � , � ° � L101
�����
��-!�
�m ��
- a�
� m a conore�e sial�� � �
ama- uniNp ell oo < x
�af o a'N
� zeoaooe�m,ameeMa ��
_ �mw,easmryor�
00
_ � ....................................................... ........�.
.e,�
Mail Kiosk -SFloor Plan
Ma I K osk 5� oof Plan
Mail Kiosk- Front Elevation
PRELIMINARY ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
scr, .eo o � za � � .•_
Mail Kiosk - Side View
�
3s,a,� �a�,e�o�
�,sae=„�c�,a�,
3=a,� ,�a�,e�o� — —
�s
�see=„��,�,a�� .::...... .......................
�a�,a� o0
�� aw� o=ke, tiooe, �s�a,o� �.mm, Re, �m�,�o�
wooa,e=�a=eeee.a, o��ed,os,n���E.Pa�aedPo,=���e ,o��
�z�.z ,zo�a�o� � �s ,a��waw n,a=,e�e,=
,saa�,�c� , .: E�9�ee�a �.ab,��waoo
,�m�e�s,�aaw,��ea�P�e��o;wa��°voa"�'d ��,� A„��a��=a�a,�n = _ y��
wa��s��ea��e,o.=oe�� ��o�=, ea� sea —
_ a�
;e�o
o-�alerior Wall Parallel @ Noncombustible Roof � Attic Access Hatch - - -
0 0��o Pa� _ �����:_ _
a „�,. ._
�oncombus�bem sneatn�g �yFt.s '-'" � Nomnoutseleb €� �e
35l �ub
1 r u 1 � - 9 Z ., .�eo ��Sw
� a�eryetl9 9 i�l� � _
o.�
e onena � .5�2D �
1 u�a) c
c1 W�� «� Folo
- --- ws@12 G �on la a
�ee si�uclurel) v eime�n _
oomn�rioia �a��a i ��m T
is a�s� �c�w ap C
�e waiilzosneauier p n�euons� � � reateesateryaoae � �z P
nor ae ars eo���vaa. ' ReSun` SIQp 2 Ste� 3 i+ C -
is � w,aio .�� 3 �
�9 EMerior Wall Perpendicular @ Noncombustible Roof :,�Sequence of Flashing End Dam � Q e `_
� � �.
Fridae Stove Slacked Dishwasher HotWaterTank Tub =� 9 a
Washer/Drver � � � � �
5 Q��
� 'r f __�� �� 2 1 ��
� � 0 � ■ �� �� � � �
� N O ry _
F c� DW��' ^I'�e N
,., m I, ', � 0
- C
M
N, f ._._._.. �
_________ U
Notes: i
y
0
ae��ewMe�na��m�e�dE�au,�< P ����o�a�ad,a e. eee�soA,�n��en�a�oe��u�o,edd���o�e�da�e��. � U
�4 Equipment5chedule
� _______ oo�ma�unme��inua,�e
------- a:�•Ma.
BGBC 20'12 Part 9.23.5.1.
�,�Holes Drilled In Standard Freming Members
��� v o
4�" Maxo�=�e�ce„�o�memtie,a,a�
BCBC 2012 Part 923.52.
�otching of Standard Framing Members
A5.3
: :�:
,:
� , -�' ���
� � . - � � � /'/ �
Ar'
� °°'�� �°-�
- � : _ �.�
�� I � � ' =
� = sa � E� � �I `'�'
. / '� � � —�f' �E ��
�r-�'l \ \�
PRELIMINARY ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
�A ,Eoo � �a� � .._
APPENDIX G
�
�_
h�l�PCE RID9E
�ll�h qeyrhY
•
.�
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: DP/013/10
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Multi-Family and Intensive Residential Development Permit
22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Application DP/013/10 has been received for a Multi-Family Development Permit for two four-plex
Street Townhouse buildings zoned RST (Street Townhouse Residential), and for an Intensive
Residential Development Permit for 16 R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) zoned lots.
Although the two duplex Street Townhouse buildings zoned RST (Street Townhouse Residential) are
not included in the Multi-Family Development Permit because they have fewer than three units per
building, the design will be regulated by a Building Design Covenant.
The Multi-Family Residential Development Permit establishes the form and character of multi-family
development, with the intent to enhance the existing neighbourhood with compatible housing styles
that meet diverse needs and minimize potential conflicts on neighbouring land uses. The Intensive
Residential Development Permit provides a greater emphasis on high standards in aesthetics and
quality of the built environment while protecting important qualities of the natural environment, with
the intent to provide an environment that is safe, attractive, people-friendly and environmentally
responsive.
Council considered rezoning application RZ/013/10 and granted first reading for Zone Amending
Bylaw No. 6725-2010 on March 23, 2010. Council granted first and second reading for Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6724-2010 and second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No.
6725-2010 on November 27, 2012. This application was presented at Public Hearing on December
11, 2012, and Council granted third reading on December 11, 2012. Council granted a first
extension on December 10, 2013. Council will be considering final reading for rezoning application
RZ-013-10 at the next Council meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DP/013/10 respecting property located at
22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description
Damax Consultants Ltd.
Insignia Homes Silvervalley 2 Ltd.
Lot: 76, Section: 32, Township: 12, Plan: BCP27885
Lot: 80, Section: 32, Township: 12, Plan: BCP27885
Lot: A, Section: 29, Township: 12, Plan: EPP27906
1107
OCP:
Zoning:
Existing: Eco Clusters and Conservation
Proposed: Eco Clusters, Conservation and Neighbourhood Park
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and CD-3-98
Proposed: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District),
RST (Street Townhouse Residential),
R-1(Residential District),
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), and
P-1 (Park and School)
Surrounding Uses
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Companion Applications:
Previous Applications:
a) Project Description:
Single Family Residential
CD-3-98 (Comprehensive Development)
Eco Clusters, Conservation
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Agricultural, ALR
Single Family Residential, Park
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RST (Street
Townhouse Residential), R-1 (Residential District), RS-
3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Eco Clusters, Conservation
Vacant, under application for Eco Clusters
development (2013-010-SD)
R-1 (Residential District), RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential)
Eco Clusters, Conservation
Vacant, previously Single Family Residential
Single-Family Residential, Street Townhouse
Residential, Park and Neighbourhood Park
10.55 hectares (26.1 acres)
136 Avenue at Nelson Peak Drive
Urban Standard for Eco Clusters development,
RZ/013/10, 2013-116-SD, VP/013/10, 2012-089-
DP
RZ/070/06, SD/070/06, SD/013/10, 2011-085-SD
The subject site is an Eco Clusters development of 75 lots located southwest of the Blaney Hamlet
within the Silver Valley Area Plan and is accessed from 136 Avenue. The slope of the site allows for
-2-
views towards the valley and the mountains. As per the Eco Clusters guidelines, each lot fronts and
backs onto green space and pockets of development are sited to protect existing vegetation and
provide view corridors. The access for the development is a long cul-de-sac from 136 Avenue with a
neighbourhood park located at the end on the high point of the site. The proposed roads on the site
are designed to meet the intent of the Silver Valley Road Classifications for Eco Clusters
developments. The site is bounded by Cattell Brook on the east and south sides with ponds in the
southeast corner, and setbacks of 30 metres have been established from the top-of-bank of these
features. Steep slopes surround the developable portion of the site and include the area known as
Nelson Peak on the northwest corner of the site.
The architectural design for all the homes on the site is a"West Coast Whistler" theme. The exterior
materials include hardi-board and vinyl siding, steep sloped asphalt roofs, Ledgestone rock detail,
and natural stained cedar beams in the roof gables. The buildings provide a street presence with
each unit having its own private front yard and main entrance to the street. To mitigate the impact of
the garages along the street, the garage doors will be recessed from the main fa�ade and painted in
dark colours to create shadow and lessen their presence.
Although the proposed street townhouses (8 units in two four-plex buildings) are considered a multi-
family development, the street townhouse units are fee-simple (i.e. no strata and no common
property) and therefore some of the Multi-Family Development Permit guidelines do not apply to this
type of development. The development also includes four Street Townhouse lots that are in duplex
form. These two buildings are located on slightly larger lots which are better suited to a two unit
building. The design is the same as the four-plex buildings, and a building design covenant will be
registered on title for these 4 units.
The street townhouse buildings are designed to have the appearance of a townhouse while also
providing a more individualized style for each unit. Two building colour schemes are incorporated to
provide greater variation in the streetscape. Both colour schemes are coordinated to blend in with
the present colour theme of the neighbouring single family homes. The buildings have a 3 storey
street frontage and 2 storey rear elevation, designed to step up the slopes from front to back. Each
unit is provided a prominent front entrance, a double garage, and all have additional parking space
on the driveway.
An access easement is provided around the building, with gates between each rear yard, to allow the
interior unit owners to access their rear yards externally. This is primarily provided to allow owners to
bring landscaping material and outdoor equipment in and out of their rear yards. An exterior finish
agreement will require all owners of attached units to work and share costs cooperatively together
for exterior building maintenance. This type of covenant is necessary because these units are fee
simple units, rather than strata units, and the exterior finishes are continuous across the building
elevations. Other easements are required for party walls, drain tile around the perimeter and utility
access.
Running concurrently with this application are the Rezoning and Subdivision applications; an
Environmental Development Permit for watercourse and natural features protection; and a Variance
Permit application for the following variances: to reduce the road right-of-way and carriageway
widths to meet the Silver Valley road standards for an Eco Clusters development; to increase the
maximum building height to 11.0 metres for the RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential), R-1 (Residential District), and R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) lots; and to
reduce the rear yard setback from 8 metres to 6 metres for the R-1 (Residential District) zoned lots
that back onto park land (green belt). The requested variances are discussed in a separate report to
Council.
-3-
b) Planning Analysis:
Multi-Family Residential:
A Multi-Family Residential Development Permit is required for all new multi-family development
(three or more dwelling units per building) in an area with an Area Plan. The Section 8.7, Multi-
Family Development Permit Area Guidelines of the Official Community Plan aim to regulate the form
and character of development located within this area. Although the proposed development is
considered a multi-family development, the street townhouse units are fee-simple (i.e. no common
property) and some guidelines will not apply to this type of development. (Appendix C)
This development respects the key guideline concepts as outlined in this section:
1. New development into established areas should respect private spaces, and incorporate
local neighbourhood elements in building form, height, architectural features and massing.
This street townhouse development will be situated in an area of new single family lots by
the same developer. The building form, setbacks and height will be compatible with the
surrounding houses. Each unit is provided with private outdoor space.
2. Transitional development should be used to bridge areas of low and high densities, through
means such as stepped building heights, or low rise ground oriented housing located to the
periphery of a higher density developments.
The street townhouses are part of a 75 lot subdivision by the same developer which
includes a variety of residential lot sizes and housing types within the R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District), RST (Street Townhouse Residential), R-1(Residential District), and RS-
1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) zones.
3. Large scale developments should be clustered and given architectural separation to foster
a sense of community, and improve visual attractiveness.
This project is not considered a large scale multi-family development.
4. Pedestrian circulation should be encouraged with attractive streetscapes attained through
landscaping, architectural details, appropriate lighting and by directing parking
underground where possible or away from public view through screened parking structures
or surface parking located to the rear of the property.
These street townhouses are located on fee simple lots so there is no common property as
would be found in a strata development. The front landscaping has been enhanced to
provide the maximum amount of vegetation between the driveways. Each unit has a fully
fenced and landscaped private rear yard. Each unit has a prominent front entrance, a
recessed double garage, and all have additional parking space available on the driveway.
Intensive Residential:
An Intensive Residential Development Permit is required for all new Intensive Residential
development in an area with an Area Plan. Residential development at densities greater than 30
units per net hectare that is typically zoned R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) is considered
as intensive residential. The Section 8.8 Intensive Residential Development Permit Area Guidelines
'�
of the Official Community Plan aim to provide a greater emphasis on high standards in aesthetics
and quality of the built environment while protecting important qualities of the natural environment,
with the intent to provide an environment that is safe, attractive, people-friendly and environmentally
responsive. (Appendix D)
The key guideline concepts for the development permit area are as follows:
1. Neighbourhood cohesiveness and connectivity should be maintained through the design of
varied yet compatible buildings, in materials used and in architectural styles, in landscapes
and in recreational areas, and by facilitating a range of transportation choices.
These R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) buildings are designed to take advantage of
the contours of the site. The resulting downhill lots provide for a two storey building fronting
the street and three storeys backing onto the park land to the rear. Several different building
types, with variations in the detail finishes, and 8 different colour schemes will ensure that
identical buildings will not be repeated within three adjacent lots. The building design
elements, materials and colour schemes are consistent with the adjacent single family and
street townhouse development, and are similar to the Silver Ridge and Hampstead
developments, all by Portrait Homes. The garage doors are recessed from the building face
and prominent front entries with porches face the street. Nelson Peak Park, a new
neighbourhood park, will be developed on the site. The site is in close proximity to two other
parks and potential school site on 230A Street. There are a variety of walkways and
equestrian trails on this site and in the surrounding neighbourhood.
2. A vibrant street presence is to be maintained through a variety of housing styles, by
maintaining street parking and by directing garage structures and off-street parking to the
rear of a property accessible by a lane.
For visual interest, there are different building finishes for each building and the identical
building design will not be repeated within three adjacent lots. The dwellings have recessed
double garage doors fronting the street, a prominent front entry, and front yard landscaping
plans are provided.
c) Advisory Design Panel:
The plans for the four-plex street townhouses were reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel at the
September 11, 2012 meeting. The Panel was in support of the project as submitted but requested
some revisions as follows: aligning the bay windows of each unit; providing detail for the boulder
walls to verify there is no falling hazard; relocating the rear yard access easement and gates to rear
of the yard at the edge of the boulder walls; putting boxwoods at the front of the planters in the front
yards; and expanding the use of cultured stone at the ground floor. The applicant has revised the
designs to the satisfaction of the Advisory Design Panel and the Planning Department.
d) Financiallmplications:
In accordance with Council's Landscape Security Policy, a refundable security equivalent to 100% of
the estimated cost of landscaping for the Street Townhouse lots will be provided by the developer to
ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
Development Permit. Based on estimated landscaping costs a security of $43,876.00 will be
provided.
-5-
CONCLUSION:
As the development proposal complies with the Multi-Family Development Permit Area and Intensive
Residential Development Permit Area Guidelines of the Official Community Plan for form and
character, it is recommended that DP/013/10 be given favourable consideration.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
Prepared by: Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"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 - Subdivision Plan
Appendix C1- - RST Site Plan
Appendix C-2 - RST Architectural plans
Appendix C-3 - RST Landscape plans
Appendix D-1 - R-3 Site Plan
Appendix D-2 - R-3 Architectural plans
Appendix D-3 - R-3 Landscape plans
�
N
District of
Langley
� 22830/50 & 22942 136 AVENUE
0
.�
�
�
o �t CORPORATION OF
�� THE DISTRICT OF
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Scale: 1:3,000 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Feb 20, 2014 FILE: DP/013/10 BY: PC
IX B
�o
��Waeo,Mo�P �� � = N �
<a,'=%_w'�� iX31N0'J 3115 � o i � � ryU o�
�€m��¢�� 9e� -si ai � � u°iiQ �¢ w
n e-,�=e3s 3 J3�lb'/� 2J3/��IS �3941?1 3ldVW `4iJ S�V3d -o w
��'��'H��'e��� - NOSl3N'9NISfIC41NM01133?1151VI1N3a153?1-i�3road v�i<? ,_,ee
��f�6aJ��y,o8 � �.E w uS o 8
as4 � � � J —
_��_��._� r , , u�3a 'QLlL,l3TNA21�lISS�JOHVIN915N1 � ��Nn 64w
�]
C1
GONGEPTUAL SITE PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DATA
ZlR11N6� R5T5V 5li�f TqYUlpl°„f - 51LVER VPL.E1'
PARK
��oeR
u
�'�N �'EAKS RpHHD
�� Lopp
H LINE OF RELE55ED —
ro 4�, ��a�E oaoR �P,
�or ria.rtraJ
� � _,__-,,._.._
i
u
� u
o n
u
�
� ���
' ii
R-I LOT
�
�''
4�'-II '
I. om.]
i`
LOI�NO.
_ � �"e
�
� z�
N � �
� ZN F
�
�y �� 50
a�
� NQ N�
I
� �� ��
� �Y 'U
� �� wg�
UNIT 135,
1536 130 STREET.
SURREY, B.C.
V3W 1H8
PHONE: (604) 591-�100
FAX: (604) 59]-2099
EMPIL mall O EGarkitex.com
a�3Ho. reAG-1.3
P10021 �
SITE SEGTION THRU LOT x14
SITE SEGTION THRW LOT �39
�
� ..q �
:��b
y� y � �µ�
S
5 �ffi
� �
� �� �
� ���pa
_ B
a � X
�:barnett dembek
., ��
xe ��.; �
w�i .,..�s
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
r� � 14-='. I�III,� !l..u�.,�: i 111.�I.�m.;. I �I �,-� i II� lill' _ � I - I .�� . � I
� �ll i a= [r �� �H=� �i I�� ,ii�� u I �� .�- �f �. _ � - i ���1 I�� ,�
�i`I����°I ��� R�.� � , _J _- � , :-
� - ii �-..�!-���-1�.-.-��.�,,-�� � i� �� I ! � �
�or No. ai �or w. qo �or w. ea j �or rvo. 3a 'I w uo. 3-r �I PAr� j'� �or No. rr 'I �or �+o. io 'I �or w. is j �or w. ia �� j'� �ar No. i3 I
� i ���-
SOUTH BLOGK `°' NORTH SLOGK
STREET EL�VATIONS ALON6 NELSON P�RKS ROAD
�
c��
e I��
��
� ��
� �� �
� �� F�
r§
:a�
hamett dem6ekl
n., ��
� f�� �
�
���-RT—�,—x � � �-_�� >
,� � � � �
FRor7T���,a-rro� �, �
�t ��� � ��mrre's��� j
I I �+ I .�v I ro.qo I .����.���`�V
�'��`�}ON �� � LOT N05. 3i, 38, 3Q, & 4�
s�A
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
I J. X " X T
I' . I �rrn.ia l rois I iorrvo.ia l
FRONT ELEVATIONrm^o�+�rbw
��w � �rn�
COW�ER iRIM -As P� SroINe HAiBtIAL
I� umi,*'�' x uar���n• x �ir*'rns'n—� T
wr�.0 I . I �rm.ie I wrro.n I
REAR ELEV,4TION
NORTH �LOGK
LOT NOS. 14, I5, 16, & 17
�..0
°�o s �G �x
� ��
� �
�
� �� �
� :�� ���
y 6
d G �
barnett dembek
h., ��
� (e°°'o,; w
�im i�e '"� �
t�mro.4o x .ea.aa x �o,uo..3e x �m.a.3i }I
FRONT ELEVATION„� ",� �"D
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
GOLOR SGHEME I
■ ����. � ;;aa•P.xw
�+;oba �
■ iw.,w,v. w uo-o-mi ` en.mi s.or.mm 6
P
RI6HT SIDE ELEVATION
■ ���,u.�iN
II< <orw.� x �ria.so x �rro.sa X—=�io*�—ago j
REAR ELEVATION
'�� � • _
_,y�
"�„ : ;
o. cm� swrwu�s - e. �rrnna. sivurfi n. �. snev,e voors
rw v�i m�c ..... _. _ q.� v„+wai eooe
� , •m«�e� SOUTH SLOGK
'""" `� — °�'£`"' �`"'°�' LOT NOS. 37, 38, 3a, � 4C
',< <m �. �, 'i �.�.�6 X ,�,ro. �� x �m �.�, '�i
FRONT ELEVATION''�1ON,.o� FO"O
�
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
GOLOR SGHEME 2
■ rn`.IPrvGOo
■ (+v.cnwi cmne�
■ i+urvra� a� a
• �,
ASGIq
■ �'o ni °"
�L=—� a�Kroxrx.ioi�.
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
■ 'N4TIRI,LCmPF TNN
II< <o. ro. w � �or xo. �5 x � uo. w ��j wr r+o. �, >li
REAR ELEVATION
■��voorc> ��orw�e000cs
Rw ic5al��
NORTH BLOGiG
LOT NOS. 14, 15, 16, & I�(
-..o
�7>
2 ��
� ��
� �� �
�i� s
� � S
� ��
� �
� �� p��
6
`2 u �
bamett dembek
n�e f w3 ��
�
5EG7fON A-A!
n
6•
���
PARK Wwnua.rwor
ea��
� 1 ... 1w�.�m�e.�
��ro
.
��°� �Ao
r,
APPENDIX C3
SEL7fON B-B!
��'r w.vi�:e�ar ies
nwam�r�ar�mr.nm.a
PARK
swu
�em
nnamictt+e
cv.nwir
! r� rr �� ir i�� vr��1�~�����1
�•��.� ' �p ' �
, ���{"y� � jy f •'� '
��:.�..:���}�� ��
r �
;' ,��; ;�
; ���
� � � '��
�,�, �� �� �r� '
�'.�s�,����!� �����` ���� �
�����.�,.,.� -''��'�� . �1�,!� � �l r �
�� �' �e� , r
ai► � _�� ��
�,�,►� ���_—
� ��A��—
o� u�e a� iccmem —
ro�a.w� oaon mrV
o��.,...,�..: n:��:�T� �..�
lAH�SCAPE ABCHITECTllBE
.�Y�n tL}
�
�^ aARK
�
l�i -_.�.��y��Y ... � ��� ��I�(��
e
_ �o , . � � 'c�� 1
�o �
��r��rr
c::�s �'���''-�','r r:..��
�f...�'�r'• p��,�,�°s. ;�
'' �i:�g��•r�:� �r.
� x�
c.�"�.'
o� �
U��1 ��II ���
a y?.: o�
������o ' ' j�y � � i
� Gt; �v°� � e
�=�� �"'"�11 ��' �
.
"�` � � �
-�
�
�
�
� 50D 11J�A' - . . .
m' a�
�
�
lPNOSCGPE APCNITECNflE
� � /J6.Sdd � AOAD
�Y
LLl�lLKVCOC
—_ �xa^•�� SNRUB
PLAN
� �;'a '� �...L2..
� ,. . ��,; ���
,,��ii�i���;,i�i�ii�i�ii��ii�iii�ii�ii�iii�ii�ii�ii�ii�ii�i�ii�i��� �
���
1.
I\I
0_ . _.
�
�, 5'-0" PRI VAGY SGREEN ""' " � �
IpNOSCpPE pflCNIiECTOflE
�
P^��Yon^=� DEiAICS
��A q.. a..L3,
r_�»�,i��►:���
F1 R FRONT ELEVATION
F2R FRONT ELEVATION
G1 R FRONT ELEVATIOIV
G2R FROIVT ELEVATIOIV
APPEN�IX D2
Homes
slson's Peak
Maple Ridge
welopment Plan
Front Elevations
F1 R, FZR
G1R, G2R
___ ��.n�, ��---------
`�-�--- -_ LEFT ELE\/ATION
� - - -
; - ,__ _ _
� --
; --,_`-� .
� - . �- - �----- ---�
� - - '.\\ - i I
i -_ - ---- � �� �
i -% --- - '�� � i
-----= __.._
-- - --
i / -- --- _- ----- ��. � �
,;-�.�`� � --------- \� ----I-- - -_
-�i , ' �` _ ��'.� __ � � - _ - � � I -
�
_ _ _
�, � � i �-- � _
, � i �� - - i _
i , _ __ ,i i - � y�
, �- - --_ _ _ - - __ -___�
- _ _
�� � I I
y� — -� — — - — `�-�.
s.,x i � _ _ - — � _-= -= = - - -__ _ -
' -__ = = �� _ r �� '� � j _I
_ — i
_ -- __-_ -_ _-�,� - �! � -__� ___
_�'".�. � — = -- — _ = � _ ��";I
_ « _— ry � �_ i '
. ` i
—� — — - — � i �i -
�— ^ ' , — — --
-� -
4
__ ___ � :_�� _� �_
_— _ _ _— ,
� —__ — _ _ -__� ;�
""'=----------- ---------------�"
.� • � ;
W�ii�i�i
�
Homes
Nelson's Peak
— in Mapte Ridge
Development Ptan
a�.��,�
Plan F1R
� � �. ' '�.
,.=�_- =-
� ,�.
_.- °=
� -
;i
��= _
i
_I
,� =... v_
;---; ,-- _ LEFT ELE�IATION
� — ' _ �a_ _ _ „�. -
� ' — --
� — -- _
•: � •
�
Homes
�lson's Peak
Maple Ridge
rvelopment Plan
� � �`�..�,.
.�.: a�.:�
��.�
�<,
i3 design
o.�
r�'
���
��
30
b�
-----___
Par�l�
G G
2�
20
� 9�
�F
/ /_ • •. --� �_.
. ' •�
���c
/ n�` �t
� \
i
i\��
� `.
i
� �.
l `�,
3
2
�
L�J
Homes
Ne�son's Peak
in Maple Ridge
DeLelopment Plan
S�e Plan
.
•
►
�
LOT 28 I LOT 27
PLAN G1R I p�p,N F1R CUSTOM
E PLAN F1 R
STREETSCAPE LOTS 18-2°i
SCALE: 1/8"='I'-0°
-�� _ �
I LOT 18
PLAN F2R
LOT 26 I ''''"""'�
PLAN G2R f LOT 25 �
' PLAN F2R pI�N F�R
STREETSCAPE LOiS 22-28
SCALE: 1!8"=1'-0"
LOT 23
PLAN G1R
STREETSC/�PE i.OTS 49-53
SCALE:1/8"='I'-0"
rv�.iV VLL'-
LOT 22
PLAN G2L
��Y Ntr
I I
Homes
Peak I
Ridge
nent Ptan
. ,d �w.�.
. ncEY.f4.tl#
....n-� .
i3 design
o. �
�»
�.
��:�
7m
EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE
FILE : 2093-116 - SD
��3 1-0�5
22830,22850 AND 22942,136 AVE., MAPLE RIDGE, B.C.
INSIGNIA HOMES SILVER VALLEY LTD.
Nelson
MATERIALS FINISH SCHEME 1 RUST/BEIGE SCHEME 2 BEIGE/RUST SCHEME 3 BLUE/BROWN SCHEME 4 TAN/BROWN/BLUE
1. HORIZONTAL VINYL
SIDING PRE-FINISHED GENTEC Pebble GENTEC Pebble GENTEC Mdnight Surf GENTEC Canyon Clay
2. HEAVY PROFILE pRE FINISHED �NDMARK 30 YR LANDMARK 30 YR LANDMARK 30 YR LANDMARK 30 YR
ASPHALT SHINGLES "BLACK WALNUT" "BLACK WALNUT" "BLACK WALNUT" "BLACK WALNUT"
3. CEDAR SHINGLES STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR
STAINED SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TR,4NSPARENT STAIN -
"CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR"
4.ARCH.CONCRETE NATURAL NATURAL NATURAL NATURAL NATUR,4L
S.A. PAINTED WOOD TRIM PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED SHERWIN WILLIAMS
* Pre-primed 2x6 trim HC - 82 "BENNINGTON GRAY" HC - 70 "VAN BUREN BROWN" HC - 86 "KWGSPORT GRAY" SW 6236 "GRAYS HARBOR"
` Balcony Fascia PAINTED
* Wood Trim
* Open Tail Soffits
S.B. STAINED WOOD TRIM STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR
SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN -
* Cedar Raiiing STAINED "CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR"
* Decorative wood brackets
* Wood Columns
6. GUTTERS AND pRE FINISHED �YCAN -"MATCHCOAT KAYCAN -"MATCHCOAT KAYCAN -"MATCHCOAT KAYCAN -"MATCHCOAT
DOWNSPOUTS BEIGE° BEIGE" BEIGE" BEIGE"
7. VINYL WINDOWS PRE FINISHED WHITE VINYL WHITE VINYL WHITE VINYL WHITE VINYL
8. VERTICAL VINYL
BOARD AND BATTON PRE FINISHED GENTEC Wicker GENTEC Pebble GENTEC Mdnight Surt GENTEC Canyon Ciay
9. MANUFACTURED STONE ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS - ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS - ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS - ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS -
PRE FINISHED CUSTOM FIT LEDGE STONE -"EAGLE CUSTOM FIT LEDGE STONE -"EAGLE PROSTACK LEDGE STONE -"BLACK PROSTACK LEDGE STONE -"BLACK
MOUNTAIN" (3011) MOUNTAIN" (3011) TUSK" (7021) TUSK" (7021)
10. FRONT DOOR AND PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE
GARAGE DOOR PAINTED HC - 64 "TOWNSEND HARBOUR HC - 64 "TOWNSEND HARBOUR CC - 542 "WILLOW' CC - 542 "WILLOW"
BROWN" BROWN"
11. ALUMINUM FLASHING PRE FINISHED WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE
� 6 1 O v., rs
� �e_3 f6�
1 of 2
EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE FILE: 20�3-��s - so - Nelson
22830,22850 AND 22942,136 AVE., MAPLE RIDGE, B.C.
INSIGNIA HOMES SILVER VALLEY LTD.
MATERIALS FINISH SCHEME 5 KHAKI/GREEN SCHEME 6 KHAKI/BROWN SCHEME 7 CHARCOAUBLACK SCHEME 8 TAUPE/CHARCOAL
1. HORIZONTAL VINYL
SIDING PRE-FINISHED GENTEC Sage Green GENTEC Sage Green GENTEC Storm GENTEC Pebbie
2. HEAVY PROFILE pRE FINISHED �NDMARK 30 YR LANDMARK 30 YR LANDMARK 30 YR LANDMARK 30 YR
ASPHALT SHINGLES "DRIFTWOOD" "DRIFTWOOD" "DRIFTWOOD" "DRIFTWOOD"
3. CEDAR SHINGLES STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR
STAINED SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TR,4NSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN -
"CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR"
4.ARCH.CONCRETE NATURAL NATURAL NATURAL NATURAL NATURAL
5.A. PAINTED WOOD TRIM STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR STAINED SIKENS EXTERIOR
" Pre-primed 2x6 trim SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN -
* Baicony Fascia PAINTED "CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR" "CEDAR"
' Wood Trim
* Open Tail Soffits
S.B. STAINED WOOD TRIM STAINED C-I-L EXTERIOR STAINED C-I-L EXTERIOR STAINED C-I-L EXTERIOR STAINED C-I-L EXTERIOR
SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN - SEMI-TRANSPARENT STAIN -
' Cedar Railing STAINED "B�CK WALNUT" "BLACK WALNUT" "BLACK WALNUT" "BLACK WALNUT"
* Decorative wood brackets
* Wood Columns
6. GUTfERS AND PRE FINISHED �YCAN -"CHARCOAL" KAYCAN -"CHARCOAL" KAYCAN -"CHARCOAL" KAYCAN -"CHARCOAL"
DOWNSPOUTS
7. VINYL WINDOWS PRE FINISHED WHITE VINYL WHITE VINYL WHITE VINYL WHITE VINYL
8. VERTICAL VINYL
BOARD AND BATTON PRE FINISHED GENTEC Sage Green GENTEC Sage Green GENTEC Storm GENTEC Pebble
9. MANUFACTURED STONE ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS - ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS - ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS - ROCKY MOUNTAIN STONEWORKS -
PRE FINISHED CUSTOM FIT LEDGE STONE - CUSTOM FIT LEDGE STONE - CUSTOM FIT LEDGE STONE -"FOG" CUSTOM FIT LEDGE STONE -"FOG"
"PEWTER GREY" (3014) "PEWTER GREY" (3014) (3002) (3002)
10. FRONT DOOR AND PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE PAINTED BENJAMIN MOORE
GARAGE DOOR PAINTED 2134 - 20 "Mid Summer Night" HC - 73 "PLYMOUTH BROWN" 2128-10 "BLACK BEAUTY" HC - 85 "FAIRVIEW TAUPE"
11. ALUMINUM FLASHING PRE FINISHED WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE
}� - 3 I a�s
2 of 2
.3� stu�
� Sel.<mt �
�
1 m2
\ I I
,�� � �-- :..
�
m EPP27906
O �
Roa�
O 1.15 ha
0
0 0
4 "_ _ _ " _' _ ""'"'"" "" "_'_ _ _"""_" ""'""_
7R� 12 Af.Bi GRI56A�1 PAPBtBARK MAPLE
II 61WCGo BILo&1 PRINGETON SB�IIiM PRINGETON SB1iRY MAIDB:HAIR
2 MAGNOUA KOH15 5781ATA RAYAL STAR' FD'fAL STAR MA6Nq_IA
S 29 A 18 AF�UN5 LT�T� LONPAGTA STRAY�RY 1R�
�8 a � ��,�� ��,�.�
P 18 PIB215,1M17NILA'MONI�AINFIF�' .1MAt�EATDROtN�DA
�
K 69 ARLTo5TAFlMoS WA-U251 YANf.aWBiJADE' qtAilqtdUGK
SHfa,B
�p�Hm,���.,,� P IB PI6iI5JAPONIGATriJNfI�MFif�' JAPAHCSEATDFOI�A
APPENDIX D3
M2 J06 NU6BEfL- 120G8R3
iLANTED SRE / REMARKS
bGM GAL; IBM STD� Bt8
bLM C.AIa
25M Hi; Bt8
M5 POi
��:
5 POI;
•I POT;
5 PO�;
y�y, NOlES� • PI.FHi SIIES IN 7HI5 LIST ARE SPEGIFIm PLCORDIN6 To 7F� BG LANDSGAPE STANDAfm, LATEST IDITION. CONTAlIV92 51g5''F�.LIFlm AS PB2
GNfA STANDARDS. 807H P1ANT SIZE AND COM'AJt�2 SIZE ARE Tig MIWMIM AGG�1'ABLE 517E5. • R� TO SPEGIFIGATONS FOR D¢II� CqNTAI�t
t�A51.R0�@ti5 AND 011�2 PLANf MATSUAL REq11REMEN(5. • SEARLH AIID RCM6L MAKE FlJJ:T MAT621AL AVAIIABLE FOR OP110NAL F�VI6�1 BY
LAND�'.LPPE ARLHI7EGT AT 50URLE OF SUPPLY. AREA OF SEARCAi TO INGWDE IAI�L MAINLAI� ATm �Av� VALLEY. • 51BSTITVf10� OBTAIN 4WTf81
�n• r,w. avnrnc+�rm�cx�waum�wu. APPRDJAL FROM 7HE LAM75GAPE ARUIITEGT PRIOR TO MAYJN6 ANY 91B5R1U110N5 TO'fF� SPFLIF� MA7BilAL UNAI'PRDvID SUBSTINfIGtS WLL BE
�����Y�'�°'a��� e (�,IEGTID. ALLOW A MNIMIM OF flVE DAYS PF210F2 TO DSNB2Y F9R REMSiTO �TIME �TINfIONS ARE 51B.EGT TO BG LApAY.�G4PE
xtaaenurvacmmreiaxercve STANDARD-DffI1llTIONOFC.o�111otKaPAVAIUBILITY.
fC'MAtlIm WIZ21LMTbATJUCGQbYXYA1� �
�p1�1O�P'���Q�D�' ALL PLANT MATERIAL MUST BE PROVIDED FROM CERTIFIED DISEASE FREE NURSERY. PROVIDE CERTIFICATION UPON REqUEST.
Park
! BS ha
Park �,
o,nmm`w me.m.e,..m,me e.�� e�.
LAN�SCAPE ABCHITECTUAE
#220-26 Lome Mews
New Westminster, Brltish Columbia
V3M 3U
Te1:604.553.0094
FaIC 604.553.0045
Emall: office@m2la.com
PORIR,41rHOA�S
�S �
AfAPIPl�2
HG
L�TS �8_28
: lWYJlbYMf o wiNONUMazP.
��
L1
M
MW CF{
M=aP�,�R��MOEa �
o,��a,�M,.Th�,m�.,�,,.,�.,�.
no,��aa.u.,,o.m�:,�.�s�e�;�:, �,�,,.
IAN�SCAPE AflCHITECTUflE
V3M 3 V
Tel: 604.553.0044
Fax: fiO4.553.0045
Email: offtce@m2la.com
"i'' '71 '�'��
� ^• •
: �i•n- ezis awixaxumoen.
�a.��a
L2
M
� OFI
IILG!
1+�1�•. 7.r1
x iu.reesrox�rs.auxioxmueroe�arrae•aresoiW.
era roawce mra+arruver.�neawroax:
I 42" PIGKET FETIGE RND GATE
�-s �, �.. ,.-0:
CAMPAGTED GLEAR GRUSH 6RAVEL
\NDSGAPE FABRIG
�MPAGTED SUBGRADE
%�2� COMPACTED CLEAR CRUSH WALKWAY
L3 � �._�,-0.
pceoMeM
nv��+aa.�e.elornum�pa°I�ro W�awN.irwm�mion.
New WestminstereBrltish Columhia
V3M 3L7
Tel: 664.553.0094
Fax: 604.553.0045
Emai�: offi<e@m2la.com
Po�rrRarrHo�s
nssor�rs a�
. wur�Aoc�
ea
DETAILS
vr.i�o
L3
M
aKb: M�,y CF{
mumm =urnaiccrHumow. LC�iS
e RID9E
�
T0:
FROM:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 2013-048-DP
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Development Permit
22987 Dewdney Trunk Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Commercial Development Permit application has been received for the existing Tim Hortons
restaurant located at 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road (see Appendix A). The applicant is seeking to
reconfigure the drive-through route to create a dual order station set up. This will improve the speed
of the drive-through use, and is anticipated to increase the amount of vehicle stacking in the drive-
through line up by two vehicles. The subject property is currently zoned CS-1 and there are no
concurrent development applications for the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Development Permit 2013-048-DP
respecting property located at 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description:
OCP:
Existing:
Zoning:
Existing:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South
East:
EXP Services Inc.
Sandhurst Properties Inc.
Lot: A, Section: 22, Township: 12, Plan: BCP9320
Commercial
CS-1(Service Commercial)
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
Use: Commercial, Single Family Residential
Zone: CD-2-95 (Assembly, Civic, Commercial, and Off-
Street Parking) and CD-1-93 (Amenity Residential
District)
Designation: Commercial, Urban Residential
1108
West: Use:
Zone:
Designation
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Previous Applications:
b) Project Description:
Commercial
C-2 (Community Commercial)
Commercial
Fast Food Resta u ra nt
Fast Food Resta u ra nt
0.29 ha (0.7 acres)
230 Street
Urban Standard
RZ/080/03, DP/080/03, VP/080/03, SD/098/02,
DP/001/99, DP/003/99, RZ/031/97
The applicant proposes to remove two parking spaces and modify the existing drive-through
median to enable two order box stations on the north side of the access right-of-way. This would
allow two separate drive-through customers to place orders simultaneously (see Appendix B). No
changes are proposed to the existing commercial building.
c) Planning Analysis:
Zoning Bylaw:
The subject site is currently zoned CS-1 (Service Commercial)
commercial building are proposed under this application.
Off-Street Parking and Loading Bvlaw:
No changes to the existing
The Maple Ridge Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw No. 4350-1990 requires one parking space
per four seats for restaurant uses in the CS-1 (Service Commercial) zone, plus a five car stack-up for
the drive-through component. The Tim Hortons restaurant has 58 seats, therefore 15 parking
spaces are required. After losing two parking spaces for the second order box station, 35 parking
spaces are still provided, which exceeds the parking space requirement by 20 parking spaces. This
proposed revision will allow for a 15 car stack-up for the drive-through component, an increase of
two stacking spaces; which exceeds the vehicle stacking requirement by ten vehicle stacking spaces.
Official Community Plan:
The development site is designated Commercial and falls within the General Commercial category
due to its location along Dewdney Trunk Road within the Urban Area Boundary and outside of the
Town Centre. The objective of the General Commercial category as stated in the Official Community
Plan (OCP) is to "respond to emerging market trends and shopping preferences and to permit
greater flexibility in the range of commercial uses". The CS-1 (Service Commercial) zone aligns with
the General Commercial category.
In accordance with Official Community Plan Section 8.5, a Commercial Development Permit is
required for this proposal and is subject to a number of key guidelines. The subject property has
been the subject of two prior development permits in 1999 and 2003 for the construction of the Tim
Hortons restaurant and expansion of the drive-through route, respectively. As these development
permits were issued prior to 2006, the guidelines at that time were different than the current
guidelines. Additionally, it is important to note that the key guidelines refer to new developments
-2-
and major changes, and less to minor changes and site reconfiguration. The proposed changes are
not eligible for a minor development permit amendment, as the project does not meet the following
criteria for consideration of a minor amendment to a development permit:
3. Proposed modifications must not alter elements that were controversial or that attracted
considerable discussion from the public, staff, Advisory Design Panel, or Council during
the original Development Permit process.
Noise attenuation from the drive-through order station to adjacent residential properties generated
significant concern and discussion between the public, staff, and the applicant under previous
application RZ/080/03. As this development application is for an expansion to the existing drive-
through design, the key guidelines apply to a limited extent, and three key guidelines (guidelines 3,4,
and 5 below) are not applicable to the subject project. The Planning Department has reviewed the
drive-through reconfiguration in terms of how the changes comply with the key commercial
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.
Under development permit application DP/080/03, an acoustic fence and hedging was added along
the northern property line and a small portion of the western property line that abuts residential land
in order to reduce conflicts between commercial and residential uses.
2. Encourage a pedestrian scale through providing outdoor amenities, minimizing the visual
impact of parking areas, creating landmarks and visual interest along street fronts.
There are limited opportunities to provide outdoor amenities, reduce the visual impact of the existing
parking lot, and increase visual interest along street fronts as a result of the scope of this project and
the service commercial, highway oriented nature of the CS-1 (Service Commercial) zone. However,
these elements have not been impacted in a negative way as a result of the proposed changes. The
pedestrian connection from 230 Street to Tim Hortons will be maintained, as will the landscaping
around the perimeter of the property to reduce the visual impact of the parking lot.
3. Promote sustainable development with multimodal transportation circulation, and low
impact building design.
This guideline does not apply as the proposed site changes are relatively minor in nature, and there
are no proposed changes to the existing building.
4. Respect the need for private areas in mixed use development and adjacent residential
areas.
This guideline does not apply as the project is not a mixed-use development.
-3-
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.
The Tim Hortons restaurant was subject to a development permit in 1999 to guide the form and
character of the building design. As no changes are proposed to the building itself, this guideline
does not apply to this application.
d) Advisory Design Panel:
The proposed changes to the drive-through configuration for the existing Tim Hortons restaurant is
minor in nature and the form and character of the building will not be altered. The proposed
changes are taking place in the parking lot where the drive-through route is located. The application
was forwarded to the Advisory Design Panel for review. The Advisory Design Panel resolved that:
The application be supported as presented and the applicant proceed to Council for approval.
e) Interdepartmentallmplications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department requested that the applicant hire a traffic consultant to review the
drive-through queuing impacts on 230 Street and Dewdney Trunk Road. The applicant has
submitted a letter from LEA Consulting Ltd. confirming that the drive-through reconfiguration will
provide stacking for an additional two vehicles and a professional opinion that the additional
capacity and efficiencies will help to reduce the congestion. The report did not provide an analytical
analysis supporting the additional stacking would address the current queuing issues onto 230
Street. The District will monitor the intersection over time and will work with the owner in considering
modifications if the proposed improvements do not resolve the impacts on 230 Street and Dewdney
Trunk Road.
f) Citizen Implications:
The proposed change is anticipated to speed up the drive-through ordering process for customers.
By increasing the space between the order station and the pick-up window, Tim Hortons staff will
have more time to process the orders. Additionally, the proposed change is anticipated to increase
the drive-through stacking of vehicles by two, which will reduce the back up of vehicles onto 230
Street and improve traffic movement for residents of that street.
g) Financiallmplications:
The subject property is currently landscaped. The Advisory Design Panel has reviewed the
landscaping and has advised that no additional landscaping is required, therefore, there is no
landscape security required for this application.
h) Alternatives:
Under Section 919.1 of the Local Government Act and Section 8.1 of the Official Community Plan
the subject property has been designated a Development Permit Area with special requirements for
commercial development. Council approval is required for the Commercial Development Permit prior
to a Building Permit being issued.
'�
CONCLUSION:
This development application is for the reconfiguration of the existing Tim Hortons drive-through
route to create a dual order station set up; therefore, certain key guidelines are achievable while
others are not applicable. Staff have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied that it complies with
the intent of the key Commercial Development Permit Guidelines of the Official Community Plan. As
the proposed changes are anticipated to improve the functionality of the existing Tim Hortons
restaurant, it is recommended that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal
Development Permit 2013-048-DP respecting the property located at 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road.
"Original signed by Amelia Bowden"
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Jim Charlebois" for
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" for
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B - Site Plan
-5-
12115 � 12114 Q
W 28� �
25$ 26812105 � 12104
259 267 282
12095 12094
120 85 283
264 265 266 12084
�
N
� °' 284
N N
12074
12064
� � � � � � 310
� N 2 N 3N 4 N 5N N 309
P 842 1 P 450 '
BC P 22 903
LOT 1
N
�
N
N
P 84291
BC P 37415
LOT A
�
�
N
N
DEWDNEYTRUNK ROAD
10
12107
9
12073
P 15g849
12067
� ,�12057
�
ti
a 212053
38 12041
P 32509
A
BC P 93 20
�
�
6�
N
N
0
N 12116
32 �
12106 �
N
�
APPENDIX A
12153 121464
374
f� 12151 12,� 44
� 375
I� 12149
1'
a 457 12147 12
377
31 � 12145
12064 � 37$
� 23013
P 209 69 � 2301 � �,� �
12056 30 379 Q.QQ��J
O°' � 2"O
� �3� ��
12048 M
2N �
Subject Property
12022
CP 8273)
A
117
�
O
M
N
^ N
� W 38
o �
M �
� �
381 382
P 66 38
317 p
P 47120
� N M � � C.�O ti � � �Q O
6) � N � � 6� 6) � OO N N �- r M
N � N N N N N N� 215 N Rem � �a � O
N �
� � P 565 202 � 6 � �� N
� P 8011 P 57 91 � �� 975 N ��
220 229 230 231 223 224 218 2� 7 Pcl. 1 EP 10384
_— ��9s2 P 34984
P 4 788 45 11980
55 154 153 152 151 150 � 1195 5
11951/53 PC�. 2
o � N N �' � � 44
� 6� 6� 6� � (� (V
N N N N N � 189
N
Scale: 1:1,500
�ity�f Pitt
Mead�ows
District of
Langley
M
O
M
N
1194 9
I
; 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road
.�
� N
i N
��
� o �! CORPORATION OF
��� � TH E DI ST RI CT O F
�o
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�
� DATE: May 8, 2013 2013-048-DP BY: JV
DETAILS OF DEVELOPMENT
DATA REQUiRED PROViDED
ZONING SERVIGECOMMERGIAL(CS-1J
SETBHCKS FV 9m 8.i5m"
RV 6m 38.2m
INT.SV 60m 5.52m'
�.Sm 20 ]m
NET LOT AREA (sq mJT 5 B29 sq m 2BOt 4 sq.m
BUIL�INGCOVERAGE MA%.40% 9%
BUILDINGHEIGHT NOTSPECIFIED N/A
GROSSFLOORAREA NOTSPECIFIE� 26ISsq.m
oRNErHRU SraCHiNG 5 6
LOA�ING SPACES Spaces 1 1
Size NOT SPECIFIE� 6.8m x 12m
Barrier- Space RKING
Free S�aIlLenglM1 NOTSPECIFIED 5'03m
S�aIIWItl�M1 3.Bm 3.8m
Stantlartl Spaces 15 34
Parking S�aII LenglM1 S Sm S Om"
StaIIWItliM1 2.)5m 2.)0m`
OverallNumbarof5paces i6 35
AisleWltltM1 ].3m BOm
OTHER'.' EXISTING SITE CONDITION
iNTEGRATED SPEAKER MENU BOARDS
('SMB) TO B- SEf AT ��.�m (INCL. 9.5m
STACKING 131iL�K) I fiO�A 4'ICK U4' WINUOW,
MEASURE� ALCN6 µ 01 ���iNL—Ill��tl,
LANE.
OVERALL LOSS OF 3 PARKING SPACES
EXISTING GRADING TO BE MAINTAINED-
CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE POSITNE FLOW
OF SURFACE wATER AND MAINiAIN
EXISTING �RAINAGE PATTEftNS- PROVIDE
CURB CUTS AS REQUIRED, AT
APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS.
MENU ISLAND IS NOT STANDARD LENCTH_
PLEASE REFER TO TH•5 DRAWING FOR
DiMEN5i0N.
�
[*o��
un�cx �, mp)iure
cx. ca !
Wc/w�nvo� os
ocrqlis)P-R owG Na 3
a
o�c/W u� rvnic inav �
(ttP. Pox 2) pG �
vaiH.m uNcs �na_� �
ex. vuHreo uH�s �
crvaos�a[ enc[ � k�.
\�
s[ a[mov[o "u ro �
�
*a a reEuwm � �
� — — —
��
�
1� - .
PaH.Eo �Ha mP�
� eo�uws p) � �
_ _ �*•L+�-'°L�_� m _ _ _ — �
_ __— I
I
I
I
cxu�onorvc�owx i
i
i�I
v� c.�rvc vno� b� I,�es[us
rx���
R �'llll
cl�oow �
Ex ur,wi PoiE �
slcN— `•rvw � _ iz —II��
DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
rx ii�aoir
W
W
�
E. .L
�
�
N
�
APPENDIX B
MAPLE RIDGE, BC siTEP�^N
22985 DEW DNEV TRUNK ROAD S P
RESTAURANT No1803
�
�
�
Deep itoois
Greater Heights
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
Adjustments to 2013 Collector's Roll
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
DATE: Apr. 07, 2014
FILE N0: T21-212-003
ATTN: C.O.W.
BC Assessment has revised the assessed value for the 2013 Collector's Roll through the issuance of
Supplementary Roll 12. The Collector is required to make all the necessary changes to the municipal
tax roll records and reports these adjustments to Council.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
The report dated Apr. 07, 2014 is submitted for information.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
One folio was adjusted:
An appeal filed with the Property Assessment Appeal Board (PAAB) resulted in an adjustment to the
assessed value of a seniors' independent & assisted living facility to more accurately reflect the
value and condition of the improvements. Similar adjustments were made for this property in 2012
for the 2010 through 2012 assessment values.
(Municipal tax revenue changes: Decrease in Class 1(Residential) $ 6549.16)
b) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
There is a total decrease of $ 6,549.16 in municipal tax revenue.
Page 1 of 2
1131
CONCLUSIONS:
Adjustments by BC Assessment resulted in a decrease of $1,529,000 to the Residential
assessment base.
This report dated Apr. 07, 2014 is submitted for information and is available to the public.
"Original signed bv Silvia Rutledge"
Prepared by: Silvia Rutledge
Manager, Revenue & Collections
"Original signed bv Paul Gill"
Approved by: Paul Gill, B.B.A.; C.G.A.
General Manager: Corporate & Financial Services
"Ori inal signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
Page 2 of 2
��,
� �: .
❑EEa Roa:s
Greater Heights
T0:
FROM
SUBJECT
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
2014 Community Grants
DATE: April 7, 2014
FILE N0:
ATTN: Committee of the Whole
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Council has established a budget of $62,000 for community grant purposes in 2014. This limited pool of
funding allows Council to support organizations providing valuable community services. In previous years,
Council committed to providing an annual grant of $5,000 to the Alouette Home Start Society, leaving
$57,000 available for allocation to other applicants. For 2014, staff has received a request for $5,000
from the Maple Ridge Concert Band to support an event to celebrate the Bandstand's 20 years of service
to the community. The Community Grant's budget does not have the capacity to support the request in full
and staff is recommending that the additional funding required ($2,538) be provided from reserved
Gaming Revenues.
Staff has reviewed the grant applications received in relation to Council's Community Grants policy and
recommends the grant allocations shown on the attached Schedule "A".
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That the proposed allocation of grants as shown on Schedule "A" of the staff report dated April 7, 2014
titled 2014 Community Grants be approved, and
That funding in the amount of $2,538 be approved from Gaming Revenues to accommodate the Maple
Ridge Concert Band's request to support a Bandstand Birthday Bash in full.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The community grants budget of $62,000 is a limited pool of funding established by Council to assist
organizations providing valuable community services. Over the past several years, we have seen a
number of community organizations increasingly struggle to find sustainable funding for their
programs. Through the community grants program, Council has been able to provide some groups
with bridge funding as they work toward achieving long-term stable funding. In some instances, the
Municipality has supported organizations with annual funding.
Due to fiscal restraints, it is often not possible to provide the level of support that groups request, so
an effort is made to ensure that the available budget is distributed where it will benefit the
community the most.
In 2013, Council adopted a Community Grants policy, formalizing the eligibility and evaluation
criteria used when considering the allocation of the community grants budget. The intent of the
policy was to ensure that any community groups looking for funding would have information on the
types of requests that Council would consider and how their application would be evaluated.
Page 1 of 5
1132
As in previous years, groups that applied for, and were denied, a permissive tax exemption are
eligible to apply for a Community Grant. For 2014, 2 groups fell into this category: the North Fraser
Therapeutic Riding Association (NFTRA) and the Army Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada. The
NFTRA has submitted a Community Grant application that is detailed later in the report. The Army
Navy and Air Force Veterans opted not to submit an application.
For 2014, some of the available budget has already been committed through Council decisions in
previous years. The agreement with the Alouette Home Start Society (AHSS) for the Iron Horse Youth
Safe House provides for a grant to offset property taxes to support their work with youth. We
estimate that the amount required for this is $5,000.
After providing for these commitments, $57,000 is available to accommodate additional requests.
The following provides some information about grant requests recommended for support in 2014.
The Family Education and Support Centre's Community Kitchen program helps local citizens living
below the poverty line learn how to prepare affordable and nutritious meals while also providing a
place of social contact and information about community resources. The group applies to the
various credit unions and the United Way for funding every year. It can take some time to find out if
grant applications were successful and services may need to be reduced or cut pending those
funding decisions. Bridge funding from the Municipality allows the Community Kitchen program to
continue without interruption. A contribution of $4,000 is recommended to enable the program
continue until other funding can be secured.
The Community Network has a strong commitment to contribute to the current and future social
sustainability of our community and seeks to build a"culture of connectiveness" within the social
fabric of Maple Ridge. The Family Education and Support Centre is a founding member of the
Community Network and serves as host for the Network coordination funds. Other agencies that
provided funding for the Network in the past have withdrawn their support and the Network is
looking for a$5,000 grant to alleviate this funding shortfall. The District provides the Community
Network with $25,000 from gaming revenues, so the additional grant would bring the total
contribution to the network to $30,000 for 2014. Staff is recommending approval of the grant.
The Friends in Need Food Bank helps to provide food to between 2,500 and 3,000 people in the
community. The Municipality has supported this organization for many years, not only through the
community grants program, but also through the direct efforts of staff fundraising and annual food
drives. In 2013, the Municipality has provided the Food Bank with $14,700. The Food Bank has
requested an increase to $20,000. Staff recommends a grant of $15,000 for 2014.
The Maple Ridge Concert Band originally gifted the Memorial Park Bandstand to the District in 1994
and recently provided Council with an update on their intention to host a"Bandstand Birthday Bash"
to celebrate its 20 years of service in the community. To facilitate this celebration the Maple Ridge
Concert Band requested funding of $5,000 through the Parks and Leisure Services Festival Support
funding program. Unfortunately, their request could not be accommodated within the festivals
funding envelope and it was forwarded to the Community Grant Review Committee. The Community
Grants budget does not have the capacity to support the full amount requested and staff is
recommending that additional funding from reserved Gaming Revenues be authorized in order to
support this one-time request in full. Funding would be provided as follows: $2,462 from the
existing Community Grants budget envelope and $2,538 from reserved Gaming Revenues.
The Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, Katzie Seniors Network Intergenerational Garden is a
neighbourhood based initiative that promotes inter-generational relationships while providing seniors
Page 2 of 5
with opportunities to build community connections. The program is targeted primarily toward seniors
and school age children, but is open to the wider community and serves to promote urban
agriculture. The group is requesting $3,000 to support the acquisition of garden material and
supplies essential to the success of the program. Staff is recommending a grant of $2,000.
The North Fraser Therapeutic Riding Association (NFTRA) provides therapeutic equine activities for
children and adults with physical, emotional or developmental disabilities. The group applied for a
permissive tax exemption for 2014, but was denied as the programs offered, while valuable, did not
fit within our permissive tax exemption policies. As per policy, the group was eligible to apply for a
community grant. They have requested funding of $1,538 to help them fence an additional paddock
for their herd of therapeutic horses. Staff is recommending the grant be approved.
The Salvation Army Caring Place has requested a grant of $7,774 to support their community meal
program. On a daily basis, this program provides 107 bag lunches to school age children in addition
to serving three meals a day at the Caring Place. The Municipality has supported this program for a
number of years and staff recommends a grant of $6,000 for 2014.
As in other years, the Maple Ridge Lions Club, in conjunction with the Fire Department, plans to host
the annual Halloween Fireworks Display. In 2004, Council adopted a bylaw banning the sale or use
of fireworks in Maple Ridge. Since that time, the Lions Club has been coordinating this popular
community celebration and while some monies may be raised through sponsorship, a municipal
contribution of $3,000 is recommended to support the event.
In 2009, Council committed to providing the Haney Farmers Market Society with a total of $10,000
over two years to help with their efforts to promote the Farmer's Market and provide opportunities
for citizens to connect directly with local food producers. The results from that initial commitment
helped to increase the economic viability of the Market and in an effort to sustain that trend in 2011,
the Society requested $6,000 annually for 2 years. The society has researched sustainable market
funding models and identified that most markets require some annual grant funding to remain
financially viable. The Society has been working to secure an alternative funding source, but to date
has not been able to secure the funding partner. The Society continues to work to find alternate
funding sources and is optimistic they will be successful, although some level of municipal funding
may be needed on an ongoing basis in order to allow the Market to leverage additional funding.
Staff is recommending that Council provide a grant of $6,000 to support the Market in 2014.
The Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Agricultural Association's annual Country Fest is a popular
community event that Council has supported since 2008. The event serves to educate attendees
about agriculture and to celebrate local farmers and farming. The event also provides a venue for
local 4-H youth to show their livestock and learn valuable leadership skills. The Association is
requesting a grant of $12,000 to assist with the 2014 event. Staff is recommending the grant be
approved.
The Friends in Need Food Bank, Family Education and Support Centre NFTRA, the Salvation Army
and the Alouette Home Start Society receive monies from other levels of government. These
revenues help the organizations with their service goals but additional grant monies from the
Municipality will help to offset the pressures of rising costs and may help groups leverage additional
funding from other agencies.
Council established the Community Grant program to help achieve the vision of a safe and livable
community supported by a network of organizations that contribute to the wellness and vitality of the
community. In addition to the Community Grant program, Council also has an established funding
envelope to support the may festivals enjoyed by the community each year. The Parks & Leisure
Page 3 of 5
Services Commission is responsible for the allocation of the festivals budget in support of events
such as the Caribbean Festival and Canada Day celebrations. The Municipality also provides
support to a number of local organizations through fee-for-service agreements. The operating
departments manage these agreements and the associated budgets. Organizations currently
participating in fee for service agreements include Adopt-a-Block and the Alouette River
Management Society (ARMS), who recently merged their operations, the Kanaka Education &
Environmental Partnership Society (KEEPS), the Youth & Justice Advocacy Association and Ridge
Meadows Search & Rescue. During the annual business planning process staff will be reviewing the
grants received by community groups over the past number of years to see if some of these
programs would be better served through either the Parks and Leisure Services Festival Support
funding program or with fee-for service agreements starting in 2015.
b) Desired Outcomes:
Organizations, such as those identified on Schedule "A", are increasingly struggling to secure long-
term sustainable funding coupled with increasing demand for the services they provide. Through the
community grants program, Council is able to help such organizations continue with the provision of
services to the residents of Maple Ridge.
c) Business Plan / Financial Implications:
The distribution of community grants proposed on the attached Schedule "A" allocates all $62,000
of the available budget to various community groups and requires an additional $2,538 from
Gaming Revenues. Pending Council's approval, this will be incorporated into the next Financial Plan
update.
d) Alternatives
Council could choose not to distribute any grants other than those previously committed to, but as
that decision may jeopardize the ability of various organizations to continue providing necessary
services that is not recommended.
CONCLUSIONS
The provision of grants to local organizations benefits the citizens of Maple Ridge. The distribution
proposed on Schedule "A" attempts to allocate the limited resources to provide benefit to the community.
"Original signed by Catherine Nolan"
Prepared by: Catherine Nolan, CGA
Manager of Accounting
"Original signed bv Paul Gill"
Approved by: Paul Gill, CGA
GM Corporate & Financial Services
Page 4 of 5
"Original signed bv Kellv Swift"
Approved by: Kelly Swift
GM Community Development
Parks & Recreation
"Original signed bvJ.L.(Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
Schedule "A"
. �'• • � �
Requested Recommendation
Amount for 2014 for 2014 How the Grant will be used
Total Budget Available as per the 2014 Financial Plan $ 62,000
Recommended use of reserved Gaming Revenues $ 2,538
To assist the Alouette Homestart Society with their
endeavors to support the youth of the community
by providing a level of assistance not to exceed
Alouette HomestartSociety $ 5,000 $ 5,000 their Municipal propertytaxes.
To assist the organization with their Community
Kitchens program while they work to secure stable
Family Education and Support Centre 4,000 4,000 fundingforthe program
To supportthe coordination of the Community
Family Education and Support Centre (Community Network) 5,000 5,000 Network
To assist the organization with their goal of
providingfood to the hungry in Maple Ridge
(replace van used for local pick up & delivery of
Friends in Need Food Bank 20,000 15,000 food)
Maple Ridge Concert Band 5,000 5,000 To assist with the Bandstand Birthday Bash
To support the Intergenerational Garden, a
neighbourhood based initiative intended to
MR, PM, Katzie Seniors Network 3,000 2,000 develop intergenerational relationships
To assist NFTRAfence an additional paddock for
North FraserTherapeutic RidingAssociation 1,538 1,538 their herd oftherapeutic horses
To assist the Salvation Army's Community Meal
Salvation Army 7,774 6,000 Program
Fireworks Display (Maple Ridge Lions Club) 3,000 3,000 Annual Halloween Fireworks Display
To assist the market's efforts to become self
Haney Farmers' Market 6,000 6,000 sustaining.
MR, PM Agricultural Association 12,000 12,000 To assist with the annual Country Fest
Totals $ 72,312.00 $ 64,538.00
Unallocated Community Grants - $ -
Page 5 of 5
MAPLE RIDGE
6ritish Co[umhla
T0:
FROM:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 0640-30-01
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C.O.W.
SUBJECT: RIDGE MEADOWS SENIOR SOCIETY GOVERNANCE REVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The attached report was reviewed by the Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services
Commission at their meeting of March 13, 2014.
During the discussions a request was made to refer the alternatives described in the Ridge Meadows
Senior's Society Governance Review Report of March 13, 2014 to the Joint Leisure Services Model
Review process and staff committed to do this.
Staff were also asked to provide an update on implementation of the Ridge Meadows Senior's
Society Governance Review recommendations after six months and agreed to do so.
RECOMMENDATION:
No resolution required.
`Original signed by Kelly Swift'
Prepared by: Kelly Swift
General Manager, Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services
`Original signed byJim Rule'
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
:ik
Attachment - PLS Commission Report 2014-03-14
1151
%� ��
Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows
Maple Ridge Parks & Leisure Services Commission Report
Pitt Meadows REGULAR MEETING
PARKS & LEISURE SERVICES March 13, 2014
SUBJECT: RIDGE MEADOWS SENIOR SOCIETY GOVERNANCE REVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In January 2013, Commission approved an addendum as a supplement to the current Fee for
Service Agreement (FFS) between the Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services
Commission (the Commission) and the Ridge Meadows Senior's Society (RMSS), addressing the
operation of the Pitt Meadows Senior Centre (PMSC). Commission authorized staff to enter into this
addendum to the FFS agreement which will expire on December 31, 2014, coinciding with the
expiration of the current FFS agreement.
In addition to approving the addendum, Commission passed a resolution directing staff to review the
FFS after one year and report on how the FFS is working in relation to the operation of the new Pitt
Meadows Seniors Facility.
Over the past year RMSS has conducted a number of consultation processes focused on evaluating
the services they provide. As a result, they have developed a new strategic plan that focuses on six
improvement areas. The plan is designed to build on strengths and address areas for improvement.
The new board in place in 2014 is committed to the implementation of this plan.
RMSS has worked cooperatively with PLS staff to conduct a review of the governance model under
the FFS agreement that considers the past year's experience related to the operation of the Pitt
Meadows Seniors Centre, along with the feedback from RMSS members and citizens. In addition, in
January 2014, the PLS staff liaison conducted a series of focus groups designed to review the
effectiveness of the current RMSS governance model as it relates to the operation of the Pitt
Meadows Seniors Centre. Resulting recommendations are based on the above experience, member
and citizen feedback, and the outcome of this focus group process. A summary of the findings and a
list of recommendations developed in collaboration with, and endorsed by, both RMSS and the Pitt
Meadows Senior's Committee (PMSC) are included in this staff report.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Parks & Leisure Staff be directed to support the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society and the Pitt
Meadows Seniors Committee to implement the recommendations outlined in this report designed to
improve the RMSS governance model and the operation of the Pitt Meadows Seniors Centre;
And further,
That staff be directed to support the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society in incorporating the
recommendations from the governance review into the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society Strategic
Plan and ensure that these recommendations and findings inform the renewal process for the
2015-2017 Commission Fee for Services Agreement with the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society.
\\mr.corp\docs\CDPR-Ad m in\01-Adm in\0540-Council-Com mittees\20-PLSC\02-Agendas\Regular\2014\2014-03-
13\PLSC_RMSS_Governance_Review_2014-03-13.doc #1
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
In January 2013 the FFS addendum was approved by Commission and a resolution to review the
addendum within one year was endorsed. Subsequently, concerns were raised by the PMSC regarding
the operation of the Pitt Meadows Seniors Centre. As a result, Parks and Leisure Services staff and
RMSS worked together to conduct a 55+ Engagement process. This project included: asset mapping
through surveys and focus groups, 2 Senior Symposiums (one in Pitt Meadows and one in Maple Ridge)
and a final report with recommendations on the future direction of recreation services for seniors. The
information gathered through this process has supported RMSS in reviewing operations and programs
and has further informed their Strategic Plan. A report with the final recommendations was presented
to Commission at the November 14, 2013 meeting.
The steps for the review included:
1. Review of the Present System
In preparation to conduct this review, through discussions with both RMSS and PMSC it became
clear that there was a need to establish a clear understanding of both the history of the
relationship and the current structure including: structure of agreements, and the responsibilities
assigned by the agreements. The General Manager of Parks and Leisure Services conducted an
orientation that outlined both the Parks and Leisure Services Joint Services Agreement and the
FFS with RMSS. Subsequently, the staff liaison conducted informational meetings with both
RMSS and PMSC reviewing the history and the details of the FFS structure.
During these informational meetings to share this history, it became clear that a formal
discussion between RMSS and PMSC of the changes to procedures that were required for the
move to the new facility had not occurred and that PMSC needed to be provided with an
opportunity to input to the decisions regarding the changes.
2. Governance Review Process:
The review of the governance model included a review of the feedback that RMSS and PMSC
had gathered through the consultation processes they have completed to date including: the
development of a strategic plan, orientation of a new board, three surveys (staff, membership,
and general public aged 55+), and the completion of a 55 Plus Engagement Strategy.
The following themes emerged from the Focus Group discussions:
1. Strengths of the current governance system and proposed solutions
• All felt that their relationship with RMSS and PMSC was steadily improving.
• All groups indicate they are feeling that recent efforts to address concerns are creating a
feeling of promise toward the future.
• PMSC-led programs at the PM Senior Centre are generally well attended and interest is
continuing to grow.
• The newly elected RMSS Board is supportive and looking to the future with an emphasis on
solidifying and creating relationships.
\\mr.corp\docs\CDPR-Ad m in\01-Adm in\0540-Council-Com mittees\20-PLSC\02-Agendas\Regular\2014\2014-03-
13\PLSC_RMSS_Governance_Review_2014-03-13.doc #2
2. Identified Areas for Improvement:
The consultation and review process identified the following five areas for improvement:
Information Transparency
• Communication between RMSS and their membership, their partners and PMSC needed
improvement.
• Need for timely and consistent information flow between RMSS staff and RMSS
to keep partners and volunteers informed.
ii. Relationship development
• Creation of an environment at facilities, in programs, with volunteers, and with partners
that fosters a culture that is welcoming and promotes diversity.
• Ensure future involvement of stakeholders in creating common goals and shared vision
for the development of program services.
iii. Membership
The need to focus on expanding the membership through a campaign focused on
diversifying and expanding membership, with a specific strategy targeting the 55 to 65
age group.
Support the strengthening of the membership and capacity of the PMSC.
iv. Financial
• Focus on fiscal responsibility.
• Financial information pertaining to the operations, programming, and fundraising
related to the Pitt Meadows Seniors Centre shared regularly with the focus on PMSC.
v. Marketing and Promotions
• Focus on the development of a Marketing Plan and Promotional Strategy for all
RMSS programs and operations.
3. Recommendations:
The following recommendations were developed in response to the feedback through the
focus group process, review of the outcomes of the 55 Plus Engagement Strategy, and
review of the RMSS strategic plan. These recommendations were developed in
collaboration with, and are supported by, both RMSS and PMSC.
1. Clarification of Roles and Relationship (PMSC to RMSS):
a. Recommendation - to create a new Terms of Reference (TOR) for the PMSC. The
process to create the new TOR will be inclusive of full participation by PMSC,
RMSS and facilitated by the PLS staff liaison.
b. Recommendation - to include new TOR as a requirement in future Parks and
Leisure and RMSS FFS Agreements and that the TOR be reviewed by PMSC,
RMSS and PLS liaison at the end of each term.
\\mr.corp\docs\CDPR-Ad m in\01-Adm in\0540-Council-Com mittees\20-PLSC\02-Agendas\Regular\2014\2014-03-
13\PLSC_RMSS_Governance_Review_2014-03-13.doc #3
2. Need for mechanisms for improved communication and information sharing:
a. Recommendation - that PMSC and RMSS meeting structure and frequency be
outlined in Terms of Reference.
3. PLS staff liaison to support RMSS and PMSC to form working committees to support
the implementation of the six goals identified in RMSS Strategic Plan.
4. Alternatives Explored
The following alternatives were explored with both RMSS and PMSC and as a result of those
discussions are not being recommended.
1. Create a new PM Senior's Society to enter into a FFS Agreement for the operation of the
Pitt Meadows Seniors Centre.
2. Investigate a Service Agreement with a new organization (non-profit or for profit
organizations).
These alternatives, as well as the recommendations listed in Section 3 of this report, were
discussed at the meetings of both RMSS and the Pitt Meadows Seniors Committee and the
following motions were passed at each meeting:
On Wednesday February 26, 2014 the RMSS Board voted unanimously to support the
recommendations in this report.
On Wednesday February 26, 2014 PMSC presented a motion to vote on the
recommendations presented in this report and the alternatives presented in this
report. The PMSC unanimously passed the motion in favour of continuing as a
Committee of RMSS and supportingthe recommendations in this report.
Should Commission be interested in exploring either of the above options, Commission
could direct staff to research further and bring back a report on the implications including
financial.
b) Desired Outcome:
To support the Pitt Meadows Steering Committee & Ridge Meadows Senior Society in providing
opportunities for people 55 plus in Pitt Meadows by strengthening and clarifying their
relationship and by formalizing the roles and responsibilities of both RMSS and PMSC as they
relate to the operation of the Pitt Meadows Senior Centre.
c) Strategic Alignment:
To promote and support a healthy, safe and sustainable community working together to build
individual strengths, and create a strong sense of community.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Increased and improved recreational opportunities for people aged 55 plus in Pitt Meadows and
Maple Ridge.
\\mr.corp\docs\CDPR-Ad m in\01-Adm in\0540-Council-Com mittees\20-PLSC\02-Agendas\Regular\2014\2014-03-
13\PLSC_RMSS_Governance_Review_2014-03-13.doc #4
CONCLUSIONS:
This report is an overview of the review of the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society Fee for Service
Addendum as requested by the Commission. PMSC and RMSS have shown a tremendous passion
for volunteering and providing programs and services for people 55 plus in Pitt Meadows and Maple
Ridge and are committed to supporting the recommendations outlined in this report. The PLS staff
liaison will continue to work closely with RMSS and PMSC to implement the recommendations,
should they be approved.
`Original signed by Dave Speers, Acting/Recreation Manager, Youth & Neighbourhoods'
Prepared By: Tony Cotroneo
Recreation Manager, Community Services
`Original signed by Sue Wheeler'
Approved By: Sue Wheeler
Director Community Services
`Original signed by Kelly SwifY
Approved By: Kelly Swift
General Manager, Community Development
Parks & Recreation Services
:tc
\\mr.corp\docs\CDPR-Ad m in\01-Adm in\0540-Council-Com mittees\20-PLSC\02-Agendas\Regular\2014\2014-03-
13\PLSC_RMSS_Governance_Review_2014-03-13.doc #5
MAPLE RIDGE
6ritish Co[umhla
T0:
FROM:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 7, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 0640-30-01
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C.O.W
SUBJECT: FESTIVAL SUPPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the March 13, 2014 Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services Commission
meeting, a report on Festival Support Recommendations - First Intake, March 2104, was reviewed.
The report is attached for Council's information.
As part of this process, the Commission recommended that the request for one-time funding to
assist the Maple Ridge Concert Band to host a Birthday Bash to raise funds toward further upgrades
to the Bandstand be forwarded to Maple Ridge Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
(1) That a request to fund the one-time Maple Ridge Concert Band, Bandstand Fundraising
Event, be referred to the Community Grant Review Committee.
`Original signed by Kelly Swift'
Prepared by: Kelly Swift
General Manager, Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services
`Original signed byJim Rule'
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
:ik
Attachment - PLS Commission Report 2014-03-14
1152
,- Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows
Parks & Leisure Services Commission Report
Maple Ridge REGULAR MEETING
Pitt Meadows
PARKS & LEISURE SERVICES March 13� 2014
SUBJECT: FESTIVAL SUPPORT RECOMMENDATIONS - 1� Intake, March 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Applications for festival support were reviewed by the Festival Sub-Committee on February 18, 2014
and evaluated with reference to the benefit criteria outlined in Commission's Festival Support Policy.
The financial documentation provided with the applications was also examined to ensure that event
organizers requesting event funding had clearly demonstrated the need for financial support. The
Sub-Committee's detailed recommendations for support allocations are attached in the summary
chart.
The Sub-Committee noted that the quality, complexity, and number of festivals in the two
communities continue to grow. As a result, the task of distributing the existing dollars is becoming
increasingly difficult as the requests extend far beyond the capacity of the 2014 Festival Support
Funding. It appears that the stress on this budget will continue to grow as the capacity for volunteers
to host festivals within the community increases along with the rising costs of implementing events.
We recognize that every festival conducts their own fundraising initiatives to cover the majority of
their costs, however, the festivals support grant provides seed funding that helps to leverage
additional dollars and to show municipal support.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That the festival support allocations for May to November 2014 be approved as noted in the
summary developed by the Commission Festival Support sub-committee, attached to the 2014-
03-13 report on this subject for a total allocation of $32,450;
2. That a request be forwarded to Maple Ridge Council to fund the one-time Maple Ridge Concert
Band, Bandstand Fundraising Event;
3. That a request be forwarded to both Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Councils to consider an
increase in funding for festival support, during the 2015 business planning process.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The Festival Sub-committee, comprised of Commissioners Alanna Carmichael, Shannon Roberts
and Stephany Tunshell, reviewed all applications received prior to the February 18, 2014
meeting. Sixteen funding applications, for community events taking place May 1 to November
30, were reviewed. The submissions did not include the protocol events held during this time
period as these events are not required to submit festival support applications and are
guaranteed annual funding. The total amount of $8,400 is allocated to Canada Day and
Remembrance Day events in each of the two communities.
\\m r.corp\docs\CA\01-Ad m i n\0550-Cou nci I-Mtgs-Pu bl ic\20-COW \01-G en \Agen das\2014\2014-04-
07_COW\CDPR\PLSC_Festival_Gra nt_Recommend_2014-03-13.doc
#1
Based on the previous years' funding requests for annual events held from September 1-
December 31, 2014, the Sub-Committee is recommending that $16,477 be held back for the
second application intake and to address requests from potentially new emerging festivals. The
Festival Sub-Committee will meet again to review the requests for the second round of
applications and will make recommendations to Commission in June. The total festival grant
funding is $48,927 in the budget, however the anticipated total requested from both intakes for
this fiscal year is estimated at $77,000.
A particular focus of the Festival Sub-Committee was to ensure consistency between funding
awarded to festivals. As a result, in addition to the funding recommendations, the Sub-
Committee applied the following criteria in their decisions:
Maximum funding for larger festivals be established ($5,000 proposed for 2014) and
consistently applied, and that this amount be based on available resources and comparing
similar festivals.
o Implications in 2014 recommendations - Pitt Meadows Day be awarded the same
amount as Caribbean Festival and Country Fest.
Comparisons be established with categories (e.g. similar types of events) to allow for
consistency in allotting funding allocations:
o Implications in 2014 recommendations - 3 day festivals to receive similar funding
allocation (e.g. Bard on the Bandstand and Bluegrass Festival).
b) Desired Outcome:
The desired outcome is that community festivals provided to local residents and tourists by
volunteer festival organizers, are successful and effective, providing opportunities for citizens to
contribute to community, and for citizens to connect and participate in their community.
c) Strategic Alignment:
It is recognized that encouraging citizens to develop their creative potential and sense of
community through special events and festivals contributes to building a healthy, vibrant and
engaged community. Citizen participation is integral to both Pitt Meadows and Maple Ridge
Councils' strategic plans.
d) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The recommended level of funding falls within the budget guidelines and it allows for the funding
of new events as requests come forward throughoutthe year.
e) Policy Implications:
As per Festival Support Policy P100.
CONCLUSIONS:
An evaluation of all festival applications has been conducted by the Sub-Committee and they are
recommending that festivals receive the level of financial support as outlined in the Festival Review
Chart - February 2014 for a total of $32,450 in the first intake.
With the growth and interest in community festivals, the Sub-Committee recommended that both
Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Councils consider an increase in funding for festival support during
the 2015 business planning process. To stay within the 2014 festival grant allocation budget and to
not compromise funding support for other community festivals, that a request be forwarded to Maple
Ridge Council to fund the one-time Maple Ridge Concert Band Bandstand Fundraising Event.
\\m r.corp\docs\CA\01-Ad m i n\0550-Cou nci I-Mtgs-Pu bl ic\20-COW \01-G en \Agen das\2014\2014-04-
07_COW\CDPR\PLSC_Festival_Gra nt_Recommend_2014-03-13.doc
#2
Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows have a strong culture of volunteer support for festivals and events
that enhance citizens' quality of life, encourage community identity and spirit, enhance economic
benefits, attract tourists and participants, develop volunteerism and demonstrate a sense of
responsibility to the community. The Festival Grant Program recognizes and supports these
volunteer contributions and the positive outcomes they achieve.
`Original signed by Kathryn Baird'
Prepared By: Kathryn Baird
Recreation Coordinator Special Events and
Volunteers
`Original signed by Sue Wheeler'
Reviewed By: Sue Wheeler
Director Recreation
`Original signed by Kelly Swift'
Approved By: Kelly Swift
General Manager, Community Development,
Parks & Recreation Services
:kb
Attach ments:
• Festival Support Review Chart - February 2014
• Festival Policy P100
\\m r.corp\docs\CA\01-Ad m i n\0550-Cou nci I-Mtgs-Pu bl ic\20-COW \01-G en \Agen das\2014\2014-04-
07_COW\CDPR\PLSC_Festival_Gra nt_Recommend_2014-03-13.doc
#3
District of Maple Ridge
T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: March 17, 2014
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW
SUBJECT: Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 6968-2013
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the December 2, 2013 Workshop, Council received an update on the preparation of a new Smoking
Bylaw. At that meeting Council provided feedback on the proposed Bylaw and specific changes were
made to reflect the discussion in Workshop. The purpose of this report is to bring back the amended
proposed Bylaw for Council's consideration and any further discussion that may be warranted.
The Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 5495-1997 should be rescinded in its entirety as it is
outdated and is no longer supported by Provincial legislation.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
THAT Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No.6968-2013 be given first, second and third readings;
and
THAT Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No.6968-2013 is forwarded to the Minister of Health for
approval.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The most recent amendments to the Tobacco Control Act regarding the prohibition of smoking were
passed in the legislature in 2007, 2008 and 2013. These amendments provide local government
with the ability to ban smoking within at least 3 meters of commercial and municipal buildings as
well as municipal parks and playgrounds. If a local government wishes to expand on that distance
they may do so. The regulations are more stringent now in prohibiting both indoor and outdoor
smoking. Additionally, Work Safe BC has tightened up their enforcement requirements for areas of
business and work. The only indoor areas that are not governed by this legislation are dwelling units
as defined under the Zoning Bylaw; a hotel or motel room designated for smoking; enclosed
premises not open to the public where the occupants are the owner or owners of the business
carried on in the premises. All other premises are non-smoking areas within certain distances from
buildings or places.
Currently, Fraser Health is doing enforcement under the Tobacco Control Act Regulation however
strictly from an educational approach. They have extremely limited resources focused in this area.
This includes monitoring businesses for infractions regarding the selling of tobacco as well as
monitoring smoking in public places. However their principle focus is the selling of tobacco to minors.
The attached table set out in Appendix I compares neighbouring municipalities.
Page 1 of 2 1601
There is a range among municipalities with regard to the distance within which smoking is
prohibited. The distance previously recommended was 6 metres. The proposed distance has been
amended to 7.5 metres to reflect the discussion at the December 2, 2013 Workshop. This distance
matches the distance in Pitt Meadows Bylaw which makes it easier for our residents and those of
Pitt Meadows to follow when sharing our trails, parks and facilities.
The proposed Bylaw is mainly an educational enactment for the most part. In most jurisdictions, the
Health Inspectors and the Business Licence Department take on a significant amount of the
educational component, resources permitting. For continuity sake the staff positions named in the
bylaw as having the authority to enforce are the Medical Health Officers, or their delegates, Bylaw
Enforcement Officers, members of the local RCMP and members of the local Fire Department and
any other staff person designated by Council. This is to ensure that all staff inembers in an
enforcement field are aware of the regulations and can easily pass them along to the public.
Specific signage is another required component of this proposed Bylaw and in most other
municipalities either the Health Unit has picked up the cost of signage or they have worked with the
BC Lung Association in having the signs created and then it is a local staff function to conduct the
educational component including distributing the required signs to the individual businesses.
The District of Maple Ridge would be required to post their own signs in areas where smoking is not
permitted on municipal property including parks and playgrounds that is different than the current
regulations.
b) Desired Outcome(s):
The changes in the bylaw will ensure that the District of Maple Ridge Bylaw is in alignment with
current Provincial legislation.
c) Alternatives:
Do not adopt Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 6968-2013 and use the Provincial statute
as written, leaving it up to the Province for complete enforcement, and provide staff with further
direction.
CONCLUSIONS:
Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 5495-1997 is outdated and does not align with the current
Provincial Tobacco Control Act. Because of this, it should be rescinded in its entirety regardless of
whether this new Bylaw is adopted.
The adoption of the new Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw will bring the District's regulations in line
with the Provincial regulations.
"Original signed by E.S. (Liz) Holitzki"
Approved by: E.S. (Liz) Holitzki
Director: Licences, Permits and Bylaws
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
General Manager: Public Works and Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Office
Page 2 of 2
APPENDIX I
Municipality Comparison Chart
Comparison of Lower Mainland Municipalities
Municipality Bylaw Adoption Distance
Port Moody 2008 7.5 metres
Surrey 2008 7.5 metres
Abbotsford 2007 7 metres
District of N. Van 2010 6 metres
Mission 2010 3 metres
Coquitlam 2010 3 metres
Langley City 2009 3 metres
Port Coquitlam 2002 3 metres
Delta 2001 3 metres
New Westminster 2004 3 metres
Richmond no bylaw
Pitt Meadows 2008 7.5 metres
Chilliwack no bylaw
APPENDIX II
District of Maple Ridge
Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation
Bylaw No. 6968-2013
Effective Date:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10
District of Maple Ridge
Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 6968-2013
Table of Contents
Citation................................................................................................1
SeverabiI ity ..........................................................................................1
Previous Bylaw Repeal ........................................................................1
Definitions...........................................................................................1
Banon Smoking ..................................................................................3
Required Signage and Duties of Responsible Person ........................4
Duty of Administration and Enforcement ............................................5
Powerto Inspect ..................................................................................5
Obstruct/ InterFere with Enforcement Officer ....................................5
Offence and Penalty ............................................................................6
District of Maple Ridge
Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 6968-2013
A bylaw to regulate smoking in the District of Maple Ridge.
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge deems it expedient to
provide for the protection, promotion and preservation of the health, safety and welfare of
the inhabitants of the District of Maple Ridge by regulating smoking in the District of Maple
Ridge, as in this bylaw more particularly set out;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the District of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
Part 1 Citation
1.1 This bylaw may be cited as Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation Bylaw No. 6968 -2013.
Part 2 Severability
2.1 If a portion of this bylaw is held invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction, then the
invalid portion must be severed and the remainder of this bylaw is deemed to have
been adopted without the severed section, subsequent, paragraph, subparagraph,
clause or phrase.
Part 3
3.1
Previous Bylaw Repeal
Maple Ridge Smoking Regulation, Bylaw No. 5495-1997 and the following
amendment bylaws are hereby repealed:
Amendment Bylaw Effective Date
Bylaw No. 6058 - 2002 July 23, 2002
Part 4 Definitions
4.1 In this bylaw:
"Building" means a structure or portion of a building or structure which is used or
intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy and includes premises.
"Business" means a business, trade, profession, or other occupation for which a
person must obtain a licence under Maple Ridge Business Licencing and Regulation
Bylaw.
Page 1 of 6
"Common Areas" include, but are not limited to, lobbies, foyers, stairwells, elevators,
corridors, cloakrooms, washrooms, food fair seating areas, and other public areas of
a building.
"Customer Service Area" means a partially enclosed or unenclosed area, including a
balcony, patio, yard or sidewalk, that is part of or connected to, or associated with a
Business or use in a Building or Premises that includes the service of food or
beverages, including alcoholic drinks, to customers or other persons for consumption
on site.
"District" means the District of Maple Ridge.
"Dwelling Unit" means a dwelling as defined in the District of Maple Ridge Zoning
Bylaw.
"Enforcement Officer" means the Medical Health Officer of the District of Maple
Ridge, a delegate of the Medical Health Officer, a Bylaw Enforcement Officer, a
member of the RCMP, a member of the Maple Ridge Fire Department, and any other
person designated by Council.
"Premises" means a portion of a Building in respect of which a person has exclusive
possession.
"Public Transit" includes but not limited to a school bus, a Vehicle for Hire, a
passenger a bus, and a rapid transit vehicle.
"Responsible Person" means a person who owns, controls, manages, supervises, or
operates:
(a) A Business or other use which occupies all or substantially all of a
Building;
(b) A Business or other use which occupies Premises;
(c) Common Areas which includes a strata corporation or cooperative
association;
(d) A Customer Service Area; and
(e) A person who drives a Vehicle for Hire.
"School Property" means property that is owned or leased by, or operated under the
authority of, a board established the School Act or the Independent School Act, and
that is used for the purposes of delivering educational programs or other learning
programs. This includes real property and improvements.
"Smoke" or "Smoking" means to inhale, exhale, burn, or carry a lighted cigarette,
cigar, pipe, hookah pipe, or other lighted smoking equipment that burns tobacco or
other weed or substance.
"Swimming Beach" means any beach that is so designated by sign as a beach used
for swimming or sunbathing.
"Vehicle for Hire" as defined in the District of Maple Ridge Taxi Bylaw.
"Zoning Bylaw" means the the District of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw.
Page 2 of 6
Part 5 Ban on Smoking
5.1 A person shall not Smoke:
5.1.1 In a Building, except in:
a) A Dwelling Unit defined under the Zoning Bylaw including a
Dwelling Unit in which an owner or occupier also carries on a
Business;
b) A hotel or motel room or suite designated for Smoking by a
Responsible Person; or
c) Enclosed Premises:
(i) that are not open to the public;
(ii) where the only occupants are the owner or owners of the
Business carried on in the Premises.
5.1.2 In a Vehicle for Hire;
5.1.3 On Public Transit including a school bus, passenger bus, ferry, or rapid transit;
5.1.4 In, or within seven point five (7.5) metres of, an enclosed or partially enclosed
shelter where people wait to board a Vehicle for Hire or Public Transit;
5.1.5 In a Customer Service Area;
5.1.6 In Common Areas;
5.1.7 Within seven point five (7.5) metres of the perimeter of a Customer Service
Area;
5.1.8 Within seven point five (7.5) metres measured on the ground from a point
directly below any point of any opening into any Building including any door or
window that opens or any air intake;
5.1.9 On any Swimming Beach or in a wading or swimming pool;
5.1.10 Within the areas of municipal park, or playground where there are playing
fields, picnic areas, food concessions or children's play equipment present,
or organized fitness activities taking place;
5.1.11 In any municipal and/or public Building including daycares, recreation and
community centres;
5.1.12 On the grounds of any municipal recreational facility, including skate board
parks;
5.1.13 Within seven point five (7.5) metres of those places outlined in sub sections
5.1.9, 5.1.10, 5.1.11, or 5.1.12 of this bylaw.
Page 3 of 6
Part 6 Required Signage and Duties of Responsible Person
6.1 Except as permitted by section 5.1, a Responsible Person must not suffer or allow a
person to Smoke in:
6.1.1 A Building or Customer Service Area;
6.1.2 Premises or Common Areas;
6.1.3 An area described in sub section 5.1.5 or 5.1.7 except to the extent that all or
part of such area is not part of the parcel on which the Building or Customer
Service Area is situated and is not an area over which such Responsible
Person has possession or control; or
6.1.4 In a Vehicle for Hire.
6.2 Where Smoking is prohibited pursuant to sections 5.1 and 6.1 a Responsible Person
must display, at all times, or ensure the display of a sign:
6.2.5 At each entrance to a Building or Customer Service Area or to a Premise, or in
a Vehicle for Hire. The sign must state, "THIS IS A SMOKE FREE
ENVIRONMENT - NO SMOKING".
6.2.6 On each exterior wall of a Building. The sign must state: "SMOKING IS
PROHIBITED WITHIN SEVEN.FIVE (7.5) METRES OF OPENINGS INTO THIS
BUILDING INCLUDING DOORS AND WINDOWS THAT OPEN AND ANY AIR
I NTAK E"
6.2.7 In outdoor Customer Service Areas, clearly visible from each table or placed
on each table. The sign must state: "THIS OUTDOOR CUSTOMER SERVICE
AREA IS A SMOKE FREE ENVIRONMENT - NO SMOKING"
6.2.8 On the exterior wall, fence or other structure demarking an outdoor Customer
Service Area. The sign must state: "SMOKING IS PROHIBITED WITHIN
SEVEN.FIVE (7.5) METRES OF CUSTOMER SERVICE AREAS"
6.3 All signs referred to in section 6.2 must:
6.3.9 Include the text "Bylaw No. 6968-2013" in letters not less than one-quarter
(1/4) of the height of all other letters on the sign;
6.3.10 Display the international symbol to designate "No Smoking", or, in areas
where smoking is permitted, the international symbol "Smoking Permitted",
which symbol must occupy at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the size of
the sign;
6.3.11 Consist of at least two (2) contrasting colours, except that if the lettering is on
a clear panel then the lettering must contrast to the colour of the background;
6.3.12 Be at least thirty centimeters (30 cm) by fifteen centimeters (15 cm);
6.3.13 Be clearly visible; and
Page 4 of 6
Part 7
Part 8
6.3.14 Except for the text specified in sub section 6.3.1, consist of lettering, whether
upper case or lower case, that is not less than the following heights based
upon the following maximum viewing distances in direct line of sight:
Viewing Distance
3 metres or less
3 metres to 6 metres
6 metres to 12 metres
Letter Hei�ht
1 centimetre
2 centimetres
4 centimetres
A person must not remove, alter, conceal, deface or destroy any sign required under
this Bylaw.
Duty of Administration and Enforcement
The intent of this bylaw is to set standards in the general public interest and not to
impose a duty on the District of Maple Ridge or its employees to enforce its
provisions and:
a) A failure to administer or enforce its provisions or the incomplete
or inadequate administration or enforcement of its provision is not
to give rise to a cause of action in favour of any person; and
b) The grant of any approval or permission or issuance of any permit
is not a representation, warranty or statement of compliance with
the Bylaw and the issuance thereof in error is not to give rise to a
cause of action.
Power to Inspect
8.1 An Enforcement Officer has the right of entry and may enter onto any land, into any
vehicle, or into any building to which this bylaw applies, at all reasonable hours, in
order to ascertain whether the provisions of this bylaw are being complied with.
Part 9
9.1
Obstruct/ Interfere with Enforcement Officer
No person may hinder, delay or obstruct in any manner, directly or indirectly, an
Enforcement Officer carrying out duties in accordance with this Bylaw.
Page 5 of 6
Part 10 Offence and Penalty
10.1 Every person who violates a provision of this bylaw, or who consents, allows or
permits an act or thing to be done in violation of a provision of this bylaw, or who
neglects to or refrains from doing anything required to be done by a provision of this
bylaw, is guilty of an offence and is liable to the penalties imposed under this bylaw,
and is guilty of a separate offence each day that a violation continues to exist.
10.2 Every person who commits an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine not
exceeding $10,000.00.
READ A FIRST TIME on [Date]
READ A SECOND TIME on [Date]
READ A THIRD TIME on [Date]
APPROVED BY MINISTER OF HEALTH on [Date]
ADOPTED by the Council on [Date]
CORPORATE OFFICER
PRESIDING MEMBER
Page 6 of 6