The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-04-22 Council Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge COUNCIL MEETI/VG AGENDA Apri/ 22, 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 April 8, 2014 502 Minutes of the Public Hearing of April 15, 2014 503 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of April 8(3) and April 10 (2), 2014 Page 1 Council MeetingAgenda April 22, 2014 Council Chamber Page 2 of 7 600 PRESENTA T/ONS A T THE REQUEST OF COUNC/L 700 DELEGA T/ONS 800 UNF/N/SHED BUS/NESS 801 Notice of motion by Councillor Hogarth That the District of Maple Ridge adopt riparian area regulations as set out in Provincial Legislation under the Fish Protection Act and endorsed by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 802 Notice of Motion by Councillor Bell To prepare for the receipt of comments from School District No. 42 on the Strategic Facilities Plan, that staff prepare a report on the progress towards completion of the Silver Valley Area Plan including a review of density, population and capacity. 803 Notice of Motion by Councillor Bell That staff be directed to review the structure of the Bylaw Department with a view towards developing a capacity to include a community bylaw education program separate from the bylaw enforcement. 900 CORRESPONDENCE 1000 BYLAWS Bvlaws for Third Readin� Note: Items 1001 to 1003 are from the Public Hearing of April 15, 2014 1001 2013-052-RZ, 23227 Dogwood Avenue Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7003-2013 To allow a site-specific Zoning Bylaw text amendment to the C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) zone to allow apartment use as a permitted principal use; to allow parking as a principal use and to permit increased density for the residential rental units and the retail commercial use Third reading Council MeetingAgenda April 22, 2014 Council Chamber Page 3 of 7 1002 2013-091-RZ, 20395 123 Avenue Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7035-2013 To rezone from RS-1 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-1b (One Family [Medium Density] Urban Residential) to permit future subdivision into 2 single family lots Third reading 1003 2011-002-RZ, 25608 Bosonworth Avenue Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795-2011 To rezone from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to permit a future subdivision of 3 lots Third reading COMM/TTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDA T/ONS 1100 COMM/TTEE OF THE WHOLE 1100 Minutes - April 7, 2014 and April 14, 2014 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. Pub/ic Works and Deve%nment Services 1101 2013-052-RZ, 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004-2013, 23227 Dogwood Avenue Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004-2013 be given first, second and third readings. 1102 2014-014-RZ, 13316 235 Street, RS-3 to R-1 and RS-1b Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7071-2014 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential) to permit 5 fee simple lots zoned RS-1b and 8 bare land strata lots zoned R-1 be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules B and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision application. Council MeetingAgenda April 22, 2014 Council Chamber Page 4 of 7 1103 2013-082-RZ, 13260 236 Street, RS-3 and RS-2 to RM-1 Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that second reading of Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013 as amended to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RM-1(Townhouse Residential) to permit 61 townhouse units be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. 1104 2011-019-RZ, 10515 and 10595 240 Street and 23950 Zeron Avenue, First Extension Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that a one year extension be granted for rezoning application 2011-019-RZ to permit construction of 48 townhouse units under the RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone. 1105 Municipal Equipment Purchase, One Single Axle Recycle Truck Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the contract for the purchase of one single axle recycling truck be awarded to Fort Fabrication and Welding Ltd. and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract. 1106 Excess Capacity/Extended Services Agreement LC 156/14, Bosonworth Avenue and Carmichael Street Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommendingthatthe Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC 156/ 14. Financia/ and Corporate Services (including Fire and Po/ice� 1131 Disbursements for the month ended March 31, 2014 Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the disbursements for the month ended March 31, 2014 be approved. 1132 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements be accepted. Council MeetingAgenda April 22, 2014 Council Chamber Page 5 of 7 1133 2015-2019 Business Planning Process Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the Business Planning Framework timelines be adjusted. 1134 2014 Council Expenses Staff report dated April 14, 2014 providing Council expenses for 2014 updated to the end of March 2014. 1135 Review of Telecom Tower Protocols and Recommended Changes Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending changes to the Telecommunications Tower Siting Protocols applicable to tower building activities in Maple Ridge. 1136 Tax Rates Bylaws - Maple Ridge Road 13 Dyking District and Albion Dyking District Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that Road 13 Dyking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7079-2014 be given first, second and third readings and that Albion Dyking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7080-2014 be given first, second and third readings. Community Deve%pment and Recreation Service 1151 Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) Funding Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that a letter be written expressing concerns with the implementation of a Housing First model. Correspondence 1171 Other Committee /ssues 1181 Council MeetingAgenda April 22, 2014 Council Chamber Page 6 of 7 1200 STAFFREPORTS 1201 2014-2018 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw Staff report dated April 22, 2014 recommendingthat Maple Ridge 2014- 2018 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7076-2014 be given first, second and third readings. 1202 2014 Property Tax Rates Bylaw Staff report dated April 22, 2014 recommendingthat Maple Ridge Property Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7078-2014 be given first, second and third readings. 1203 Recycling Charges Amending Bylaw Staff report dated April 22, 2014 recommendingthat Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Amending Bylaw No. 7051-2014 be given first, second and third readings. 1300 RELEASE OF/TEMS FROM CLOSED COUNC/L From the Closed Council Meeting of April 7, 2014 • Loitering Bylaw Report • Medical Marihuana Update • Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues Committee Appointments 2014 • Silver Valley Lands Update 1400 MA YOR'S REPORT 1500 COUNC/LLORS' REPORTS 1600 OTHER MA TTERS DEEMED EXPED/ENT 1700 NOT/CES OFMOT/ONAND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEET/NG Council MeetingAgenda April 22, 2014 Council Chamber Page 7 of 7 1800 QUEST/ONSFROMTHEPUBL/C 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: District of Maple Ridge COUNC/L MEET/NG April 8, 2014 The Minutes of the Municipal Council Meeting held on April 8, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia for the purpose of transacting regular Municipal business. PRESENT Elected Officials Appointed Staff Mayor E. Daykin J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Councillor C. Ashlie K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development, Councillor C. Bell Parks and Recreation Services Councillor J. Dueck P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services Councillor A. Hogarth F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development Councillor B. Masse Services Councillor M. Morden C. Carter, Director of Planning C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary Other Staff as Required L. Holitzki, Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws Note: These Minutes are also posted on the Municipal Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca The meeting was filmed by Shaw Communications Inc. 100 CALL TO ORDER 200 MOMENT OFREFLECT/ON 300 /NTRODUCT/ON OFADD/T/ONAL AGENDA /TEMS Item 1701 Notice of Motion, Councillor Hogarth Item 1702 Notice of Motion, Councillor Bell Item 1703 Notice of Motion, Councillor Bell 501 Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 2 of 16 400 APPROI/AL OF THEAGENDA The agenda was approved with the following revisions: • The addition of Items 1701, 1702 and 1703 • Item 1601 to be dealt with prior to Item 1400 500 ADOPT/ONAND RECE/PT OFM/NUTES 501 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 25, 2014 R/2014-143 501 Minutes Regular Council It was moved and seconded March 25, 2014 That the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 25, 2014 be adopted as circulated CARRIED 502 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of March 20, 2014 R/2014-144 502 Minutes Development Agmt It was moved and seconded Committee That the minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of March 20, 2014 be received. CARRIED 600 PRESENTA T/ONS A T THE REQUEST OF COUNC/L - N i I 700 DELEGA T/ONS 701 National Volunteer Week • Ashley Singh, Volunteer Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Coordinator Ms. Singh gave a PowerPoint presentation providing information on National Volunteer Week and the Volunteer Centre and its services. Certificates of recognition were awarded to volunteers. Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 3 of 16 800 900 1000 1001 UNF/N/SHED BUS/NESS - N i I CORRESPONDENCE - N i I BYLA WS Bylaws for Final Readin� 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 No. 6724-2010 To amend conservation boundaries, add a neighbourhood park and relocate an equestrian trail Final reading R/2014-145 RZ/013/10 BL No. 6724-2010 Final reading It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 6724-2010 be adopted. CARRIED 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 R/2014-146 RZ/013/10 BL No. 6725-2010 Final reading It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 6725-2010 be adopted. CARRIED Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 4 of 16 COMM/TTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDA T/ONS 1100 COMM/TTEE OF THE WHOLE Minutes - N/A 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. R/2014-147 2013-087-RZ It was moved and seconded BL No. 7068-2014 First reading Forward to PH In respect of Section 879 of the Local GovernmentAct, 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 Bylaw No. 7068-2014 be given first reading; and Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 5 of 16 That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules A, C, D and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. CARRIED 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. R/2014-148 2013-107-RZ It was moved and seconded BL No. 7053-2014 First reading In respect of Section 879 of the Local GovernmentAct, 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 Bylaw No. 7053-2014 be given first reading with the following conditions: Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 6 of 16 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. CARRIED 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. R/2014-149 2013-016-RZ It was moved and seconded BL No. 7069-2014 First, second, PH BL No. 6978-2013 Second reading, PH That in accordance with Section 879 of the Loca/Government Actopportunity for early and ongoing consultation has been provided by way of posting Bylaw No. 7069-2014 on the municipal website and requiring that the applicant host a Development Information Meeting, and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a Public Hearing on the bylaw; 1. That Bylaw No. 7069-2014 be considered in conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 2. That it be confirmed that Bylaw No.7069-2014 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 3. That Bylaw No. 7069-2014 as identified in Appendix B, be given first and second readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 4. That 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; Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 7 of 16 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 Environmenta/ManagementAct, the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s). CARRIED 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 remaining in the Agricultural Land Reserve be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 8 of 16 R/2014-150 2012-102-RZ It was moved and seconded BL No. 6965-2013 Rescind BL N0. 6965-2013 Second reading, PH 1. That second reading for Bylaw No. 6965-2013 be rescinded; 2. That 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 3. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading: i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement; ii. Road dedication as required; iii. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office which addresses the suitability of the site for the proposed development; iv. Registration of a Tree Protection/Steep Slope Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office; v. Registration of a Agricultural Impact Assessment report and a Landscaping Plan for a buffer along the Agricultural Land Reserve Boundary at the Land Title Office; vi. Entering into a Restoration and Enhancement Agreement for the unconstructed portion of the 256 Street allowance abutting the site; vii. Removal of the existing building/s; viii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance with the regulations. ix. Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmenta/ManagementAct, the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s). CARRIED Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 9 of 16 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. The Manager of Legislative Services advised that correspondence was received from Lincoln and Wendy Bodnar opposingthe variances and setbacks. R/2014-151 DVP/013/10 Sign and seal It was moved and seconded That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DVP/013/10 respecting property located at 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue. �•• �_. 1106 DP and DVP/107/10, 23657 AND 23651132 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. R/2014-152 DVP/107/10 It was moved and seconded DP/107/10 Sign and seal 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. CARRIED Councillor Bell, Councillor Masse - OPPOSED Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 10 of 16 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. R/2014-153 DP/013/10 It was moved and seconded Sign and seal That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal DP/013/10 respecting property located at 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue. CARRIED 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. R/2014-154 2013-048-DP It was moved and seconded Sign and seal That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Development Permit 2013-048-DP respecting property located at 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road. CARRIED Financia/ and Corporate Services (includin� 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 Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 11 of 16 Note: Mayor Daykin excused himself from discussion of Item 1132 at 7:27 p.m. as family members are vendors in the Farmer's Market, recipient of a grant. Councillor Morden acted as Chair. 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. R/2014-155 2014 Community It was moved and seconded G ra nts Approve 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 further 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. CARRIED Note: Mayor Daykin returned to the meeting at 7:33 p.m. and resumed as Chair Community 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. Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 12 of 16 R/2014-156 Bandstand Fund- It was moved and seconded raising Event Refer to Grant Review Committee That a request to fund the one-time Maple Ridge Concert Band, Bandstand Fundraising Event, be referred to the Community Grant Review Committee. CARRIED Correspondence - N i I Other Committee /ssues - N i I 1200 STAFFREPORTS- Nil 1300 RELEASE OF /TEMS FROM CLOSED COUNC/L - N i I Note: Item 1601 was dealt with prior to Item 1400 1400 MA YOR'S REPORT Mayor Daykin attended the dedication of a marker for Alisa's Wish Child and Youth Advocacy Centre, the opening day for the Ridge Meadows Minor Baseball Association, the Heritage Tea and the Volunteer Breakfast. He also attended the first day of bowling for the Maple Ridge Lawn Bowling Association, the Sunshine Dreams for Kids Foundation Annual Sunshine Charity ball game and a documentary at the ACT on the Environmental School Project in Maple Ridge 1500 COUNC/LLORS' REPORTS Councillor Dueck Councillor Dueck attended the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Annual General Meeting. Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 13 of 16 Councillor Masse Councillor Masse advised on upcoming events. Councillor Morden Councillor Morden attended Union of British Columbia Board of Directors meetings and a meeting of the Maple Ridge Community Heritage Commission. Councillor Hogarth Councillor Hogarth attended the screening at the ACT of "Found in the Forest", a documentary on the Environmental School Project in Maple Ridge. He participated in the Volunteer Appreciation Event held at the Red Robin restaurant. Councillor Bell Councillor Bell advised on upcoming meetings. Councillor Ashlie Councillor Ashlie participated in the Volunteer Appreciation Event at the Red Robin restaurant. She attended meetings of the Maple Ridge Social Planning Advisory Committee and the Maple Ridge Agricultural Advisory Commission. Note: Item 1600 was dealt with prior to Item 1400 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. Mayor Daykin spoke to the reasoning for the call for the reconsideration of Bylaw No. 6968-2013. He advised on amendments recommended for the definitions section of the bylaw. Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 14 of 16 R/2014-158 BL No. 6968-2013 Three readings Forward to Minister of Health R/2014-157 BL No. 6968-2013 Amendment to Definitions R/2014-159 BL No. 6968-2013 Amendment to Wording R/2014-160 BL No. 6968-2013 Legal Counsel to review amendment MOTION That Bylaw No. 6968-2013 be given first, second and third readings and be forwarded to the Minister of Health for approval. AMENDMENT TO MOTION It was moved and seconded That the definition of "Smoke or Smoking" in Part 4 of Bylaw No. 6968-2013 be removed in its entirety and be replaced with the definition of "Smoke or Smoking" means to inhale, exhale, burn or carry a lighted cigarette, electronic cigarette, cigar, pipe, hookah pipe or other lighted smoking equipment that burns tobacco, marihuana or other plant substance." CARRIED AMENDMENT TO MOTION It was moved and seconded That the wording in the definition of "Enforcement Officer" on Page 2 of Bylaw No. 6968-2013 be amended from "Medical Health Officer of the District of Maple Ridge to "Designated Provincial Medical Health Officer for the District of Maple Ridge." AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT It was moved and seconded That the text "if approved by legal counsel prior to final reading" be added. AMENDMENT CARRIED MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED Councillor Bell, Councillor Hogarth, Councillor Morden - OPPOSED Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 15 of 16 1700 NOT/CES OFMOT/ONAND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEET/NGS 1701 Notice of motion from Councillor Hogarth That the District of Maple Ridge adopt a riparian area regulations as set out in Provincial Legislation under the Fish Protection Act and endorsed by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 1702 Notice of motion from Councillor Bell To prepare for the receipt of comments from School District No. 42 on the Strategic Facilities Plan, that staff prepare a report on the progress towards completion of the Silver Valley Area Plan including a review of density, population and capacity. 1703 Notice of motion from Councillor Bell That staff be directed to review of the structure of the Bylaw Department with a view towards developing capacity to include a community bylaw education program separate from bylaw enforcement. 1800 QUEST/ONSFROMTHEPUBL/C John McKenzie Mr. McKenzie asked whether there will be public input on the possible "Lonsdale Quay" type development and future planning of neighbourhoods. Mayor Daykin advised that a concept plan has been presented on the proposed quay development, however, an application has not been submitted yet. He advised that many opportunities for public input will be provided once the application is submitted. Jim Devlin Mr. Devlin asked whether the District paid for a hair salon floor put into the ECRA Centre. The General Manager of Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services offered to meet with Mr. Devlin to provide clarification. Brian Harris Mr. Harris spoke to the increase in the number of buskers that could come to Maple Ridge as a result of more transit. He inquired whether a bylaw addressing busking will be brought forward and if there will be designated areas within the municipality for busking. Mayor Daykin advised that Mr. Harris speak with the Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws. Council Minutes April 8, 2014 Page 16 of 16 1900 ADJOURNMENT- 8:59 p.m. E. Daykin, Mayor Certified Correct C. Marlo, Corporate Officer District of Maple Ridge PUBL/C HEAR/NG April 15, 2014 The Minutes of the Public Hearing held in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia on April 15, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT Elected Officials Mayor E. Daykin Councillor C. Ashlie Councillor C. Bell Councillor J. Dueck Councillor A. Hogarth Councillor B. Masse ABSENT Councillor M. Morden Appointed Staff J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental Services D, Pollock, Municipal Engineer Mayor Daykin called the meeting to order. The Manager of Legislative Services explained the procedure and rules of order of the Public Hearing and advised that the bylaws will be considered further at the next Council Meeting on April 22, 2014. The Mayor then called upon the Manager of Development and Environmental Services to present the following items on the agenda: 1) 2013-052-RZ Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7003-2013 Lega I: Location: Lot 1, Section 28, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan LMP46534, Except: Plan BCP39158 23227 Dogwood Avenue Purpose: To allow a site-specific Zoning Bylaw text amendment to the C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) zone to allow apartment use as a permitted principal use; to allow parking as a principal use and to permit increased density for the residential rental units and the retail commercial use The Manager of Legislative Services advised that correspondence expressing concern with the application was received from Ron and Maria McCabe and Giti Attar and Hamid Karimi was received on this item. 502 Public Hearing Minutes April 15, 2014 Page 2 of 4 The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Site Plan • Terms and Conditions Scott Bremner Mr. Bremner expressed concern with the impact of the proposed development on his property value and parking in the neighbourhood. Hamid Karimi Mr. Karimi expressed concern that the privacy of his property will be negatively impacted by the proposed 3 storey building, particularly by windows which face north directly into his back yard. He also expressed concern over risks to his property during excavation of the parking lots. Mr. Karimi stated that the proposed high density building along with rental suites is not suited to the neighbourhood. David Ho. Project Architect Mr. Ho addressed the concerns of the neighbours pertaining to privacy and risks involved with excavation. He also spoke to underground parking concerns and buffers between the project and neighbouring properties. There being no further comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with. 2) 2013-091-RZ Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7035-2013 Legal: Lot 45, Except Part Dedicated Road on Plan LMP6759, District Lot 276, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 43216 Location: 20395 123 Avenue From: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential) To: RS-1b (One Family (Medium Density) Urban Residential) Purpose: To permit future subdivision into 2 single family lots. Public Hearing Minutes April 15, 2014 Page 3 of 4 The Manager of Legislative Services advised that no correspondence was received on this item. The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation providing the following information: Application Information Subject Map Neighbourhood Context OCP Context Site Characteristics Proposed Subdivision Plan Terms and Conditions There being no comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with. 3) 2011-002-RZ Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795-2011 Lega I: Location: From: To: Purpose: Lot 1, Section 12, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 2713 25608 Bosonworth Avenue A-2 (Upland Agricultural) RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) To permit a future subdivision of 3 lots. The Manager of Legislative Services advised that no correspondence was received on this item. The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation providing the following information: Application Information Subject Map Neighbourhood Context OCP Context Site Characteristics Site Plan Terms and Conditions There being no comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with. Public Hearing Minutes April 15, 2014 Page 4 of 4 Having given all those persons whose interests were deemed affected by the matters contained herein a chance to be heard, the Mayor terminated the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m. E. Daykin, Mayor Certified Correct C. Marlo, Corporate Officer CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITTEE MINUTES April 8, 2014 Mayor's Office PRESENT: Ernie Daykin, Mayor Chairman J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Member 1. 2012-060�D LEGAL: LOCATION: OWNER: REQUIRED AGREEMENTS Amanda Allen, Recording Secretary Lots 1& 2, both of Section 19, Township 15, New Westminster District, Plan EPP35640; Lot 33, Section 19, Township 15, New Westminster District, Plan 64913 Except: Plan EPP35640 12149 269 Street Daniel Tanguay Covenants: Habitat Protection; Septic; Storm Water Management Lot 1; Storm Water Management Lot 2; Geotechnical; Covenant Release R43648; Covenant Release W65956; Covenant Release W65958;; Covenant Release X105393; Covenant Release BF128729 THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO 2012-060SD. C�ia1:�:�1�� J.L. (Jim) Member ule, Chief Administrative Officer 503 N SCALE 1:2,500 District of Langley 12149 269 STREET , �l� CORPORATION OF � --��-�� THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: Aug 7, 2012 FILE: 2012-060-DP BY: PC CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS COMMITTEE MINUTES April 8, 2014 Mayor's Office PRESENT: Ernie Daykin, Mayor Chairman J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Member 1. RZ/013/10 LEGAL: LOCATION: OWNER: REQUIRED AGREEMENTS Amanda Allen, Recording Secretary Lots 76 & 80, both of Section 32, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan BCP27885; Lot A, Section 29, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan EPP27906 22942 136 Avenue, 22850 136 Avenue & 22830 136 Avenue Insignia Homes Silver Valley 2 Ltd. Rezoning Servicing Agreement; Geotechnical Covenant THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SFAL THE PRECEDING DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO RZ/013/10. CARRIED J.L. (Jim) ule, Chief Administrative Officer Member N Pi District of Langley 22830/50 & 22942 136 AVENUE _ �;: � _�� -.� CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE FINANCE DEPARTMENT Scale: 1:3,000 � �� i �'��' 'o''�� DATE: Nov 19, 2013 FILE: RZ/013/10 BY: PC CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITTEE MINUTES April 8, 2014 Mayor's Office PRESENT: Ernie Daykin, Mayor Chairman J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Member 1. 2012-033,SD LEGAL: LOCATION: OWNER: REQUIRED AGREEMENTS Amanda Allen, Recording Secretary Lots 1& 2, both of Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan EPP37336 24189 124 Avenue Simone Hacquebard Habitat Protection Covenant THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING DOCUMENT AS IT RELATES TO 2012-033�D. CARRIED � J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Member CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITTEE MINUTES April 10, 2014 Mayor's Office PRESENT: Ernie Daykin, Mayor Chairman J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Member 1. 2012-054-SD LEGAL: LOCATION: OWNER: REQUIRED AGREEMENTS Amanda Allen, Recording Secretary Lot 3, Section 33, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 20132, Except part dedicated Road and Park on Plan EPP34551; Lot 6, Section 33, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan EPP34552; Lot 2, Section 33, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan EPP34552; Lot 4, Section 33, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan EPP34551 Lot 5, Section 33, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan BCP42873 23274 Silver Valley Road 13762 Silver Valley Road Affinity Homes and Designs Inc. Subdivision Servicing Agreement No Build Covenant Statutory Right of Way - Municipal Services Release BB1225506 THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING DOCUME�LTS AS THEY RELATE TQ 2012-054SD. Ernie Da�R�iyi, Chair � C�1a\:7:71�1�. J.L. (Jim) ule, Chief Administrative Officer Member N Scale: 1:2,000 District of Langley 13762 & 23274 SILVER VALLEY ROAD �, CORPORATION OF `� --=�`�. THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: Apr 8, 2014 FILE: 2012-054-SD BY: PC CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITfEE MINUTES April 10, 2014 Mayor's Office PRESENT: Ernie Daykin, Mayor Chairman J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Member 1. 2013-023�D LEGAL: LOCATION: OWNER: REQUIRED AGREEMENTS Amanda Allen, Recording Secretary Lot A, Section 16, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan EPP24273 11461236 Street Wallmark Homes Reciprocal Access Easement THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING DOCUMENT AS IT RELATES TO 2013-023�D. CARRIED J.L. (Jim) Rule,�hief Administrative Officer Member N � District of Langley 11461 236 STREET CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Scale: 1:2,000 � '� �\ ��7 �"�--jy�(� DATE: Apr 9, 2014 FILE: 2013-023-SD BY: PC CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7003 - 2013 A Bylaw to amend the text of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended. WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended; NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7003 - 2013." 2. That PART 7 COMMERCIAL ZONES, 701 NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMERCIAL: C-1 1. PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES is amended by: item e) is amended by adding the following legal description in the correct sequence: Lot 1 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP46534 Except: Plan BCP39158; PID 024-815-756 Adding item f) off-street parking is permitted specific to the following site: Lot 1 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP46534 Except: Plan BCP39158; PID 024-815-756 3. That PART 7 COMMERCIAL ZONES, 701 NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMERCIAL: C-1 8. OTHER REGULATIONS is amended by: item a) is amended by adding "principal off-street parking" before "and accessory off-street parking and loading..." item b) is amended by adding the following in the correct sequence: (iv) The gross floor area of all permitted principal uses shall not in the aggregate exceed 959.5 m2 on Lot 1 Section 28 Township 12, New Westminster District Plan LMP46534 Except Plan: BCP39158; PID 024-815-756. Gross floor area of the ground floor commercial uses shall not exceed a total of 530.6 m2. iii. item f) is amended by adding the following legal description in the correct sequence: Lot 1 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP46534 Except: Plan BCP39158; PID 024-815-756 1001 4. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985, as amended, is hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the 11t" day of March, 2014. READ a second time the 11t" day of March, 2014. PUBLIC HEARING held the 15t" day of April , 2014. READ a third time the day of ADOPTED the day of , 20 . , 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7035 - 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. 7035 - 2013." That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot 45 Except: Part Dedicated Road on Plan LMP6759; District Lot 276 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 43216 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1598 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 26t" day of November, 2013. READ a second time the 11t" day of March, 2014. PUBLIC HEARING held the 15t" day of April, 2014. READ a third time the day of ADOPTED the PRESIDING MEMBER day of , 20 . , 20 CORPORATE OFFICER 11 i 124 AVE. A B $ � BCP 22537 � 2 � 3 �4 v � ap � 12415 0 0 0 0 0 0 � N � 12404 124AAVE. N N N N N N rn � o Rem 80 N 12388 13 � � � 1� � � 82 81 � � � 12393 w N 12� � N N o o v 1 M o � � � w � P 21555 � 12 11 N 10 9 12411 � o 0 0 P 422 0 � 4g � P 72 64 12409 �' 6 N 7 N g N 12387 P 78 25 22 0 5 P 26 90 P 15611 � � 0 9 r g N 20324 � 12401 N �5 � 52 N 53 N E 150' 4 N N N � 2 � 10 � � � � 2 � � � M � N N c�.i 12373 123B AVE. 2p3 � M 12395 0 o N � 20 N N E. c� v ao r�o � 20 0 0 o r> ; 123B AVE. � a°po � rn � �°r�° $ Rem 7 0 2 0 3 N 4 N 6' 12387 20� i o � o 0 0 0 12351 1 N N i N c� N N N N 3.0 P 8325 5 19 ��o �I �� I I o 12345 / q� v oo a � co � 6 4 a 22 P 1 706 P 17�8�52, 7 12�31 P 43216 i Q�� $ N I �� 16 N N 15 ' 1 098 190 8 LMP 52 P 37 62 � � � w___-I I P 4861 19 18 17 16 15 14 � � �— —— ,�—— —— �, �, � �, �, � 2 N EP 748 0 Rem 45 Rem 42 43 �r I P 77 17 N � N N N N 12327 12322 � �� CP 4 946 � � LMS � ��1 2 3 � � 1 2 I � 910 J a � � `n rn c� � I U v �n � I � o rn I N O M M 57 � � N N O Im N N N I I N N P13506 ; � N � N � 12309 � LMP 6759 N LMP6713 - LMP 6719 5 6 7 $ c� 58 12301 123 AVE. � a°Oo 12290 � o � � � � rn 1903 59 12293 N � N� 9 25 N N N N N N N �22so LM 1593 �22ss 24 26 2� P 22101 1 2 A B 429 P 766 0 $�22ss �22�26 � �22a2 3 CP 50� P 1 914 2 1 2 3 4 5 � ��66 �� 5 12� 5 N 12222 LM 215 2p CP 11510 P 3 108 �,.� �, r� � M I �, � cn 12266 A B 2 0� 3 4 11 � � N � � O I � � � M M 7 1� CO V V N N O N N N I I N N 12269 �� N N N N N O O 12258 EP 76691 3 12 RW 74874 5 1226 AVE. 12252 �225 N � N � N � 2 �22R9 N I O M 7 7 � � � 00 � � 2 � � � 5 � � 6 12246 13 �° � N N N N � � � � � � 4 � N I N 9 N$ N 7 N 6 N 5 N 00 12253 � LM 1593 14 � � L P 1 93 � � 15 � 16 17L �15�4 MP 510 MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING Bylaw No. 7035-2013 Ma p No. 1598 From: RS-1(One Family Urban Residential) To: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) N SCALE 1:2,000 CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 6795 - 2011 A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended. WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended; NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6795 - 2011." 2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot 1 Section 12 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 2713 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1510 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential). 3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the 8t" day of February, 2011. READ a second time the 25t" day of March, 2014 PUBLIC HEARING held the 15t" day of April, 2014. READ a third time the day of , 20 . ADOPTED the day of , 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 1003 MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING Bylaw No Map No. Fro m: To: 6795-2011 1510 A-2 (Upland Agricultural) RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) N SCALE 1:3,000 District of Maple Ridge COMM/TTEE OF THE WHOLE MEET/NG M/NUTES April 7, 2014 1:00 p.m. Council Chamber PRESENT Elected Officials Appointed Staff Mayor E. Daykin J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer Councillor C. Ashlie K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development, Councillor C. Bell Parks and Recreation Services Councillor J. Dueck P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services Councillor A. Hogarth D. Pollock, Acting General Manager Public Works and Councillor B. Masse Development Services Councillor M. Morden C. Carter, Director of Planning C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services Other Staff as Required F. King, Director of Human Resources C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental s Services A. Kopystynski, Planner II R. Acharya, Planner II 1. DELEGA T/ONS/STAFFPRESENTA T/ONS 1.1 Human Resources Update - Frances King, Director of Human Resources Ms. King gave a Power Point presentation highlighting: • 2013 HR Trends Survey • What Inspires people to do their best work • DMR Environmental Scan • Staff count and generations • DMR training and development programs • Corporate Wellness • Customer service • HR Service Delivery Approach and Core Work 1100 Committee of the Whole Minutes April 7, 2014 Page 2 of 7 2. PUBL/C WOR{(S AND DEI/ELOPMENT SERI//CES Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council Agenda: 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 recommendingthat 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. The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Site Plan • Land Use Designation Area Reconciliation • Neighbourhood Park Walking Distance RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 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 recommendingthat 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 Committee of the Whole Minutes April 7, 2014 Page 3 of 7 R. Acharya, Planner gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • OCP Context • Neighbourhood Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Site Plan • Land Use Designation Area Reconciliation • Neighbourhood Park Walking Distance RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 1103 2013-016-RZ, 20178 Chatwin Avenue, RS-3 and RS-1 to RS-1b Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommendingthat 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. R. Acharya, Planner gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Neighbourhood Park Area • Proposed Subdivision Plan • Environmental Context Map RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 7, 2014 Page 4 of 7 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 remaining in the Agricultural Land Reserve be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. A. Kopystynski, Planner gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Site Plan RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 1105 DVP/013/10, 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommendingthatthe 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. The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Site Plan • Proposed Variances Committee of the Whole Minutes April 7, 2014 Page 5 of 7 RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 1106 DP and DVP/107/10, 23657 AND 23651132 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 1107 DP/013/10, 22830, 22850 and 22942 136 Avenue Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommendingthatthe 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 1108 2013-048-DP, 22987 Dewdney Trunk Road Staff report dated April 7, 2014 recommendingthatthe 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 7, 2014 Page 6 of 7 3. F/NANC/AL AND CORPORA TE SER �/CES (including Fire and Police) 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. Note: Mayor Daykin excused himself from discussion of Item 1132 at 2:17 p.m. due to a conflict of interest regardingthe Farmers Market. 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. Note: Mayor Daykin returned to the meeting at 2:22 p.m. 4. COMMUN/TYDEI/ELOPMENTAND RECREA T/ON SERI//CES 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. 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. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 8, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 7, 2014 Page 7 of 7 5. CORRESPONDENCE - N i I 6. OTHER /SSUES - N i I 7. ADJOURNMENT - 2:23 p.m. 8. COMMUN/TYFORUM - N i I M. Morden, Acting Mayor Presiding Member of the Committee April 14, 2014 1:00 p.m. Council Chamber PRESENT Elected Officials Mayor E. Daykin Councillor C. Ashlie Councillor C. Bell Councillor J. Dueck Councillor A. Hogarth Councillor B. Masse ABSENT Councillor M. Morden 1 1.1 District of Maple Ridge COMM/TTEE OF THE WHOLE MEET/NG M/NUTES Appointed Staff J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development Services C. Carter, Director of Planning C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services Other Staff as Required S. Pendl, Park Planning Technician C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental Services R. Acharya, Planner R. Carmichael, Director of Engineering Operations W. Oleschuk, Roads and Fleet Supervisor L. Benson, Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning C. Nolan, Manager of Accounting J. Bastaja, Director of Corporate Support DELEGA T/ONS/STAFFPRESENTA T/ONS Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Update • Kim Day, Executive Director Ms. Day gave a PowerPoint presentation highlighting the following aspects of recycl i ng: • Multi-Material British Columbia program • 2013 community events • New commodities and programs • 2014 work plan 1100 Committee of the Whole Minutes April 14, 2014 Page 2 of 7 1.2 Ron McNutt, Canadians for Safe Technology Local Riding Representative • Health Aspects of Shaw Communication WiFi Mr. McNutt spoke to the potential health impacts of microwave radiation and asked that Council consider a policy that would protect those individuals with electrohypersensitivity. He suggested that Council wait for results of review of Safety Code 6 before proceeding and asked for an opportunity to meet with staff. 1.3 Maple Ridge Cemetery Update • Sylvia Pendl, Park Planning Technician A Power Point presentation providing an overview of the expansion of the Maple Ridge cemetery was given by Ms. Pendl. 2. PUBL/C WORKS AND DEl/ELOPMENT SERI//CES Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council Agenda: 1101 2013-052-RZ, 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004- 2013, 23227 Dogwood Avenue Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004-2013 be given first, second and third readings. The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Site Plan RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 14, 2014 Page 3 of 7 1102 2014-014-RZ, 13316 235 Street, RS-3 to R-1 and RS-1b Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7071-2014 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential) to permit 5 fee simple lots zoned RS-1b and 8 bare land strata lots zoned R-1 be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules B and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision application. The Planner gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Subdivision Plans • Site Context Map RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1103 2013-082-RZ, 13260 236 Street, RS-3 and RS-2 to RM-1 Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that second reading of Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013 as amended to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit 61 townhouse units be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. The Planner gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • OCP Context • Site Characteristics • Proposed Site Plan • Proposed Building Elevations • Proposed Streetscape Committee of the Whole Minutes April 14, 2014 Page 4 of 7 • Proposed Variances • Proposed Landscape Plan and details of the central amenity • Proposed sidewalk from 132nd Avenue to Fern Crescent The Planner advised on errors on pages 3 and 6 of the staff report regarding the number of parking stalls. Randy Dyck, Portrait Homes Mr. Dyck highlighted changes made to the previous proposals by the applicant. David Laird, Damax Mr. Laird provided clarification on access to the proposed development. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1104 2011-019-RZ, 10515 and 10595 240 Street and 23950 Zeron Avenue, First Extension Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that a one year extension be granted for rezoning application 2011-019-RZ to permit construction of 48 townhouse units under the RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1105 Municipal Equipment Purchase, One Single Axle Recycle Truck Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the contract for the purchase of one single axle recyclingtruck be awarded to Fort Fabrication and Welding Ltd. and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract. The Director of Operations provided information on the rationale for the purchase. The Roads and Fleet Supervisor advised that the trade-in value of the original vehicle will be deducted from the price. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 14, 2014 Page 5 of 7 1106 Excess Capacity/Extended Services Agreement LC 156/14, Bosonworth Avenue and Carmichael Street Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC 156/14. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 3. F/NANC/AL AND CORPORA TE SER �/CES (including Fire and Police) 1131 Disbursements for the month ended March 31, 2014 Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the disbursements for the month ended March 31, 2014 be approved. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1132 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements be accepted. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1133 2015-2019 Business Planning Process Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that the Business Planning Framework timelines be adjusted. The Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning reviewed the staff report. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 14, 2014 Page 6 of 7 1134 2014 Council Expenses Staff report dated April 14, 2014 providing Council expenses for 2014 updated to the end of March 2014. The Manager of Accounting reviewed the report. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1135 Review of Telecom Tower Protocols and Recommended Changes Staff report dated April Telecommunications Tower activities in Maple Ridge. 14, 2014 recommending changes to the Siting Protocols applicable to tower building The Director of Corporate Support reviewed the recommended changes to the protocol. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 1136 Tax Rates Bylaws - Maple Ridge Road 13 Dyking District and Albion Dyking District Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that Road 13 Dyking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7079-2014 be given first, second and third readings and that Albion Dyking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7080-2014 be given first, second and third readings. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. 4. COMMUN/TYDEI/ELOPMENTAND RECREAT/ON SERI//CES 1151 Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) Funding Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that a letter be written expressing concerns with the implementation of a Housing First model. RECOMMENDA T/ON That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of April 22, 2014. Committee of the Whole Minutes April 14, 2014 Page 7 of 7 5. CORRESPONDENCE - N i I 6. OTHER /SSUES - N i I 7. ADJOURNMENT - 2:35 p. m. 8. COMMUN/TYFORUM - Ni/ A. Hogarth, Acting Mayor Presiding Member of the Committee � � � Deep Rao}s Greater Nerghts T0: FROM: SUBJECT District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FILE N0: 2013-052-RZ Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W First, Second, and Third Reading 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004 - 2013 23227 Dogwood Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The subject property, located at 23227 Dogwood Avenue (see Appendix A), is subject to a text amendment to the C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) zone, under application 2013-052-RZ. The site specific text amendment is being proposed to accommodate dwelling units in excess of the one accessory dwelling unit normally permitted in the C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) zone, and for an increase in density for the residential and commercial units. A condition of the zoning application is that these dwelling units would be rental units in perpetuity. To authorize the District to enter into a Housing Agreement, the attached authorizing bylaw (see Apendix B) is being brought forward to Council for first, second and third reading. A Public Hearing is not required. Once the other terms and conditions of application 2013-052-RZ are fulfillled by the applicant, this Housing Agreement bylaw will be brought forward for final reading at the same meeting as the final reading for Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7003 - 2013. RECOMMENDATIONS: That 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004 - 2013 be given first, second and third reading. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Legal Description: OCP: Existing: Proposed: Zoning: Existing: Proposed: David Ho Beta Enterprises Ltd. Lot 1, Section 28, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan LMP46534, Except: Plan BCP39158 Commercial Commercial C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) C-1 (Neighbourhood Commercial) 1101 Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Residential Zone: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) Designation: Estate Suburban Residential South: Use: Pub and Liquor Store Zone: CS-1(Service Commercial) Designation: Commercial and Estate Suburban Residential East: Use: Residential Zone: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) Designation: Estate Suburban Residential West: Use: Residential (Strata) Zone: RG-2 (Residential Strata) and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) Designation: Estate Suburban Residential Existing Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Five commercial rental units and five rental housing units for the C-1(Neighbourhood Commercial) zone Access: Dogwood Avenue Site Area: 1758 m2 Servicing: Urban Companion Applications: VP/080/08 and 2012-062-DP b) Description: Under Section 905 of the Local Government Act, the District may enter into Housing Agreements. These agreements may include terms and conditions agreed to by the District and a land owner regarding the occupancy of the housing units identified in such agreements, including the form of tenure of the housing units. Authorization to enter such agreements requires an authorizing bylaw. The subject property is being developed to accommodate a two storey mixed-use building. A site specific text amendment is being proposed to accommodate dwelling units in excess of the one accessory dwelling normally permitted in the C-1(Neighbourhood Commercial) zone and for an increase in density for the residential and commercial units. A condition of the text amendment application is that these dwelling units would be rental units in perpetuity. This is consistent with Policy 3-32 of the Official Community Plan which states that "Maple Ridge supports the provision of affordable, rental and special needs housing throughout the District." The housing units to be located on the second floor of this mixed-use commercial/residential building are to be rental housing for perpetuity. The agreement to be authorized by this bylaw is appended with the authorizing bylaw to this report as Appendix B. It has been reviewed and accepted by the land owner. In addition to the bylaw, the agreement will be registered as a restrictive covenant, and a notice of the Housing Agreement will be filed on Title by the District in the Land Title Office, in accordance with subsection 905 (5) of the Local Government Act. -2- CONCLUSION: To allow for more than the one accessory dwelling unit normally permitted in the C-1(Neighbourhood Commercial) zone and for increased density, the applicant has agreed to enter into a Housing Agreement to allow for five dwelling units on the second storey of the proposed mixed-use building. Provision of this rental housing will provide more housing choices in the community. The Local Government Act requires an authorizing bylaw for a municipality to enter into such Housing Agreements. Therefore, Council is required to consider granting first, second and third reading for the 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004 - 2013. Final adoption would be considered by Council at a later date, concurrently with the associated text amending application to the C-1(Neighbourhood Commercial) zone. "Original signed by Michelle Baski" Prepared by: Michelle Baski, AScT 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- 23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004 - 2013 -3- N District of Langley 23227 DOGWOOD AVENUE �t CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF - � MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Scale: 1:2,000 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Feb 27, 2014 FILE: 2013-052-RZ BY: PC APPENDIX 6 DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7004 - 2013 A Bylaw to authorize the District of Maple Ridge to enter into a Housing Agreement for 23227 Dogwood Avenue WHEREAS pursuant to Section 905 of the Local Government Act, as amended, Council may, by bylaw, enter into a housing agreement under that Section; AND WHEREAS Council and Beta Enterprises Ltd. Inc. No. 99301 wishes to enter into a housing agreement for the subject property at 23227 Dogwood Avenue; NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited as "23227 Dogwood Avenue Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 7004 - 2013". 2. By this Bylaw Council authorizes the District to enter into a housing agreement with Beta Enterprises Ltd. Inc. No. 99301, in respect to the following land: Lot 1 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP46534 Except: Plan BCP39158 3. The Mayor and Corporate Officer are authorized to execute the housing agreement and all incidental instruments on behalf of the District of Maple Ridge. 4. Schedule A, attached to this Bylaw, is incorporated into and forms part of this Bylaw. 5. This bylaw shall take effect as of the date of adoption hereof. READ a first time the READ a second time the READ a third time the day of day of day of RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the PRESIDING MEMBER ,20 . ,20 . , 20 . day of , 20 . CORPORATE OFFICER Schedule A Part of Bylaw No. 7004-2013 SECTION 219 COVENANT AND �IOUSING AGREEMENT (2013-052-RZ) BETWEEN; BETA ENTERPRISES LTD. (Inc. No. 99301) of 765 West 41S` Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, VSZ 2N4 (hereinafter called the "Covenantor") �� OF THE FIRST PART THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia, V2X 6A9 (hereinafter called the "District") AND ; OF THE SECOND PART CANADIAN WESTERN BANK 300 — 10303 Jasper Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, TSJ 3X6 (hereinafter called the "Lender") WHEREAS: OF THE THIRD PART A. The Covenantor is the registered owner of or has an equity of redemption in certain lands situated in the Municipality of Maple Ridge in the Province of British Columbia, and more particularly lcnown and described as: PID: 024-815-756 LOT 1 SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 12 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN LMP46534 EXCEPT: PLAN BCP39158 (hereinafter called the "Lands") B. The District is prepared to allow construction of a second storey for rental housing with a gross floor area of 429 m2. C. The Covenantor and the District wish to enter into this Agreement to restrict the use of housing units to be constructed on the Lands, on the terms and conditions of this 4 Schedule A Part of Bylaw No, 7004-2013 Agreement, to have effect as both a covenant under section 219 of the Land Title Act and a housing agreement under section 905 of the Local Government Act. D, The District has adopted a bylaw under section 905 of the Local Gove��nment Act to authorize this Agreement as a housing agreement. NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the premises and the covenants herein contained, the payment of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) paid by the District to the Covenantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufticiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties covenant and agree, pursuant to section 905 of the Local Governn2ent Act and section 219 of the Land Title Act (British Columbia) as follows; Definitions 1. In this Agreement: (a) "Dwelling Units" means all residential dwelling units located or to be located on the Lands whether those dwelling units are lots or parcels, or parts or portions thereof, into which ownership or right of possession or occupation of the Lands may be subdivided (hereinafter defined) and includes single family detached dwellings, duplexes, townhouses, auxiliary residential dwelling units, rental apartments and strata lots in a building strata plan; (b) "Lands" ineans the land described in Item 2 of the General Instrument, including any buildings now or hereafter located on the aforeinentioned land, and any pai-t or a portion of such land or building into which said land or building is or may at any time be subdivided; (c) "Subdivide" means to divide, apportion, consolidate or subdivide the Lands, or the ownership or right to possession or occupation of the Lands into two or more lots, parcels, parts, portions or shares, whether by plan, descriptive words or otlzerwise, under the Land Title Act or the Strata Properry Act, or otherwise, and includes the creation, conversion, organization or development of "cooperative interest" or "shared interest in land" as defined in the Re�rl Developmenl Ma�^keting Act. Use, Occupancy, Subdivision and No Separate Sale Restrictions 2. All Dwelling Units shall only be used to provide rental accoinmodation and shall remain as rental accommodation in perpetuity. 3, All Dwelling Units shall be rented only on a month to month basis or under a residential tenancy agreement having a fixed term not exceeding three years, including any rights of renewal, 4. No Dwelling Unit may be occupied except by an individual who occupies pursuant to a rental agreement that meets the requirements of section 3. S Schedule A Part of Bylaw No. 7004-2013 5. The Lands shall not be Subdivided, except by means of a strata plan under the St��ata Property Act that includes all of the Dwelling Units within a single strata lot. Speciiic Performance 6, The Covenantor agrees that because of the public interest in ensuring that all of the matters described in this Agreement are complied with, the public interest strongly favours the award of a prohibitory or mandatory injunction, or an order for specific performance or other specific relief, by the Supreine Court of British Columbia at the instance of the District, in the event of an actual or threatened breach of this Agreement. Notice of Housing Agreement 7. For clarity, the Covenantor acicnowledges and agrees that: (a) this Agreemezlt constitutes both a covenant undec section 219 of the Land Title Acl and a Housing Agreenlent entered into under section 905 of the Local Uvve�°n�nenl Acl; (b) the District is required to file a notice of Housing Agreement in the Land Title Ofiice against title to the Lands; and (c) once such a notice is filed, this Agreement binds all persons who acquire an interest in the Lands as a Housing Agreement under section 905 of the Local U��vernment Act, No Obligation to Enforce 8. The rights given to the District by this Agreement are permissive only and nothing in this Agreement imposes any legal duty of any lcind on the District to anyone, or obliges the District to enforce this Agreement, to perform any act or to incur any expense in respect of this Agreement No Effect on Laws or Powers 9. This Agreement does not: (a) afiect or limit the discretion, rights, duties, or powers of the District or the Approving Officer for the District under the common law or any statute, bylaw, or other enactment, nor does this Agreeinent date or give rise to, nor do the parties intend this Agreement to create any implied obligations concerning such discretionary rights, duties or powers; (b) afI'ect or limit the common law or any statute, bylaw or other enactment applying to the Lands; or (c) relieve the owner from complying with any common law or any statute, regulation, bylaw or other enactment. 6 Schedule A Part of Bylaw No. 7004-2013 Indemnity 10. The Covenantor hereby releases the District, and indeinnifies and saves the District harmless, from and against any and all actions, causes of actions, suits, claims (including claims for injurious affection), cost (including legal fees and disbursements), expenses, debts, demands, losses (including economic loss) and liabilities of whatsoever lcind arising out of or in any way due or relating to the granting or existence of this Agreement, the restrictions or obligations contained in this Agreement or the performance or non- performance by the Covenantor of this Agreement that the District is or may become liable for, incur or suffer. Priority 11. The Covenantor will do everything necessary, at the Covenantor's expense, to ensure that this Agreement is registered against title to the Lands in priority to all liens, charges and encumbrances registered or pending registration against title to the Lands, save and except those specifically approved in writing by the District and those in favour of the District. Waiver 12. An alleged waiver of any breach of this Agreement is effective only if it is an express waiver in writing of the breach. A waiver of a breach of this Agreement does not operate as a wavier of any other breach of this Agreement, Interpretation 13. In this Agreement: (a) reference to the singular includes a reference to the plural, and vice versa, unless the context requires otherwise; (b) reference to a particular ilumbered section or article, or to a particular lettered Schedule, is a reference to the correspondingly numbered or lettered article, section or Schedule of this Agreement; (c) article and section headings have been inserted for ease of reference only and are not to be used in interpreting this Agreement; (d) the word "enactment" has the meaning given to it in the Interpretation Act (British Columbia) on the reference date of this Agreement; (e) reference to any enactment is a reference to that enactment as consolidated, revised, amended, re-enacted or replace, unless otherwise expressly provided; 7 Schedule A Part of Bylaw No. 7004-2013 ( fl rererence to "party" or the "parties" is a reference to a party, or the parties, to this Agreement and their respective successors, assigns, trustees, adininistrators and receivers; (g) time is of the essence; and (h) reference to a"day", "montlz" or "year" is a reference to a calendar day, calendar month, or calendar year unless otherwise expressly provided. Further Acts 14. The Covenantor will do everything reasonably necessary to give effect to the intent of this Agreement, including execution of further instruments. Severance 15. If any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court having the jurisdiction to do so, that part is to be considered to have been severed from the rest of this Agreement and the rest of this Agreement remains in force unaffected by that holding or by the severance of that part. No Other Agreements 16. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties regarding its subject and it terminates and supersedes all other agreements and arrangements regarding its subject, Enurement 17. This Agreernent binds the parties to it and their respective successors, heirs, executors and administrators. Deed and Contr�ct 18. By execttting and delivering this Agreenzent each of the parties intends to create both a contract and a deed executed and delivered under seal, As evidence of their agreement to be bound by this Agreement, the Covenantor and the District have executed the Land Title Act Form C or D, as the case may be, attached to and forming part of this Agreement. : Schedule A Part of Bylaw No. 7004-20] 3 CONSENT & PRIORITY The Lender in consideration of the payment of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acl<nowledged) hereby consents to the registration of the Covenant herein granted under Section 219 of the Land Title Act, running with the said lands and against the said lands and the Lender hereby postpones all of its rights under the Mortgage and Assignment of Rents registered respectively under No, and (the "Lender pocuments") to those rights of the District under the Covenant herein in the same manner and to the same extent and effect as if the Covenant herein had been dated, granted and registered prior to the Lender pocuments. END OF DOCUMENT 9 T0: FROM � � � District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: and Members of Council FILE N0: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: SUBJECT: First Reading Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7071-2014 13316 235 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: April 14, 2014 2014-014-RZ CofW An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to R-1(Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential). The subject site (Appendix A) is designated "Medium-High Density Residential" in the Silver Valley Area Plan. The proposed RS-1b zone is a continuation of what currently exists north of the subject site, facing 235t" Street. The proposed R-1 zone aligns well with the OCP designation and with the proposal that was recently approved east of the subject site (RZ/075/09 and 2011-140-SD). The proposed preliminary subdivision plan (Appendix C) shows five (5) fee simple lots zoned RS-1b and eight (8) bare land strata lots zoned R-1. The existing topography of the subject site is challenging and access options are limited, so a bare land strata arrangement is suitable. An OCP amendment is not required. To proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7071-2014 be given first reading; and That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules B and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision application. DISCUSSION: a) Background Conte�: Applicant: Owner: Legal Description: OCP: Existing: Proposed: Ed Brett/Paul Hayes Landmark Enterprises Ltd. Lot 3, Section 28, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan 3007; PID: 002-392-313 Med-High Density Residential Med-High Density Residential 1102 Zoning: Existing: Proposed: Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Zone: Designation South: Use: Zone: Designation East: Use: Zone: Designation West: Use: Zone: Designation Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing requirement: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) R-1(Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Single Family and Duplex Residential RT-1(Two Family Urban Residential), RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Medium Density Residential Single Family and Larch Avenue RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Medium-High Density Residential, Neighbourhood Park, and conservation Single Family and Street Townhouses (new development under construction) R-1(Residential District) and RST-SV (Street Townhouse) Medium-High Density Residential Single Family Residential and 235t" Street RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Medium Density Residential Vacant Single Family Residential 0.770 Hectares (1.90 acres) 235t" Street and Larch Avenue Urban Standard b) Site and Project Characteristics: This subject site (Appendix A) is a remnant parcel and the proposal is the last phase of a series of pre-zoned lands north of the subject site and west of 235th Street. There is an existing 3.0 metre wide statutory right-of-way along the northern property boundary which is to be retained. The preliminary subdivision plans (Appendix C) show a total of 13 single family residential lots, of which 5 lots are proposed to be zoned RS-1b, ranging in size from 557 m2 to 635 mz and accessed off of 235th street. The remainder eight (8) lots, ranging in size from 373 m2 to 392 mz, will be part of a bare land strata arrangement, accessed off of Larch Avenue. The topography of the subject site is challenging with some areas showing 15-25% slopes (Appendix D). The proposed RS-1b lots facing 235th Street follow the existing lot pattern on the north of the subject site, leaving an inaccessible, deeper remainder lot on the eastern portion, which can be accessed only off of Larch Avenue. Further subdivision of this remainder lot is not possible through a fee simple subdivision, so a bare land strata arrangement is suitable for the eastern half of the subject site (Appendix C). The proposed R-1 lot sizes within the bare land subdivision arrangement are compatible with the ones -2- Council approved on the east of the subject site (RZ/075/09). The RS-1b lots facing 235th Street will not have access off of the bare land strata lane. All the off-site upgrades to roads and servicing will be required as a condition of final reading of the zone amending bylaw and the final subdivision a pprova Is. 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 (OCP) and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will need to be made once full application packages have been received. A more detailed analysis and a further report will be required prior to Second Reading. Such assessment may impact proposed lot boundaries and yields, OCP designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for further development permits. c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan - Silver Valley Area Plan: The development site (Appendix A) designated "Medium-High Density Residential", is located within the Silver Valley Area Plan. The proposed RS-1b and R-1 zones align well with the OCP designation. The development of Silver Valley is based on principles associated with achieving a complete community with good pedestrian linkages. Within the Silver Valley Area Plan, the subject site falls between Forest Hamlet and River Village. In February 2012, Council approved a development proposal RZ/075/09, east of the subject site for 13 single family lots zoned R-1 and 17 street townhouses zoned RST-SV. This application RZ/075/09 included the construction of the new Larch Avenue. The original Larch Avenue leg will remain as a multi-purpose trail to enhance the pedestrian connectivity in this neighbourhood (Appendix A). Properties on the south of the subject site are designated for a Neighbourhood Park which will prove to be an asset for the future residents of the proposed development. The proposal fits well with the existing neighbourhood context. The proposed zones follow the neighbourhood's pattern and align well with the existing OCP designation. An OCP amendment is not required. Zoning Bylaw: The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 13316 235 Street from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit a future subdivsion of 13 single family residential lots. The proposed R-1 (Residential District) zone requires a minimum lot size of 371 m2; a minimum lot width of 12 metres and a minimum lot depth of 24 metres. The proposed 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 maximum height permitted in the RS-1b zone is 9.5 metres and in the R-1 zone is 9.0 metres. The Zoning Bylaw, Subdivision Servicing Bylaw and Off- Street Parking & Loading Bylaws establish general minimum and maximum regulations for specific zones. If the development proposal does not meet the requirements such as road standards, setbacks, height, on-site parking, etc. the applicant may seek a variance. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance Permit application. A Development Variance Permit allows Council -3- some flexibility in the approval process. Such flexibility can allow an applicant to sensitively fit a project to a challenging site. This assessment is anticipated to take place prior to second reading. Development Permits: 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. 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) Fire Department; d) Building Department; e) School District; and f) Canada Post. The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application progresses, to liaise with agencies and/or departments not listed above. This application has not been forwarded to the Engineering Department for comments at this time; therefore, an evaluation of servicing requirements has not been undertaken. We anticipate that this evaluation will take place between First and Second Reading. e) Development Applications: In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as required by Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999 as amended: 1. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule B); 2. A Natural Features Development Permit Application (Schedule G); and 3. A Subdivision Application. The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the assessment of the proposal progresses. '� CONCLUSION: The development proposal is in compliance with the Silver Valley Area Plan. In addition, the proposed zone and lot configuration fits well with the existing lot/road pattern and the emerging neighbourhood. Therefore, it is recommended that Council grant first reading to the Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7071-2014, subject to additional information being provided and assessed prior to Second Reading. The proposed layout has not been reviewed in relation to the relevant bylaws and regulations governing subdivision applications. Any subdivision layout provided is strictly preliminary and must be approved by the 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 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 7071-2014 Appendix C- Proposed Preliminary Subdivision Plans Appendix D - Environmental Map -5- 23430 � 31 BC 42355 30 PAR 664 26 27 28 � N N N ��O��L �.7 23486 1 30 /�� 2��s� � ^� 234 82 p� 33 r, 17 � � / $3395 13385 � * �3375 �' 6 � 13365 � 5 13355 � 4 3 3345 2 3335 13418 '� -- 1 313379 � 13382 5 1� 10 13367 � g�,�., w 13412 � 13366 � � 213375 13380 6 9 16 13363 20 � � ��3371 p 13376 7 �406 $ 13360 � � �' 7 13357 13356 ��3367 � $ Q � 21 � 13400 13353 913363 � � � 0 6 J M �+�j � 13390 N N � � 6 13349 22 $� 3359 13380 5 � � � 13350 07 cn 13355 r 13370 � N 513345 � 23 �6 c�o 4� � N 13346 � �3351 N 13356 � 3 13360 � w 4 13341 24 513347 13350 14 3 � 13340 M � 413343 � 13346 15 SUBJECT PROPERTY 25 N 3 13339 � 13340 16 13336 � � BC � 13331 1333226W 213335 W 1-3336 �7 13336/40 � 13331 1 3332 � $ �• h 1� 3327 13328 � �� 5 13326 19 13A6 � hy 2 v`� ry � 13325 � �33j 913321 13322 �� 6 �g 13320 ZQ `S 9 3456 4 P K v 3 Re m 3 $ 3317 13318 �� 1 315 13312 2"r 13313 ,5 4 �330g P 3007 � 3313 13312 14 23 2122 1�2M3 r PP X4138 613309 ��, W w � �� L 50153 5 �3305 �� `'w �� M N� / � 5 13305 �'s> �� cfl w c� PARi� N 13301 r� 8� `s 10 P 2145 � 6 RRem A$ � PN �, Nw��w �p.��N PJ�� 1 27 � o, Q J$� 7 M W U, -� 3295 co m � �, � (J1 N N N N �r�j c�J� ' V ln (V ZS9 N ------- --------L-F4RCH-�E------- ---------------- 0 � c 0 M � N N M N 13167 1 37 P 40978 4 38 P 24142 ' -�•�:3 I� M � M `V �913283 � 24 N 25 26 w30277 � � � � I ' 13245 i ' 39 � i P 131 7 P 37 22 ti 35 3 30 31 32 33 '� N Scale: 1:2,000 District of Langley ROLL #73884-0000-X � (LARCH AVENUE) .� � � o �t CORPORATION OF �� THE DISTRICT OF � - � MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT l� , DATE: Feb 24, 2014 FILE: 2014-014-RZ BY: PC APPENDIX 6 CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7071-2014 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. 7071-2014." That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot 3 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 3007 Except: Reference Plan 15218, Plans 66891, LMP46668, LMP47584, BCP10664, BCP42355, EPP9001, AND EPP23139. and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1615 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-1 (Residential District), and 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 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. 7071-2014 Map No. 1615 From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) To: � R-1 (Residential District) � RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) N SCALE 1:2,500 APPENDIX C � � N �F�16.9H I ' LARCH AVENUE � ss .� PROPOSED SUBDI VI SION I NTO F:�:a�:�►:��,►►,��i�y�:��r��c� DATE: 20 JANUARY, 2014 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 3 SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 12 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 3007 EXCEPT: REFERENCE PLAN 15218, PLANS 66891, LMP 46668, LMP 47584, BCP 10664, BCP42355, EPP9001, AND EPP23139 ;� � � � �� 3�� . ' � �°� �� , � ��._�� `�� .--�,. �- � , � ., � � � _..� �'�I �� I ��1 .� � � _�a.,�� _� — � — — — — — — EPP � � �� ? 3 2� � � E��,��,t�.�� ' C''� V �� f'11 � i � ? �� i � � �cv� � ��7 .� ��:�� .��. �S: 4 � . I � � �=.� i � � �� 1 �� L��H�vc, ` . � � � _� � _ �'� � b� . � 4 ,ya, � Scale: 1:1_000 Le�end slope 1'rail� Percent o� � �T�iv � 0 0 - , � DE�IRED � 15 - �� E}CI�TIN� � �6-30 - ��t � J " �. �� .� �� v� f�rlulti Use Trail area .. � �� •;Y p� � '�s ■ �� The Corporation oftha District ��f 1,laple Ri�ge makes no guarantee regarding the accuracy .or present status of the information shown on this map. � �� t. �ite �ont�xt N1ap � ��RP�F�ATI�N �F � -�=� THE DI�TF�I�T �F fVIAPLE F�ID�E =_.i � � � �a ] _ }.i � n• _ � r DkTE: kpr1,�01f FILE: Untitled BY: R� � � District of Maple Ridge T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 FILE N0: 2013-082-RZ MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Second Reading Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.7037-2013 13260 236 Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The proposal is to rezone the subject property (Appendix A) from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) zones to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone. At the September 24, 2013 meeting, Council reviewed a staff report recommending denial for this application. At this meeting, Council resolved that staff prepare the bylaw amendments in support of this development application, subject to the developer committing to build a sidewalk as an off-site amenity for the neighbourhood, as a compensation for the higher density proposed. At the December 10, 2013 meeting, Council granted first reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013. The developer (Portrait Homes) is seeking a site-specific zoning text amendment to permit an increase in the total gross floor area (i.e. from permitted 0.6 FSR to 0.64 FSR) which translates to 61 units or a density of 49.98 units per net hectare. Some setback and height variances will be required to achieve this density. As a compensation for the increased gross floor area, the developer is offering an amenity in the form of a new sidewalk located on the west side of 236 Street between 132nd Avenue and Fern Crescent (Appendix D). This sidewalk installation will cost approximately $135,000.00 and is anticipated to improve pedestrian connectivity in this part of Silver Valley. Since first reading the developer has revised the proposal, reducing the number of townhouse units from 64 to 61. This proposal as revised (Appendix C) does not require an OCP amendment. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013 be amended as identified in the staff report dated April 14, 2014, be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and 2. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading. i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement; 1103 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; Removal of the existing buildings; Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the Visitor Parking; Construction of the sidewalk along 236th Street up to Fern Crescent; An Engineer's certification that adequate water quantity for domestic and fire protection purposes can be provided; 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; and ix. Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management Act, the property owner will provide a Site Profile for the subject land. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Randy Dick Owner: Portrait Homes Ltd. Legal Description: Lot: 21, Section: 28, Township: 12, Plan: NWP 47603 OCP: Existing: Medium-High Density Residential Proposed: Medium-High Density Residential Zoning: Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), and RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) Proposed: RM-1(Townhouse Residential) Surrounding Uses: North: South Use: Zone: Designation Use: Zone: Designation Single Family Residential and 133rd Avenue R-1(Residential District) Medium-High Density Residential Single Family Residential RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) Medium-High Density Residential -2- East: Use: Zone: Designation West: Use: Zone: Designation Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing requirement: Companion Applications: b) Site and Project Description: Vacant currently (recently approved 69 townhouses, Conservation and one Single Family Residential) RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential); RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential); and RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) Medium-High Density Residential and Conservation Single Family Residential, Street Townhouses and 236t" Street RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential), RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and RST-SV (Street Townhouses- Silver Valley) Medium-High Density Residential Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential (townhouses) 3.017 acres or 12209.36 m2 236t" Street Urban Standard 2013-082-DP and 2013-082-DVP The subject site (Appendix A) is located in Silver Valley and is bounded to the north by single family lots, approximately 5-10 years old. To the west, there are new street townhouses, facing 236t" Street and to the east, a recently approved 69 unit townhouse development. To the south, facing 132na Avenue, are two single family lots, designated "Medium-High Density Residential" which are likely to be re-developed in the near future. The subject site (Appendix A) is sloping down almost 12% from north-east corner to the south-west corner, towards the intersection of 132nd Avenue and 236th Street. The current development proposal consists of 61 townhouse units in 17 blocks clustered around a 6.0 metre wide strata road. Main access to the site is proposed from 236th Street, in the south-west corner (Appendix C). The units facing 133rd Avenue have direct pedestrian access on to 133ra Avenue and are in a duplex form to be more sensitive to the existing single family houses north of 133rd Avenue. Each duplex has a combination of tandem and a two-car double wide garage attached. Most of the units facing 236t" Street are 3 storey units (13 feet or 3.96 metre wide) with tandem parking arrangement (one enclosed garage and the second space on the driveway apron). For the rest of the site, the proposal has a reasonable mix of tandem and double wide units. Out of a total of 61 units proposed, 18 units have a 2-car double wide attached garage, while 43 units (70.49%) have a tandem parking arrangement. Throughout the site, the unit block sizes vary from 2 to 5 attached units in each block. The proposed unit sizes vary from 119 m2 (1277 sft) to 162 m2 (1749 sft) giving a reasonable mix of two and three bedroom units. A large central green space (amenity area) is surrounded by pedestrian walkways and townhouse blocks. The proposed rain and storm water management scheme utilizes means such as infiltration of site run-off through absorbent landscaping, rain gardens, bio swales, central green space between units, permeable pavers for the visitor parking stalls and staggered landscaped beds with appropriate top soil. The -3- Landscape Architect has provided a detailed landscape plan (Appendix F) that will be discussed in the Development Permit report at a future Council meeting. Proposed building finishes include a variety of finishes such as pre-finished vinyl siding, painted board and batten siding, painted wood wall shingles, painted wooden bargeboards, fascia, columns, beams, cultured stone cladding for column bases and fiberglass laminated shingles for roofing. Details of the proposed materials and finishes will be discussed in a future Council report. c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan: The development site (Appendix A) is located on the south-east corner of 236t" Street and 133ra Avenue, within the Silver Valley Area Plan, located just outside of the "River Village" Hamlet Centre. The OCP designation for the subject site is "Medium-High Density Residential". Silver Valley Area Plan Policy 5.2 states: River Village is located along a main arterial route in the Silver Valley area, on Fern Crescent, between Maple Ridge Park to the south and an escarpment to the north and east. The principles within the River Village area talk about making it a complete community with diverse mix of uses and building types. Principal 5.2.8 for River Village Hamlet states: a) Residential densities range from 30 to 70 units per net hectare within a 5-minute walk of the River Village. Approximately 400 residential units are proposed within this area, however, an additional 575 residences are proposed within an 800 metre radius of the centre. b) Higher densities of 70 units per hectare are generally limited to Balsam Street on opposing sides of the north half of the Community Green. These densities are typically associated with maisonette type apartment accommodation within a mansion building form. c) Densities of 30-50 units per hectare will be encouraged for the balance of the River Village area and may include attached as well as detached fee-simple housing. d) In general, higher densities of 50 units per hectare should be located south of Balsam Creek between 233'd Street and 235r'' Street and should be within 400 m or 5 minute walk from the village centre. Land uses in the periphery of the hamlet are meant to serve as a transition to higher density in the Hamlet Centre. The subject site (Appendix A) is outside both: the defined higher density areas in the Area Plan and the 400 metre or 5 minute walking radius of the River Village Hamlet Centre. Based on the location, the density permitted for the subject site is 30-50 units per net hectare. The original proposal with 64 townhouse units, exceeding 50 units per net hectare, needed an OCP amendment. '� This proposal was recently revised to 61 townhouse units after Council granted first reading, to avoid the requirement of an OCP amendment. The density proposed as shown in the current proposal is in compliance with the density for this area (Policy 5.2.8 c above). As a result an OCP amendment is not required. However, a site-specific text amendment is necessary to allow an FSR of 0.64 which exceeds the permitted floor space ratio in the RM-1 zone. Zoning Bylaw: The proposed zone requires a minimum usable open space of 45 m2 for each three-bedroom and 30 m2 for each two-bedroom unit. This zone also requires a Common Activity area of minimum 5 m2 per unit. The proposed useable open space and common activity area including the central green space, front and exterior side yards exceeds the minimum required in the zone. The proposed zone permits a floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.6 times the net lot area plus a 50 m2 area per unit for habitable basements. The RM-1 zone permits a total gross floor area of 7322.33 m2 for the subject site. The developer is requesting increased total gross floor area to 7808.75 m2 (i.e. an FSR of 0.64 instead of 0.6 permitted) via a site-specific text amendment. This site-specific text amendment is reflected in the revised Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013 as attached (Appendix B). The first reading report showed an FSR of 0.67 which has been revised to 0.64 FSR as attached in Appendix B. This proposal shows 10 more units than the previous application (RZ/085/08). 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. Maximum permitted height in this zone must not exceed 10.5 metres and 2.5 storeys. Some variances for setback, height and storeys of certain units are being sought, as outlined below. Proposed Variances to the Zoning Bylaw: Some setback variances are being requested fro units facing 133rd Avenue (north) and 236th Street (west) and are along the eastern and southern property lines. In addition to this all the proposed units are three storeys in form and out of 61 units, 20 units are proposing a height of 11.75 metres while 41 units are proposing a height of 11.5 metres. A development variance permit allows Council some flexibility in the approval process. From a design perspective these setback variances are minor and proposed with an intention of providing better street presence. It should however be noted that the height and storey variances have stemmed from the form/design and will not 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. The details of these variances (setback, height and storeys) will be discussed in a future Council report. 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 -5- for visitors. Based on the required total on-site parking ratio for the RM-1 zone, 122 residential stalls are required, which have been proposed in the form of tandem or double wide parking garages attached to each unit. Out of a total of 61 units proposed, 18 have a 2-car double wide attached garage, while 43 units (70.49%) have a tandem parking arrangement. All the units have driveway aprons ranging in length from 4 to 6 metres. A total of 13 parking spaces are required for visitors, which have been distributed throughout the site in between the building blocks as shown in the proposed Site Plan (Appendix C). Proposed Amenit� The developer is required to provide all the off-site upgrades along both the street frontages, as a condition of final reading on the rezoning. This is standard with any development application requiring the land to be rezoned. In addition to this the developer is offering to build a sidewalk going south, down the west side of 236t" Street, from 132nd Avenue to Fern Crescent. This sidewalk is anticipated to be a 1.5 m asphalt sidewalk as shown in a draft sketch attached as Appendix D. The details of the sidewalk will depend on ground-truthing and be finalized with the off-site servicing drawings. The proposed sidewalk is approximately estimated to cost the developer $135,000.00 plus other fees. The developer is offering this as a type of amenity to offset the proposed excess gross floor area for the site. This will also be a condition of final reading as mentioned in this report. Development Permits: Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan, a Multi-Family Development Permit application and approval 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. This will be the subject of a future Council report. Advisory Design Panel: On February 11, 2014, 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 pedestrian access on north internal street; • Consider more meaningful onsite pedestrian access & circulation from informal gravel paths to more formal paths and elimination of the dead-end paths; • Consider onsite storm water detention methods on internal streets to maximize soil volume for planting areas; • Consider using bio-swale treatment along 236 Street; • Reconsider access between buildings facing 236 Street for internal circulation; • Consider non-combustible materials in buildings of close proximity; � • Consider centralizing the amenity area/green space to a better sun aspect (orientation) and/or improving the visual supervision for all the residents including connectivity to 236th Street; • Consider consistent wood detail (reference to the double wood detail) throughout the site; • Consider further natural play-scape elements in the amenity area/open space. All the above stated concerns were addressed through design revisions such as improved pedestrian connectivity to 236t" Street and within the development, introducing bio-swales and providing an improved Storm Water Management on site. These revisions were reviewed by the Panel to their satisfaction. The details of these revisions will be discussed in a future Council report. Development Information Meetin�: A Development Information Meeting was held on Thursday, April 3, 2014 from 5:00 to 7:30 pm at the Yennadon Elementary School at 23347, 128t" Avenue, Maple Ridge. The developer and his team of consultants were present with the details of the proposal and to answer any questions from the attendees. 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. Approximately 14 people attended this meeting and the concerns expressed and some responses may be summarized as stated below: • There seemed to be a general concern about the existing traffic in the Rock Ridge area and the negative impact on traffic due to increased gross floor are with this development. Some expressed concerns about the safety at the corner of 236t" Street and 133rd Avenue and suggested that a traffic circle or four-way stop sign be installed; • There seemed to be positive support for the duplex form proposed facing 133rd Avenue; • There seemed to be a general concern about lack of schools/ neighbourhood parks and no transit in the Silver Valley area and that the children cannot be accommodated in the Yennadon Elementary School; • Some expressed concerns about the proposed tandem units. The developer explained that the project meets the proposed tandem parking bylaw amendments; • One of the resident preferred single family development for the site instead of townhouses; • Some concerns were expressed about parking along 236th Street. The developer explained that 236t" street would be widened to a Collector standard road right-of-way which will offer at least 15 new parking spaces along east of 236t" Street; • Some expressed concerns if the existing mail boxes on 133rd Avenue may be moved; • Some expressed concerns about removing trees; wanted as many trees to be saved as possible. The developer explained trees along southern property line will be saved and the others will need to be cleared but will be replaced by substantial new ones; • Some enquired about the new sidewalk along 236th Street up to Fern Crescent; and • Some enquired about the drainage and on-site storm water management for the proposed development. The developer explained that the Storm Water Management Plan proposes a combination of top soil, absorbent landscaping, bio-sales and detention on site, with special attention to reduce negative impacts on downstream lands along the southern property line. The meeting ended at 8:00 pm. -7- d) Environmentallmplications: 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) Rainfall capture will be primarily achieved by using 300 mm thick absorbent topsoil, with detention, containment, and conveyance achieved through oversized piping and the bios-wales, rain gardens and detention tanks located on the site. The BCLNA "growing medium" tables provide guidelines for ratios of sand, silt, and clay, along with organic content, acidity, and drainage. A Storm Water Management Restrictive Covenant showing all the SWM areas along with guidelines for maintenance by the future strata will be registered on title. e) Interdepartmentallmplications: Engineering Department: The Engineering Department reviewed the proposal and determined that there is road dedication for a 3x3 metre corner truncation and that all the required off-site services do not exist. The deficient services and upgrades which are required to be provided through a Rezoning Servicing Agreement include the following: removal of culverts, under-ground utilities, new separated sidewalk, new concrete barrier curb and gutter, street trees and street lights facing 133rd Avenue and 236th Street. In addition to the above, details of the proposed off-site amenity of the sidewalk along 236th Street up to Fern Crescent will need to be included in the refundable cost estimate. This sidewalk is anticipated to be a 1.5 m asphalt sidewalk as shown in a draft sketch attached as Appendix D. The details of the sidewalk will depend on ground-truthing and will be finalized with the off-site servicing drawings, prior to final reading of the proposed bylaw. Parks & Leisure Services Department: The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the Development Permit is completed they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. Upon completion of this project, it is anticipated that 22 street trees (total along both the road frontages) will be added to the municipal 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 these will be addressed at the Building Permit stage. 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 at a later date. f) School District Comments: A referral was sent to the School District office and comments were received on March 12, 2014. The School District 42 has reiterated that developments in the Silver Valley Area would affect the projected student population for the catchment area currently served by Yennadon Elementary and Garibaldi Secondary schools. The enrollment at the Yennadon Elementary School is at 104.4% utilization (569 students, including 140 out of catchment students, for 2013-14 year). The students from this area will need to be bussed to Harry Hooge and Alouette Elementary schools, which are beyond the established walking limits of the School Board. Enrollment at the Garibaldi Secondary school is at 74.67% utilization (784 students, including 362 out of catchment students, for 2013-14 year). g) Citizen/Customer Implications: A Development Information Meeting was conducted on April 3, 2014 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 proposed land use is in compliance with the land use designation of the Silver Valley Area Plan. The original proposal was revised to comply with the OCP. The project architect has addressed all the concerns from the Advisory Design Panel. Some setback and height variances will be required as described in this report. The developer (Portrait Homes) is seeking a site-specific zoning text amendment to permit an increase in total gross floor area on site (i.e. 0.64 FSR instead of 0.6 FSR permitted) which translates to 61 units or a density of 49.98 units per net hectare. As a compensation for the increased gross floor area on site, the developer is offering an amenity in the form of a new sidewalk located on the west side of 236 Street between 132nd Avenue and Fern Crescent (Appendix D). � It is recommended that that second reading be given to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013 (Appendix B), and that application 2013-082-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing. "Original signed by Rasika Acharya" Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B-Arch, M-Tech, UD, LEED� AP, MCIP, RPP 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 No. 7037-2013 Appendix C- Proposed Site Plan Appendix D- Proposed Sidewalk up to Fern Crescent Appendix E- Proposed typical Building Elevations and Streetscapes Appendix F- Proposed Landscape Plan and details -10- APPENDIX A Mea N District of Langley � 13260 236 STREET 0 .� � � o �! CORPORATION OF �� THE DISTRICT OF � � - � MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT � Scale: 1:2,000 � `�\\_ �, _�- �`�--� —_'--'° �(� DATE: Aug 15, 2013 FILE: 2013-082-RZ BY: PC APPENDIX 6 CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7037-2013 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. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7037-2013." 2. That PART 6- RESIDENTIAL ZONES, Section 602, RM-1(Townhouse Residential District) Subsection 5, DENSITY, is amended by deleting in its entirety and replacing with the following: a) All buildings and structures shall not exceed a floor space ratio of 0.6 times the net lot area, excluding a maximum of 50m2 of habitable basement area. b) Notwithstanding the above, all buildings and structures shall not exceed a floor space ratio of 0.64 times the net lot area, excluding a maximum of 50 m2 of habitable basement area, for the parcel or tract of land described as 13260, 236t" Street (Lot 21 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 47603). 3. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Lot 21 Section 28 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 47603 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1599 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RM-1(Townhouse Residential). 4. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the 10th day of December, 2013. READ a second time the PUBLIC HEARING held the READ a third time the ADOPTED the day of day of day of day of ,20 ,20 ,20 ,20 PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING Bylaw No. 7037-2013 Map No. 1599 From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) To: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) N SCALE 1:2,500 APPENDIX C , . �.�� .� . � BUILDING HEIGHi MAiRI% I �\ . dafe descripfion BUILDING UNIiNO- MAKHEIGHi I � — � . . ' — 1 I II.Sm • �� , . 2 IISm II ' / 2 3 IISm i � � � � 133 AVENUE � � ` "��' 3 5 II.Sm 6 IISm I� . . 4 I II.Sm I . � ' — — — _ � — _. . __ _ 8 II.Sm no� I I�. 5 9 I1.Sm / Rem.Pal'0' I "`� ', ,Y � �\'> E — — ._ � 0 5 � o � �-, - - ��"- �--a9a 0i� t ii_m aar.aia�iaoa � E�Keo � ' . ' ' .__ - �..' ' I e ti n.sm � ;: o� �� , o o �� o � � �,—�— is iism I i 9<mi f;;mi � ia ii_sm _ �.-, .�- ' , P _-, b i.—�� a nnsm f u ii.sm I � ie ivsm I � n iism ° L L II 1 i 'T^ B 18 I1.Sm �uy3 io3 �, I �+c�;, � �.;,• -, ��,� .._ �,. 9y µ 19 I1.ISm rva� a203 R� �a wwa re I I � ��'� INTERNnLDRIVEWAY� I n 23l5� 2p IISm Febrza20 a R� �ftazon�g i I G I a � 9 21 IISm I , .� ��. ' ___ __ ' .�':._ I 22 I1.JSm -rziia s .,: " .- - ' 23 IISm � I��.6m'• � �. H -�-� = ' ... I 24 II.Sm � � � � o � � zs iism I \. _. : il - o 0 0_"'� , � � - �I ^ ' 10 26 I1.Sm I ; .. \ I _ O -, , . . : .. � �.�,.� - � 2l II.Sm _ � ~ \ I e le_- '� o """ ' � � ' , . I 29 II I'Sm _ _ _ w e O �. ,.. I � I v �i I 11 30 II.Sm � � _ � `� 31 IISm � ��.. � .,... ' 32 IISm � � �'� . � ae.. � � 93 I1.Sm .� � �.m ___—�I � I C, ". 0 :. G EDNC P D �. 34 IISm � , ..� r�,.e ..�-,r.,� _„ N I " � - I'� SEE UN S APED NLAN FOR I �2 ?5 I I 5m r � ALLLAN S APINGDEiAILS �� 36 IISm , � L' �r 3J II.Sm i 0 38 IISm � 'I I ��I it,,, 39 I1.Sm . ■ � � � � — 13 AO I I Sm Q L �- ., -_ I Rurrowes Huggins Architects : 3 C 3 I F� . I .r� _ .�I I 4I I1.15m ,.,�.��,� I m' . _ .. > , .: a2 II.ISm ;.�" , ,:.,��,� —a I O�( — ... � � I 43 I1.Sm I ,...,. . N.. Q . , . ._ poJed. � ;: �� ' � � '� '� 14 a4 Il.sm . ..,_._^_ I � Z � 45 I1.JSm I . .t : _ :_ � � '� �-�' '... , . . � 06 I1 l5m �' I I _ �. ..�nm • _ : . "'_ _ � . . I 4J I I.Sm I �4 - 48 II.Sm ��[iiffi.11f �11I11Y.A � If I I � -. � C � O'� I 15 a9 I I.Sm as /,� .� � �,,yz.�� =� � �i i�"i i f,_'i I so i i�sm PIan409J8 I .. /�.� .� I �^'�` � + ' _ ...� � 52 II'Sm COf Io � .__"-_ ' - �� ' .'� ...,... '_ - ' - - " .;:: ' I 16 53 I1.ISm I .>�� `� . � ' �" � I 54 IIJSm I �'"ENiRANCEDRIV WAY � - yI 55 I1.JSm � � e� : wreeNn�oeroEwnv _ � s�i ivsm � — i., �il �..�� ..�� v se ivsm .eai .eai �, � a��. I..... e — 3.. ,�:P.� �... I Sv it.lsm I I� O e_, � � 60 IIJSm — � ,.�,� � �� -T - ...� C � I 61 I1 �Sm I - �.. ,.� ei C C"' • i.. . � _ � � In ,.. � . ,0 � `� I � m.bam _ �� z „�- ��:•:,; i �� NOTE: AREAS IN DARKER GREEN IDENTIFY a,ow^: I � o �" � � � � . USABLE OPEN SPACE (UOS) AND COMMON nncHiPH o�ioea�zoiz � m„ _ � � � �, _.� _ �� —.ACllVITY AREA (CAA). =k=< � ...,� a � e, �_ � --` — � . o �. � � I�� ... � __ _� - �� JI I v an 2��n % i `\� Lef. s notcd � P 39i a` p � - - / sheefftle � �k_ L - �� ' _ _�"_' ._'_'_'_ _I StePlan I _ — _ � . ', �I __ _. _ �..�\ �. .. ... "_ — — I— _ — I � I NORTH - - - � °,' ) � � � ' � SITE PLAN w— � � � n � �� I SCALE: 1:300 �� .�� M N Scale: 1:2,500 District of Langley Proposed Sidewalk � 0 .� � � � � CORPORATION OF �� ' THE DISTRICT OF ° • � MAPLE RIDGE - PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: Sep 17, 2013 BY: DT FILE: 236_ProposedSidewalk.mxd ?�y,• �' �� `'y 1v , � , �� t� e (�.' U � � .- � 5';.� w?7 '_ . �r ,l . .�rh�: . . . �m �.� � �� y�� ,_ '' 1 �, /�1. �1 � 4 ��k'. T � __" . . " pavd" � ), � i� � � � I 1. �t p�/ , j �. �� t- o� ac . �Y —�► � � ;! _ � � o� � � � �- ta - � :_i �i: ;� \ r `' 1 • /_�� _ �- � l �`o' ° ' h ril llamax Consultants L�d. 10�-1600 West Ftl: Ave. Vancouver, B.C. V6J 1R3 7'el. 224-6$27 Fax 689-3880 — � � 1 - th 8�Q ' : 'fi�*E- -- °�`� � I/ � _a '�6 -.`- �r G !� N�t-�iNr \� 5 . � ,,� ,1 , • , �S n �� q.F�� . N - . �'S ' . � � I .-..�r_.� ��\ � . - ( , !/ � �,�'� . I 'n.^ ' -., '.?.V' �%K 45 �� •. � � iNf•h :.8i'mt — -' i �� , �o �. ��C �` � , 'lY' �: ." %�l �� • � �y� �u-`� '� �t�hf�io�: , 1y1��SdC . �:i � �' sy�� ;`� . P� GI �1G � + ,,: ;r�s .s � CT •, '� PJ ��- - 4- , ; -, a :, : a�Yce j� � � i .V � C �,l� � t _ .::': :w �e. ..?t,'.^r i ; �'F,t.�. a G%Cl� , \' �\ --� H7x A k�- ��.; 'i. .^. %k��?. � i �, 4 � L/ � � ) t�P ' Le'4 ., ... � , � � � Ck � i . � � F � h � lLl� f`� -'�� 1•�m� v.1��E �; - ��'C� —� : ' � F� w�, - G� '�T,�j�� p;,\\� \�o S � A � ^' �Q� I` ''4 +4 a�! �,,- .. `��`��c11�i\j — a �`� � s -� / � i�(,�.`�� `y .\�\ <;;- • V � ��. •' �� . ,5 ' i:�;. ;� ;� �;�t7s� ? . � ,� y ,`_- � '-:S - -' nh � - ! '�:f , �. r i ��- - . '� s,. � .s . �'��"�Z� �r�`�, ,y�. ,� 4`�' 1,,� �l`�� I s+� .�;, , 3� ��'Y a-e ws �� m � •�. tj I ;' �1 � ' l '� � I � nl * � I' y`t ;sii; , ,a� i � "' ,� ` 5-�-4� �� ;� �^�:� r,a�b�" �`� -- �,''1 '��,� `, �:� �-i�Zf ;� , � �� ,, e� `� ::;�., � \� ��• .1_�� ,u .�, \. �,, n� �� .�'' ` .a � .��''`is+ra� b6' !'l°' � �,' — , - � �?;�, ,; e - - ... �i i � � � � ��..��, ❑0 EAST ELEVATION SCALE:3/16"= I'-0" WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = I -0" NORTH ELEVATION SCALE_ 3/16" — I'-0" � �I . �� i_..�irriir C. �� SOUTH ELEVATION �'� � SCALE:3/16"-1�-0� ELEVATIONS BUILDING 7 dafe descripfion . r Rurrowes Huggins Architects prqect: _ ^ _ ��[iiffi.11f �11I11Y.A eal eal FMH/PH May2013 �Le3/16..=1-0" I�1PJ9/ sheef title: Elevotionz B�iltling ) A5.07 � SOUTH ELEVATION /�� SCALE:3/16"=1'0" � NORTH ELEVATION SCALE'. 3/16" = I'-0" F 88550 �� e) [c� _os � �' � i � � � � �,, WEST ELEVATION SCnLE: 3/ 16"= I'-0" EL8&SSOrn I EOt � EOt � � 1 � �-� � 2 � � EAST ELEVATION � SCALE'. 3/ I 6" = I-0" ELEVATIONS BUILDING 1 SEE STREET ELEVATIONS FOR VARIATIONS FOR BUILDINGS 3,4 AND 5. fEV�s�dafe descripfion . r Rurrowes Huggins Architects prqect: ��[iiffi.11f �11I11Y.A eal eal FMH/PH May2013 �Le3/16..=1-0" I�1PJ9/ sheef title: Elevotionz B�iltling I A5.01 � �\ COMPOSITE NORTH STREET ELEVATION ! SCALEI/16"=1-0' / � COMPOSITE WEST STREET ELEVATION SCALE: 1 /16" = 1'-0" a s� — �� i.o�.�� m� �O dafe descripfion . r Rurrowes Huggins Architects prqect: ��[iiffi.11f �11I11Y.A eal eal ��MH/PH e�eJ�ne2013 � notod L PJ9/ sheef title: Sireet Eleva�ions � A5.20 ,�V� � �� rr�v,�� r�� =K��r'�' r:1 ��r �^�'-�-'� ,� �`'�� `- � , - �x. W � :�'��`, N�� . �� s � ; ;�� - _�� f ^ ,� �� `�. +�, � �r.� : .._ � �� .. � . '_^ 6 � ■ r � � �_ � + � � �. �: � � � � r.� . � �... . . _ . —. � .- � � .� �� , � . �� :�:� � � � .�t � 3D Massing Street View Studies . aa�e ae:�ncro� �� 6 owes Huggms Architec[s projecf: ROCKRIDGE nnaple Rldge. B-G I�[iiffi.11f �11I11Y.A eal eal .�� eH e��o��anzoin �P NiS jeC,P�9J sheet title: 3D Massing SNtlies �n�A8.04 ,�� " " r�,��; �g':": ::i;� ��" � W'...��aa..•d4��..��lil1 {4�iE::..- i. :1�� i�B��i. � i e�l;s� .:n.w n.�.:: � wl�.-i.iic e...... ��''�s!`7►�-_ � a -. -.-� =�;:::�;��Na�3l'3��e =: s��- ;:�`:`� �:::':.... r .�-�:�I�:::;II �r.+� �r �� . :i: it -'•.F . ....... .�� ..,, ;, , . , „ ; � �: ; ..� � �,. -:� � _i �: ... 0 � � •: _ ., ... , .. ,:. ��:---..�.�, ..� .�- --. . . '�---..�.� �5---- � - •: ..� ��Y �IR: ii� �� E�� _�. �„ nr �5�� , +� ��.Ca F�:�'7��:, „_, ,+n �i, IR7�`�I:�;� if . 't° I..� �. ,.!I`� �Pn ��A �111 I'III 111+ �11' I K[rawrvli"=��'�a"1 _ -; `�y l ..f� -�,� � " , r ' x �' . s �'' � � r .�� }�i`` -*. f - � { �..'� k b � >� s. f I, �4v �; � � - - ,.,, ��r, ( � :. " —�.,�; ..� �' . . . �.��'�3a'�: . (Ll �u�srorv[naourvoa�[nlua[ra[[ �J 3 DETAIL PLAN 3(1" -10'-0"� eErvcn anECEOErvi �mr�m�i� ��ari�s ROCKRIDGE TOWNHOMES 236th Street Maple Ridge, British Columb�ia scaie: r=io•-o•• Drawn: DS/Tf Rev�ewed: os Prolect No. OG342 DETAIL PLAN L3.2 � � - i r T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FILE N0: 2011-019-RZ Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W Rezoning - First Extension Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871 - 2011 and Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864 - 2011 10515 and 10595 240 Street and 23950 Zeron Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant for the above-referenced file has applied for an extension to this rezoning application under Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 - 1999. This application is to permit approximately 48 units under the RM-1(Townhouse Residential) zone. RECOMMENDATION: That a one year e�ension be granted for rezoning application 2011-019-RZ. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Legal Descriptions: OCP: Existing: Proposed: Zoning: Existing: Proposed: Brian Shigetomi , Atelier Pacific Architecture Inc. Spencer Creek Ventures Inc. Lot 3, Except Parcel A(EPP 16557); District lots 406 & 408, Group 1, New Westminster District Plan 3825 Parcel A(EPP 16557), Lot 3, District Lots 406 & 408, Group 1, New Westminster District Plan 3825 Lot 9, District Lots 406 & 408, Group 1, New Westminster District Plan 29456 Urban Residential Urban Residential RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) RM-1(Townhouse Residential) -1- 1104 Surrounding Uses North: South: East: West: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Use: Zone: Designation: Existing Use of Properties: Proposed Use of Properties: Site Area: Access: Servicing: Companion Applications: Single Family Residential RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential Urban Residential Vacant RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) and RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Conservation and Urban Residential Single Family Residential and Conservation RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) and RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Conservation, Low Medium Density Residential and Medium Density Residential Single Family Residential RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) Urban Residential Vacant Multi-Family Residential 1.98 ha (4.9 acres) 240 Street Urban Standard 2011-019-DP, 2011-019-VP, and 2011-020-DP This application is to permit approximately 48 units under the RM-1(Townhouse Residential) zone. The following dates outline Council's consideration of the application and Bylaws 6871 - 2011 and 6864-2011: first and second reading was granted October 25, 2011; Public Hearing was held November 15, 2011; third reading was granted on November 22, 2011. Application Progress: The Rezoning Application and Development Permit application proposed 48 townhouse units with underground parking. The developer has since revised their proposal to eliminate the underground parking component of the development and slightly revise the layout resulting in approximately 52 units. Due to the revised layout, a new Public Hearing will be required. This will be the subject of a future report to Council. Alternatives: Council may choose one of the following alternatives: 1. Grant the request for extension; or 2. Deny the request for extension and require a new Rezoning Application. -2- CONCLUSION: The applicant has been actively pursuing the completion of this rezoning application and has applied for a one year extension due to the change in the development proposal. The additional year should be sufficient time for the applicant to return to Public Hearing and complete the terms and conditions of the rezoning application. "Original signed by Michelle Baski" Prepared by: Michelle Baski, AScT Planning Technician "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP 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- Second Reading Report -3- �"�v " � 10717 l iv� iv� iv� �ii a 10719 (j K2111K21'Tl " � 324 d 3 2g m 2 3 L 1 I 5 608 m 10699 107AVE. 10705 50 N 49 ��66 30 m ti sos 325 2 � N � `�° 10697 5� o �ry � m m m m g� o�o �� po� 326 10695 21 N 22N 23N 24N 10693 �068a '^ 48 ��°�a 3 8 32 CP 1 894 32 oa2� 2 s � 6 14 52 106a2 < < 12 tih 3303 PARK � 10680 70683 56 47� � �� 3� ios�s �r Q 13 ry ry��ry � 332 � 2 10660 � 10663 10680 1p6j3 10672 � � 24( �� ,�, �osss 13 57 55 � 46 —' n14 �osq� � �y�� 333 c� BC 2536 10670 � 54 a ioss2 �,�� F M�' a U 3 4 5 8 9 10 aryo"'�' 53 N L P 51 37 '��'3 2 �,`b ry ry m� ^ � m 11 10660 5$ Z N`� o� 45m � 44 7 �, „ „ 1062 M � M 6'� 12 a N �, �, M 43 �, 42 � "' � o� m m N oi 59 � o o � r� ry`3%� N N N N �� 10650 M N N N N N C O9 3 �. ,�v"� �� 0 106 AVE. 239��N PJ� 10640 0 d 64 � 0 106 qVE. yh �� ,� � `� � M o �o � � N N 65 � o �o ry�q� ryM osg2 q n�cb N� ro ro v� 16 � 61 J 72 0 0 o c`Oo � o Q M ZV N N 25 N 10596 N 10630 � N N N N � � 336 �a 15 62 6610621 N 73 74 N N ry�,c�^^ 3^ J m 24 iosas7 Rem 3 �osss �oszo N 39 38 . ��,ro 2 � �osas �asao 18 P 3825 10610 g� � 71 �h°` N m a 23 ios�4 CO 63 �06'`° ��6�� ryM �O � U 10575 9 � 2Sp N �osss � 9� 68 0 'o ��'0 70 MP Q�os�s 22 iossa 20 `V o 69�'a `� 5 2S � Sss � 3SS M iosso 21 m A 2 0 ^ �, 2�0Ss9 ��s68 ss rn 3Sq `��so EP 16557 S3 a Q �osss �oss4 PARK 2S4 �OSS� �°Sso s) �3S3°S4s 33g LM P 51537 SS ��543 ��SS4 S8 o N 3�0S3j ��5qa lps3s �OS46 $9 � M � �9 � �054? 339 3 4 351 �n ��536 340 6 ��52� ��s36 �� ios2i N �os2 34 1 N 9 � a os�9 �os2s 6 350 P 29456 10513 �p57g 342 0511 10516362 349 363 348�0509 1p 343 �os�s �0502 5j0 a BCP 8155 10503 364 ��So `�qA J 05 10�g2 1�� s Rem. Pcl. A 6� Ro,6 s� 365 347 ,0 345 1a -y�, pg2 0 ,� ,� 0 1� 36�0 ^346 �6 �� g �� o�°`�ti �6� �6 �o �60 6��0�� oo �6g � P 10921 `L ,� Q5o � Rem. Pcl. A 6 `L�°R,�°°`6 �o �69 � o�y5 1o�,ati so BCP 8155 �,6 � � 3�0 �o �oass 9 �66 �� R36 ��9 �� 6� o�3g 3� 1 e'�� `� � � 1 1�q22 373 The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge �$$ '0 so 26a��R31 1Cp 10009 makes no guarantee regarding the accuracy 2 3$$9 � 6g or present status of the information shown on z 2�� 0 2 10423 this map. 2"16 "'0 10415 374 0 �za95 27� 10416 � Cit f Pitt �-�S %' � N Scale: 1:2,500 District of � � Langley � 10515, 10595 240 Street .� 23950 Zeron Ave � � a �t CORPORATION OF L � THE DISTRICT OF � � - � MAPLE RIDGE a = • � - PLANNING DEPARTMENT � DATE: Apr 3, 2013 FILE: 2011-019-RZ BY: DT APPENDIX B � � —�'��'�T�� District of Maple Ridge T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: October 17, 2011 and Members of Council FILE N0: 2011-019-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: First and Second Reading Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871-2011 and Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864-2011 10515 240 Street, 10595 240 Street, 23950 Zeron Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) , to permit development of a 48 unit townhouse development. The proposed rezoning from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1(Townhouse Residential) is in compliance with the Official Community Plan, however, an Official Community Plan amendment is required to adjust the conservation boundary. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 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; 2. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871-2011 be considered in conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 3. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871- 2011 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 4. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871-2011 be given First and Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 5. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864-2011 be given First and Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and 6. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading. i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of security as outlined in the Agreement; ii. Amendment to Schedule "B" &"C" of the Official Community Plan; iii. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses the suitability of the site for the proposed development; iv. Road dedication as required; v. Consolidation of the development site; vi. A landscape plan prepared by a Landscape Architect must be submitted including the security to do the works; vii. Park dedication as required; 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 subdivider will provide a Site Profile for the subject land(s); and x. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the Visitor Parking. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Applicant: Owner: Atelier Pacific Architecture Inc Brian Shigetomi Spencer Creek Ventures Inc Legal Description: Lot: 9, Plan: 29456 Lot: 3, Plan: 3825 Plan: 3825 -2- OCP: Existing: Proposed: Zoning: Existing: Proposed: Surrounding Uses North: Use: Zone: Designation South: Use: Zone: Designation East: Use: Zone: Designation West: Use: Zone: Designation Existing Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Site Area: Access: Servicing: Companion Applications: b) Project Description: Urban Residential/Major Corridor Urban Residential/Major Corridor RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) RM-1(Townhouse Residential) Single family residential RS-1b (One Family Urban (medium density) Residential Urban Residential/Major Corridor Vacant RS-1b (One Family Urban (medium density) and RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Conservation, Urban Residential and Medium Density Residential Single family residential and conservation area RS-1b (One Family Urban (medium density) Residential) Conservation, Urban Residential and Medium Density Residential Single Family Residential RS-1b (One Family Urban (medium density) Residential) Urban Residential Vacant Multi-Family Residential 1.98 HA. 240t" Street Urban Standard 2011-019-DP/VP The subject site is characterized by steep slopes along the western portion of the property and a tributary to Spencer Creek along the southern boundary. The land flattens out towards 240t" and with re-grading provides an adequate building area for the 48 proposed townhomes. There is an unnamed tributary to Spencer Creek located on the southern boundary of the site. A 15 metre setback is required and has generally been provided for this tributary. Due to the topography of the site a small portion of the setback falls short of the 15 metre requirement. To compensate for this an additional 160m2 area will be dedicated for the protection of the Tributary. Further compensation is also to be provided through additional planting and stream enhancements. The compensation measures will be addressed in the Watercourse Protection Development Permit. -3- c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan: The Official Community Plan designates this property Urban Residential/Major Corridor which provides for a range of densities in a ground oriented housing form, subject to satisfying the Infill and Compatibility Criteria prescribed in the Plan. The proposed rezoning to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) is in compliance with the OCP designation, however, an Official Community Plan amendment is required to adjust the conservation boundaries as depicted in the Official Community Plan. Zoning Bylaw: In order to accomodate the current proposal the following Zoning Bylaw variances are required; Required Proposed Front Yard Setback 7.5 metres 4.5 metres Interior Lot Setback 7.5 metres 4.5 metres Building Height 10.5 metres 11.7 metres The above variances will be the subject of a future report to Council. The proposed variances are supportable as they are typical for townhouse development in the area and are minor in nature. Development Permits: The application site is adjacent to Spencer Creek and is challenged with slopes greater than 25% grade. A Watercourse Protection and Natural Features Development Permit is, therefore, required for the preservation, restoration and enhancement of the natural environment of the watercourse areas and of the natural features on the site. A Security will be taken as a condition of the issuance of the Development Permit to ensure that the Development Permit area guidelines are met. Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan, 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. Accordingly, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Development Permit must be reviewed and approved. An application for the Development Permit has been received. Adherence of this project to the guidelines of this permit will be provided for Council in a future report. Advisory Design Panel: The current application was presented to Advisory Design Panel on July 14, 2011. The Panel raised a small number of concerns related to the building design and building and landscape materials. Since that time the applicant revised the drawings and resubmitted to the panel for acceptance in '� August 2011. The current design reflects these changes and has been accepted by the design panel. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: On September 29th, 2011 the applicant hosted a Development Information Meeting at Kanaka Creek Elementary School concerning the current proposal. Approximately thirteen people filled in the attendance list and eight filled out a comment sheet. The residents in attendance were concerned about increasing the traffic along 240t" Street as it is already perceived as very busy and unsafe especially at 240t" Street and McClure Drive. There is also concern about development in this area and the lack of school capacity available for existing residents. e) Interdepartmentallmplications: Engineering Department: Concerns have been raised about the proposed site entrance off 240t" Street. As a result the Engineering Department requested the applicant to provide a traffic study to determine if a left turn bay is required along 240t" Street. The traffic study prepared by BWW Consulting dated April 7, 2011 has determined that no left turn bay is required for the proposed development. Fire Department: The Fire Department has no concerns with the proposed development. Building Department: There have been concerns raised regarding the grading and slope stability on the site. The applicant is required to address all concerns related to lot grading and slope stability and a geotechnical report will be registered as a Restrictive Covenant on title prior to Final Reading. f) Intergovernmentallssues: School District A referral has been sent to School District 42. No comments have been received from the School District at the time of preparing this draft. Local Government Act: An amendment to the Official Community Plan requires the local government to consult with any affected parties and to adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section 882 of the Act. The amendment required for this application, to adjust the conservation boundary, 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 -5- of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the Federal and Provincial Governments. The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have no impact. g) Environmentallmplications: A 15 metre setback has generally been provided along a tributary of Spencer Creek. An Enhancement and Restoration Plan and securities for the work proposed is required before issuance of the Watercourse Development Permit. CONCLUSION: The current application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan. It is, therefore, recommended that First and Second Reading be given Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864-2011 and Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871-2011 and they be forwarded to Public Hearing. Prepared by: Sarah Atkinson Planning Technician Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PI, MCIP Acting Director of Planning Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A - Subject Map Appendix B- OCP Amending Bylaw 6871-2011 Appendix C- Zone Amending Bylaw 6864-2011 Appendix D - Site Plan Appendix E- Building Elevation Plans Appendix F - Landscape Plans � CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 6871-2011 A Bylaw to amend Schedules "B" &"C" forming part of the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 6425-2006 as amended 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" and "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. 6871 - 2011. 2. Schedule "B" and "C" is hereby amended for those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as: Lot 9 District Lots 406 and 408 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 29456 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 816, a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adjusting the Conservation boundary. 3. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.6871-2006 is hereby amended accordingly. READ A FIRST TIME the 25t" day of October, A.D. 2011. READ A SECOND TIME the 25th day of October, A.D. 2011. SECOND READING WAS RECINDED the 8t" day of November, A.D. 2011. RE-READ A SECOND TIME the 8t" day of November, A.D. 2011. PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 15t" day of November, A.D. 2011. READ A THIRD TIME the 22nd day of November, A.D. 2011. RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER ""'�v -' � 10717 l iti� iti� iti� �ii a 10719 (j K2111K21'Tl a 3 29 m 2 3 LM 51537 � 10608 324 m 10699 107 AVE. 10705 5� � 49 �( °' 325 2 30 m N iosos � � � � 31os9� 51 0 ��ti m m m m 326 1 0695 21 N CP 1 894 24N 32 693 �068a ^� 48 3 �osoa27 328 2s � 6 14 52 10682 � ��tih � 33033' PARK 1 ios�s �osao iosss 56 47 s � ry ry��ry �� 332 � 2 10660 � 10663 10680 1p6j3 10672 � �� `�� r, �osss � 3 57 55 � 46 ' `' ry°` �os � �� 3 N BC 2536 10670 Q ioss2 N3,�ry�� ry� q�F �y ��33a3 4 ry�54 a 2 3�3 ��, ry�a U 5 8 9 10 M 11 w N o" a 53 N L P 51 3 21 N3 2 `b ry m� � � � 10660 5$ z `� 0 45 4 7 �,� „ ; 10625 M � °' 6� 12 a N � N 44 � �'� "' � M m m N � 59r oo a , 3 ry`3%� N N N N �� 10650 � N N N N � �8 h� 9 P`�� o �a 3�9 �. „�v � 106AVE. 239� �RON 60 in o M 106 N"' �r 3�� N � ti �osao a g4 N� AVE. �� ry�,��'� ti`�� 0ss 2 4 n�`b N� /� �� oi 16 � 61 � N 65 72 0 0 0 � Q M ZV N N 25 N 10596 N 10630 � N N N N a 336,� v 1a 17 15 62 6610621 Q 73 74 10595 b � �w` � m 24 iosss Rem 3 �oszo � 3 �n 70580 10610 N t� ry�,�° � ��,ro^ 2 iosas 18 P 3825 67 , 7� 2 y�` ti � d 23 co � 63 6,�� a6�2 48 24gry�� '2S N U iosss ios�4 19N � 1068 0 'o�,��'o�, 70 8 Q � o S 22 iossa 20 0 69 p 2� S � 3 2F��NqLF 10560 m 2S2 ss SS M 21 q o ; � �� 2�0Ss9 ��s68 ss rn 3Sq �so EP 16557 S3 a Q �osss �oss4 PARK 2S �OSS� �OSsos7 �3S3°S4s 338 LM P 51537 9 2 �OS43 �OSSQ S8 � ��53 �0548 SSo 'os �S M � 3S2 > �o54Z 339 2S S3S 46 9 4� M 10529 �0 34 o �052> >os3660 � a 351 � 536 0 M257 � �os2i N �os 34� 0 9 �os�s �os2636� 350 28 � 258 10513 � p5 42 P 29456 �8 3 10511 10516362 349 10509 343 10515 363 348 �os� 25g �0502 ° a BCP 8155 10503 364 ��So `�qA J 05 10�g2 1�� s Rem. Pcl. A 26� R9y s� 365 347 ,� 345 1� 9j'T 1oag2 � 6� �$� o,�0 36�^ ^346 `L �,o �ti `L ��g s� o�°` �6� �6 00 �60 p �� o0 6g � P 10921 `L�O�'�° 6,� 050 � Rem. Pcl. A 6 �g �� 6R,00� o �6� �� 0�55 1o�,o�ti so BCP 8155 MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING Bylaw No. 6871-2011 Map No. 816 From: Urban Residential To: Conservation N SCALE 1:2,500 CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. No 6864-2011 A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended. WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended; NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864-2011" 2. Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as: Parcel "A" (Explanatory Plan 16557) Lot 3 District Lots 406 and 408 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 3825 Lot 9 District Lots 406 and 408 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 29456 Lot 3 Except: Parcel "A" (Explanatory Plan 16557); District Lots 406 and 408 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 3825 and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1544 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-1(Townhouse Residential) 3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are hereby amended accordingly. READ a first time the 25t" day of October, A.D. 2011. READ a second time the 25th day of October, A.D. 2011. PUBLIC HEARING held the 15th day of November, A.D. 2011. READ a third time the 22nd day of November, A.D. 2011. RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 . PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER """" � -- a3o�� l NI NI NI NJ a 21�0719 m 2m 3m LM 51537 v�s � 10608 I324 m 10699 107AVE. 10705 5� � 49 � °' 325 2 30 m N 10606 � � � `r° 10697 51 0 �ry z') m m m m 31 � 326 1 0695 21 N 22N 23N 24N 10693 �0s83 ^° 48 `'�'s 327 32� 329 � CP 1 894 32 � �osoa 8� J 6 14 52 �osaz �tih � 33033 PARK 1 ios�s 10680 — 10683 � 56 47 s ry`� �ry°j � � 332 � 10660 � 10663 rn� 10680 lps� 10672 � �ry�, �,� ��,�^� �^� \ � 2 BCP 25369 y 13 v o 55 � '� ,� �osss � 57 AS � 46 `��'3� �ry� �06q� ry ry`�� 33 a — �6 \ e �� 10670 M 54 S38\ a 10662 2�3�3 M�� F ti v°� U3 4 5 8 9 10M 11 \ cp2g3j J �MP51538 w N o"'� a 53 N L P 51 � 214 `�'`i7 q�`�'� `�' m� � 10625 r� v M 6'� 12 � O 10660 5$ zQ `� N 45� N 44 M � 2"� c� M m m N oi 59 r � a a a , 3on ry`3%� O N N N N �� 10650 � N N N N V ��a �3�9 �. �q,h � 106AVE. 239�9 60 �n o M 106AVE. N �r 3�� N � 10640 a 64 N� �� M�'y� ti�'� �0s9 2 4�� N N �� oi 16 � 61 � N 65 7 2 0 0 0 0 �j.j�p `�' Q � M 26 N N 25 N 10596 N 10630 � c�v N N N ti 3�88� 336� v �' 1a 17 15 62 6610621 Q 73 74 ° �, �,�� M J m 24 �osss Rem 3 �osss 10620 _P51538 � PS 538 ) ry�,c�a � 3�ro^ I I� 2 � iosas iosao 18 �p P 3825 10610 67 N � 71 2 y�` ti I � ,� d 23 � nl 63 � 7�\ o� �6� �8 ryM� �O M U 10575 10574 M �if� �� 6 �0 2 24g o 2Sp N iosss � 9 N W� s"O 68 � 'o�, �'o�, 70 $ � Q �os�s 22 iossa 20 0 's s�'� � 69 p � 2S� o v �� h� �os � 3 iosso m � � MN 2S2 ss SSM 21 A LMP 51539 ^ � n �'� �� 2�0Ss9 ��s68 ss rn 3Sq �so EP 16557 � �o � 3 a Q ��osss �oss4 PARK � 2S4 SS� °Ssos� �353°s4s 33 LM P 51537 _� �o � 2 �os43 �oss4 S8 0 ,os3 5q8 �� ^h SS �0 3 " rn 3S2 � �OsaZ 339 — _ 1 ^ 2v^ �S3S S46 S9 h"'� 10529 / i �0 34 v o �os2> �os366� � 4 351 � 536 0 / � � / �= � M257 � ios2i N �os 34� 0 9 � // 36y 350 2a i / �os�9 �os2s P 29456 � � 10513 3 'i � J 258 10511 10516362 349 ��57g 42 RW 66539 / �/ 10509 343 10515 — � 7 � Q�1a2� 25g 363 � 348 �2� �OS�o a i�. �0502 P 39 � � � � , � BCP 8155 10503 364 �. �y �osos 3g4 J M � 10�g2 � p32 10�� g � �� I Rem. Pcl. A 26� R9y s� MP 35 365 347 ,� 345 � 1 � I 1 0 9�0 1�dg 2 6 0346 � 1/ I� I 0 `L6��o°`$� �'O 3�ti � — r— � �g s�' '�°� 36� I � i ! �,6`L,o°` �60 � rn �� o�� o0 6g � � � � P 10921 � �o� `L6 '� ,� �50 -o Rem. Pcl. A � �L 6 g ��, � �6p��o�,6 '`° �6c� o/ / � — ��@ � � o�y5 1o�,ati so BCP 8155 00/ i, MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING Bylaw No. 6864-2011 Map No. 1544 From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) To: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) N SCALE 1:2,500 ;� NORTH / /a / ( � - 240 STREET - NOTE; ALL DIMENSIONS HAVE 9�H CAtNERTE[I IMPQUALTO MEfRICANDARE PROVIGED IN 80TI OESIGN MINIMUM BlSEMINf EIEVATION TOBE [ WHEN FIWLLORAOINO PIAN ISMPROVFA. � . ._...... i_ _�_.-_... . � , ,__ __ _ . . I -_ _ � � ' � -- : �. __ -� �n��.. � � Deep Roofs Greater Neights T0: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FILE N0: RFP-OP14-13 FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Committee of the Whole SUBJECT: Municipal Equipment Purchase, One Single Axle Recycle Truck EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The approved Financial Plan includes funding for the purchase of a recycle truck. A public request for proposals to supply one recycle truck resulted in four (4) submissions being received. Following a detailed evaluation of the proposals, it is recommended that the contract to supply the truck be awarded to Fort Fabrication and Welding Ltd. This is a replacement unit for a 2006 recycle truck and is consistent with our normal fleet life cycle renewal procedure. RECOMMENDATION: That the contract for the purchase of one single axle recycle truck be awarded to Fort Fabrication and Welding Ltd in the amount of $182,684.25 plus applicable taxes of approximately $21,922.11, and a contingency amount of $10,000 and further, that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: A Request for Proposals (RFP-OP14-13) for the supply of one single axle recycle truck was publicly advertised on February 19, 2014 and closed March 12, 2014. Four (4) proposals were received and evaluated. The results of the detailed evaluations for best value recommend award of a Walinga Champion Recycle Body on a 2015 Freightliner M2 106 Cab and Chassis to Fort Fabrication and Welding Ltd. This is a replacement unit for a 2006 recycle truck and is consistent with our normal life cycle renewal. A conditional assessment in 2013 allowed extension of one additional year of service before replacement was required. b) Financiallmplications: The cost of the truck is within the approved fleet replacement budget and project LTC#8218. Total purchase price for the unit is $182,684.25 plus applicable taxes of approximately $21,922.11, and a contingency amount for minor modifications if required of $10,000. 1105 CONCLUSION: Following a public request for proposals, and analysis of the received submissions, it is recommended that the contract to supply one recycle truck should be awarded to Fort Fabrication and Welding Ltd. and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract. "Original signed by Russ Carmichael" Prepared by: Russ Carmichael, AScT, Eng.L Director of Engineering Operations "Original signed by Trevor Thompson" Reviewed by: Trevor Thompson Manager Financial Planning "Original signed by David Pollock" acting for: Approved by: Frank Quinn General Manager, Public Works and Development Services "Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer ��. �� Deep Roots Greater Heights T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: and Members of Council FILE N0: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Excess Capacity/Extended Services Agreement LC 156/14 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: April 14, 2014 E08-015-1062 06-2240-20 CofW A developer has subdivided land at Bosonworth Avenue and Carmichael Street. Part of the subdivision servicing is considered to be excess or extended servicing in accordance with the Local Government Act. The extended servicing benefits adjacent properties. Latecomer Agreement LC 156/14 provides the municipality's assessment of the attribution of the costs of the excess or extended servicing to the benefiting lands. RECOMMENDATION: That with respect to the subdivision of lands involved in subdivision SD 102/03 located at Bosonworth Avenue and Carmichael Street, be it resolved: 1. That the cost to provide the excess or extended services is, in whole or in part, excessive to the municipality and that the cost to provide these services shall be paid by the owners of the land being subdivided, and 2. 3. That Latecomer Charges be imposed for such excess or extended services on the parcels and in the amounts as set out in the staff report dated April 14, 2014; and further That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC 156/14 with the subdivider of the said lands. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: The attached map identifies the lands which are involved in the subdivision and those which will benefit from the excess or extended services. The cost breakdown for each excess or extended service is shown on attached Schedule A. In addition, a copy of Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC 156/14 is also attached for information purposes. 1106 b) Strategic Alignment: Administration of excess or extended services legislation complies with the Smart Managed Growth element of the Corporate Strategic Plan. The administration procedure supports the requirement for a developer to construct municipal infrastructure in support of land development and recognizes that the infrastructure may provide benefit to other land. c) Policy Implications: Part 26, Division 11, of the Local Government Act provides that where a developer pays all or part of the cost of excess or extended services, the municipality shall determine the proportion of the cost of the service which constitutes excess or extended service and determine the proportion of the cost of the service to be attributed to parcels of land which the municipality considers will benefit from the service. Latecomer Agreement LC 156/14 will provide such determination for Subdivision SD 102/03. CONCLUSION: A developer has provided certain services in support of Subdivision SD 102/03. Some of the services benefit adjacent lands therefore, it is appropriate to impose Latecomer Charges on the benefitting lands. Latecomer Agreement LC 156/14 summarizes the municipality's determination of benefitting lands and cost attribution and also establishes the term over which such Latecomer Charges will be applied. "Original signed by Stephen Judd" Prepared by: Stephen Judd, PEng. Manager of Infrastructure Development "Original signed by David Pollock" Reviewed by: David Pollock, PEng. Municipal Engineer "Original signed by David Pollock" acting for: Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng. GM: Public Works & Development Services "Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer TG/mc Schedule A TYPE OF EXCESS OR EXTENDED SERVICE 1. OVERSIZE WATER SYSTEM SERVICE # BENEFITTING COST OF COST PER BENEFIT ATTRIBUTED BY LOTS BENEFIT LOT PROPERTY EXCLUDING SUBDIVISION Water Reservoir, 209 $3,389,562 $16,218 Lot 2. NWP 2713 Pump Station & RN 84407-0000-3 Watermains 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 4, NWP 2713 RN 84409-0000-4 2 x $16,218.00 Lot 5, NWP 2713 RN 84410-0000-1 2 x $16,218.00 Lot 6, NWP 2713 RN 84411-0000-7 2 x $16,218.00 Lot 8, NWP 8336 RN 84436-0000-7 5 x $16,218.00 Lot 72, NWP 56277 RN 84458-0200-8 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 1, NWP 23771 RN 84403-0100-5 2 x $16,218.00 Lot 3, , BCP39010 RN 84394-0102-0 8 x $16,218.00 Lot 7, , NWP 1363 RN 84393-000-1 4 x $16,218.00 E 1/� of Lot 6, N W P 1363 RN 84392-0100-X 1 x $16,218.00 W 1h of Lot 6, NWP 1363 RN 84392-0000-6 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 4, BCP 39010 RN 84394-0103-0 8 x $16,218.00 Lot 5, NWP 37195 RN 84384-0200-8 2 x $16,218.00 Page 1 SERVICE Water Reservoir, Pump Station & Watermains (Cont'd from previous page) # BENEFITTING LOTS 209 COST OF BENEFIT $3,389,562 Page 2 COST PER BENEFIT ATTRIBUTED BY LOT PROPERTY EXCLUDING SUBDIVISION $16,218 Lot 10, NWP 1363 RN 84396-0000-8 8 x $16,218.00 Lot 2, N W P 65405 RN 84397-0402-2 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 1, N W P 65405 RN 84397-0401-1 2 x $16,218.00 Rem.N1hofE1hofSW1/a Sec. 11, NWP 37195 RN 84384-0000-0 9 x $16,218.00 W 135.31'ofN1hofE1hof SW 1/4 Sec. 11, NWP 37195 RN 84384-0100-4 1 x $16,218.00 Lot E, NWP 23702 RN 84397-0500-1 4 x $16,218.00 Lot 56, NWP 39169 RN 84468-0300-8 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 57, NWP 39169 RN 84468-0400-1 1 x $16,218.00 Parcel A, Ex. Plan 30870 RN 84468-0100-0 2 x $16,218.00 Lot 41, NWP 35648 RN 84467-0300-2 1 x $16,218.00 Rem Lot 25, NWP 32801 RN 844670100-5 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 6, NWP 17459 RN 84461-0200-6 3 x $16,218.00 Lot 5, NWP 17459 RN 84461-0100-2 1 x $16,218.00 Lot 1, NWP 2713 RN 84406-0000-8 2 x $16,218.00 2. ONSITE SERVICE FOR ADJACENT PROPERTY SERVICE # BENEFITTING COST OF COST PER BENEFIT ATTRIBUTED BY LOTS BENEFIT LOT PROPERTY EXCLUDING SUBDIVISION Roadworks on 112 35 $506,345.00 $14,467.00 Lot 3, BCP39010 Avenue and RN 84394-0102-0 Bosonworth Ave. 1 x $14,467.00 Lot 56, NWP 39169 RN 84468-0300-8 1 x $14,467.00 Pcl. A, Ex. Plan 30870 RN 84468-0100-0 2 x $14,467.00 Lot 41, NWP 35648 RN 84467-0300-2 1 x $14,467.00 Rem. Lot 25, NWP 32801 RN 84467-0100-5 1 x $14,467.00 Lot 6, NWP 17459 RN 84461-0200-6 3 x $14,467.00 Lot 5, NWP 17459 RN 84461-0100-2 1 x $14,467.00 Lot 1, NWP 2713 RN 84406-0000-8 1 x $14,467.00 Page 3 A total of all of the aforementioned services for each property is as follows: Property Amount of Benefit Lot 2, Sec 12, TP 12 NWP 2713 $16,218.00 RN 84409-0000-3 Lot 4, Sec 12, TP 12 NWP 2713 $32,436.00 RN 84409-0000-4 Lot 5, Sec 12, TP 12 NWP 2713 $32,436.00 RN 84410-0000-1 Lot 6, Sec 12, TP 12 NWP 2713 $32,436.00 RN 84411-0000-7 Lot 8, Sec. 13, TP 12, NWP8336 $81,090.00 RN 84436-0000-7 Lot 72, Sec 14, TP 12, NWP 56277 $16,218.00 RN 84458-0200-8 Lot 1, Sec 11, TP 12 NWP 23771 $32,436.00 RN 84403-0100-5 Lot 3, Sec.11, TP 12, BCP39010 $144,211.00 RN 84394-0102-0 Lot 7, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 $64,872.00 RN 84393-000-1 E 1/z of Lot 6, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 $16,218.00 RN 84392-0100-X W 1h of Lot 6, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 $16,218.00 RN 84392-0000-6 Lot 4, Sec. 11, TP 12, BCP 39010 $129,744.00 RN 84394-0103-0 Lot 5, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 $32,436.00 RN 84384-0200-8 Lot 10, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 $129,744.00 RN 84396-0000-8 Lot 2, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 65405 $16,218.00 RN 84397-0402-2 Lot 1, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 65405 $32,436.00 RN 84397-0401-1 Rem. N 1/� of E 1/z of SW 1/a Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 $145,962.00 RN 84384-0000-0 W 135.31' of N 1h of E 1h of SW 1/4 Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 $16,218.00 RN 84384-0100-4 Lot E, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 23702 $64,872.00 RN 84397-0500-1 Lot 56, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 39169 $30,685.00 RN 84468-0300-8 Lot 57, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 39169 $16,218.00 RN 84468-0400-1 Pcl. A, Sec 14, TP 12, Ex. Plan 30870 $61,370.00 RN 84468-0100-0 Lot 41, Sec 14, TP 12, NWP 35648 $30,685.00 RN 84467-0300-2 Rem. Lot 25, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 32801 $30,685.00 RN 84467-0100-5 Lot 6, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 17459 $92,055.00 RN 84461-0200-6 Lot 5, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 17459 $30,685.00 RN 84461-0100-2 Lot 1, Sec. 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 $46,903.00 RN 84406-0000-8 Page 4 � DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY � BENEFITTING PROPERTIES SCALE: N. T. S. MAPLE RIDGE Bnt�ish Co�urnbla EXCESS CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPACITY/EXTENDED SERVICES AGREEMENT LC 156/14 DATE: FEB 2014 � FILE/DWG No LC156-2014 EXCESS CAPACITY LATECOMER AGREEMENT LC 156/14 -- SD/102/03 THIS AGREEMENT made the day of , 2014 BETWEEN: Grant Hill (GP) Ltd. 15080 North Bluff Road White Rock, BC V4B 5C1 (Hereinafter called the "Subdivider") AND: OF THE FIRST PART THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE, a Municipal Corporation under the "Municipal Act", having its offices at 11995 Haney Place, in the Municipality of Maple Ridge, in the Province of British Columbia (Hereinafter called the "Municipality") WHEREAS: OF THE SECOND PART A. The Subdivider has developed certain lands and premises located within the Municipality of Maple Ridge, in the Province of British Columbia, and more particularly known and described as: Lot 8 and 9, Plan 1363 and N.E. 1/4 Sec. 11, TP. 12 Except: Firstly Part Subdivided by Plan 23771; Secondly: Parcel "A", Statutory Right of Way Plan LMP1489; Section 11, Township 12, N.W.D. (Hereinafter called the "said lands"); B. In order to facilitate the approval of the subdivision of the said lands, the Subdivider has constructed and installed the road, water reservoir, pump station and water mains shown on the design prepared by Vector Engineering Services Ltd. - Off-Site Design, revision 4, dated 30 June, 2010, reviewed as noted by the municipality July 20, 2010 and the Off-site Waterworks design drawings prepared by Kerr Wood Leidel Consulting Engineers, dated Aug. 2011, sheets W201 to W205, revision C, reviewed by the municipality Aug. 24, 2011 Municipal Project No E08 015-1062. (Hereinafter called the "Extended Services"); C. The extended services have been provided with a capacity to service the said lands and other than the said lands; Page 1 of 7 D. The Municipality considers its cost to provide the Extended Services to be excessive; E. The Subdivider has provided the Extended Services in the Amount of $3,895,907.00. F. The Municipality has determined that Lot 1, Sec. 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 Lot 2, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 Lot 4, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 Lot 5, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 Lot 6, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 Lot 8, Sec 13, TP 12, NWP 8336 Lot 72, Sec 14, TP 12, NWP 56277 Lot 1, Sec 11, TP 12, NWP 23771 Lot 3, Sec.11, TP 12, BCP39010 Lot 7, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 E 1/z of Lot 6, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 W 1/z of Lot 6, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 Lot 4, Sec. 11, TP 12, BCP 39010 Lot 5, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 Lot 10, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 Lot 2, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 65405 Lot 1, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 65405 Rem. N 1/z of E 1/� of SW 1/4 Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 W 135.31' of N 1/z of E 1/z of SW 1/4 Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 Lot E, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 23702 Lot 56, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 39169 Lot 57, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 39169 Pcl. A, Sec 14, TP 12, Ex. Plan 30870 Lot 41, Sec 14, TP 12, NWP 35648 Rem. Lot 25, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 32801 Lot 6, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 17459 Lot 5, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 17459 (the "Benefitting Lands") will benefit from the Extended Services; G. The Municipality has imposed as a condition of the owner of the Benefitting Lands connecting to or using the Extended Services, a charge (the "Latecomer Charge") on the Benefitting Lands in the following amounts: Lot 2, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 RN 84407-0000-3 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 4, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 RN 84409-0000-4 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system Page 2 of 7 Lot 5, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 RN 84410-0000-1 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 6, Sec 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 RN 84411-0000-7 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 8, Sec 13, TP 12, NWP 8336 RN 84436-0000-7 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $81,090.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 72, Sec 14, TP 12, NWP 56277 RN 84458-0200-8 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 1, Sec 11, TP 12, NWP 23771 RN 84403-0100-5 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 3, Sec.11, TP 12, BCP39010 RN 84394-0102-0 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $129,744.00 for use of the municipal water system • $14,467.00 for a direct driveway access to 112 Avenue that is in addition to the one existing access and is within the area from the east property line to 60m west of the east property line Lot 7, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 RN 84393-000-1 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $64,872.00 for use of the municipal water system E 1/z of Lot 6, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 RN 84392-0100-X • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system W 1/z of Lot 6, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 RN 84392-0000-6 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system Page 3 of 7 Lot 4, Sec. 11, TP 12, BCP 39010 RN 84394-0103-0 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $129,744.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 5, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 RN 84384-0200-8 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 10, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 1363 RN 84396-0000-8 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $129,744.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 2, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 65405 RN 84397-0402-2 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 1, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 65405 RN 84397-0401-1 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system Rem. N 1/z of E 1/� of SW 1/4 Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 37195 RN 84384-0000-0 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $145,962.00 for use of the municipal water system W135.31'ofN1/zofE1/zofSW1/4Sec.11,TP12,NWP37195 RN 84384-0100-4 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot E, Sec. 11, TP 12, NWP 23702 RN 84397-0500-1 •$16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $64,872.00 for use of the municipal water system Lot 56, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 39169 RN 84468-0300-8 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second service connection if more than one connection is installed • $14,467.00 for direct driveway access to Bosonworth Avenue Lot 57, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 39169 RN 84468-0400-1 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second service connection if more than one connection is installed Page 4 of 7 Pcl. A, Sec 14, TP 12, Ex. Plan 30870 RN 84468-0100-0 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second or third service connection if more than one service connection is installed • $14,467.00 per lot to a maximum of $28,934.00 for direct driveway accesses to Bosonworth Avenue that are in addition to the one existing access Lot 41, Sec 14, TP 12, NWP 35648 RN 84467-0300-2 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second service connection if more than one connection is installed • $14,467.00 for direct driveway access to Bosonworth Avenue that is in addition to the one existing access Rem. Lot 25, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 32801 RN 84467-0100-5 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second service connection if more than one connection is installed • $14,467.00 for direct driveway access to Bosonworth Avenue that is in addition to the one existing access Lot 6, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 17459 RN 84461-0200-6 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $48,654.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second, third or fourth service connection if more than one service connection is installed • $14,467.00 per lot to a maximum of $43,401.00 for direct driveway accesses to Bosonworth Avenue that are in addition to the one existing access Lot 5, Sec. 14, TP 12, NWP 17459 RN 84461-0100-2 • $16,218.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second service connection if more than one connection is installed • $14,467.00 for direct driveway access to Bosonworth Avenue that is in addition to the one existing access Lot 1, Sec. 12, TP 12, NWP 2713 RN 84406-0000-8 • $16,218.00 per lot to a maximum of $32,436.00 for use of the municipal water system for a second or third service connection if more than one service connection is installed • $14,467.00 for direct driveway access to 256 Street Page 5 of 7 plus interest calculated annually from the date of completion of the Extended Services as certified by the General Manager - Public Works & Development Services of the Municipality (the "Completion Date") to the date of connection of the Benefitting Lands to the Extended Services; H. The Latecomer Charge when paid by the owner of the Benefitting Lands and collected by the Municipality shall pursuant to Section 939 (7) of the Local Government Act R.S.B.C. 1996, c.323 be paid to the Subdivider as provided for in this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE AS AUTHORIZED BY Section 939 (9) of the Local Government Act R.S.B.0 1996, c. 323, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The Latecomer Charge, if paid by the owner of the Benefitting Lands and collected by the Municipality within fifteen (15) years of the Completion Date shall be paid to the Subdivider and in such case payment will be made within 30 days of the next June 30t" or December 31St that follows the date on which the Latecomer Charge was collected bythe Municipality. 2. This Agreement shall expire and shall be of no further force and effect for any purpose on the earlier of the payment of the Latecomer Charge by the Municipality to the Subdivider, or fifteen (15) years from the Completion Date, and thereafter the Municipality shall be forever fully released and wholly discharged from any and all liability and obligations herein, or howsoever arising pertaining to the Latecomer Charge, and whether arising before or after the expiry of this Agreement. 3. The Subdivider represents and warrants to the Municipality that the Subdivider has not received, claimed, demanded or collected money or any other consideration from the owner of the Benefitting Lands for the provision, or expectation of the provision of the Extended Services, other than as contemplated and as provided for herein; and further represents and warrants that he has not entered into any agreement with the owner of the Benefitting Lands for consideration in any way related to or connected directly or indirectly with the provision of the Extended Services. The representations and warranties of the Subdivider herein shall, notwithstanding paragraph 2 of this Agreement, survive the expiry of this Agreement. 4. The Subdivider (if more than one corporate body or person) hereby agrees that the Municipality shall remit the Latecomer Charge to each corporate body or person in equal shares. 5. If the Subdivider is a sole corporate body or person, the Municipality shall remit the Latecomer Charge to the said sole corporate body or person, with a copy to the following (name and address of director of corporate body, accountant, lawyer, etc.): Page 6 of 7 6. In the event that the Subdivider is not the owner of the said lands, the owner shall hereby grant, assign, transfer and set over unto the Subdivider, his heirs and assigns, all rights, title and interest under this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their respective Corporate Seals, attested by the hands of their respective officers duly authorized in that behalf, the day and year first above written. SUBDIVIDER Subdivider - Authorized Signatory Subdivider - Authorized Signatory DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE Corporate Officer - Authorized Signatory Page 7 of 7 � s- -`- . Deep Roots Greater Heights T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer DATE: April 14, 2014 Committee of the Whole Disbursements for the month ended March 31, 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The disbursements summary for the past period is attached for information. All voucher payments are approved by the Mayor or Acting Mayor and a Finance Manager. Council authorizes the disbursements listing through Council resolution. Expenditure details are available by request through the Finance Department. RECOMMENDATION: That the disbursements as listed below for the month ended March 31, 2014 now be approved. GENERAL $ 6,190,706 PAYROLL $ 1,563,010 PURCHASE CARD $ 101.542 7.855.258 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: The adoption of the Five Year Consolidated Financial Plan has appropriated funds and provided authorization for expenditures to deliver municipal services. The disbursements are for expenditures that are provided in the financial plan. b) Community Communications: The citizens of Maple Ridge are informed on a routine monthly basis of financial disbursements. 1131 c) Business Plan / Financial Implications: Highlights of larger items included in Financial Plan or Council Resolution • Emergency Communications - Dispatch levy - 1St quarter • Fort Fabrication & Welding Ltd. - Recycling truck • Fraser Valley Regional Library - 1St quarter member assessment • G.V. Water District - Barnston pump station • SV Trucks (Custom House ULC) - Fire truck d) Policy Implications: $ 245,292 $ 189,497 $ 630,132 $ 1,071,223 $ 802,604 Approval of the disbursements by Council is in keeping with corporate governance practice. CONCLUSIONS: The disbursements for the month ended March 31, 2014 have been reviewed and are in order. Prepared by: G'Ann Rygg Accounting Clerk II Approved by: Trevor Thompson, BBA, CGA Manager of Financial Planning Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA GM - Corporate & Financial Services Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer gmr VENDOR NAME Aecom Canada Ltd Alliance Painting & Decorating BC Hydro BC SPCA Boileau Electric & Pole Ltd CUPE Local 622 Chevron Canada Ltd Emergency Communications Fitness Edge Fort Fabrication & Welding Ltd FortisBC - Natural Gas Fraser Valley Regional Library Fred Surridge Ltd GP Rollo & Associates Ltd Genesis Janitorial Service Ltd Gr Vanc Sewerage & Drainage Greater Vanc Water District Innovyze Jacks Automotive & Welding CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS - MARCH 2O14 DESCRIPTION OF PAYMENT Sanitary servicing for Albion Flats Sanitary master plan Sanitary subcatchments study Cottonwood leachate pond & sanitary design Greg Moore Youth Centre Whonnock Lake Centre Electricity Contract payment Maintenance: Banners Brickyard office Christmas decorations Leisure Centre Library Municipal Hall Operations Pitt Meadows Athletic Centre Pitt Meadows Family Rec. Centre Port Haney wharf/tunnel Riebolt Park Service conductor replacement Street Lights Underground wiring replacement Vehicle detection cameras Whonnock Community Centre Dues - pay periods 14/05 & 14/06 Gasoline & diesel fuel Dispatch levy - 1st quarter Fitness classes & programs Recycling truck Natural gas 1st quarter member assessment Waterworks supplies Albion land exchange consulting Janitorial services & supplies: Firehalls Library Municipal Hall Operations Randy Herman Building RCMP South Bonson Community Centre License for residential transfer station Transfer station waste disposal Waste discharge industrial treatment fee - Cottonwood Waste discharge permit administration fee - Cottonwood Barnston pump station Maple Ridge Main West PRV chamber Sanitary sewer & drainage system hydraulic modeling software Fire Dept equipment repairs 19,664 11,153 1,828 2,101 10,500 10,658 416 1,043 66 983 496 288 860 123 246 2,337 277 1,215 4,588 1,213 4,353 239 3,220 4,809 2,371 2,754 3,341 2,480 3,959 15,000 504 4,173 5,583 1,071,223 61,312 AMOUNT 34,746 21,158 126,935 27,925 18,742 22,972 73,021 245,292 16,361 189,497 32,287 630,132 18,759 19,061 22,934 25,260 1,132,535 16,922 16,994 Lafarge Canada Inc Manulife Financial Maple Ridge & PM Arts Council Maple Ridge Carpet One Maridge Properties Ltd Medical Services Plan Municipal Pension Plan BC North Of 49 Enterprises Ltd Pax Construction Ltd Pitt River Quarries Ltd Receiver General For Canada RG Arenas (Maple Ridge) Ltd Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Safetek Emergency Vehicles Ltd Sentis Market Research Inc SVI Trucks (Custom House ULC) Tetra Tech EBA Inc Warrington PCI Management Wholesale Fire & Rescue Ltd Disbursements In Excess $15,000 Disbursements Under $15,000 Total Payee Disbursements Payroll Purchase Cards - Payment Total Disbursements March 2014 Road salt Employer/employee remittance Arts Centre contract payment Mar Program revenue Feb Arts Centre telephone system Municipal Hall flooring Greg Moore Youth Centre flooring Security refund Employee medical & health premiums Employer/employee remittance Skating lesson programs Renovations to RCMP Integrated Forensic Section Roadworks material Employer/Employee remittance PP14/05 & PP14/06 Industry Canada radio license renewals Ice rental Feb Monthly contract for recycling Weekly recycling Litter pickup contract Recycling station pickup Roadside waste removal Travel for baler viewing GST on SVI fire truck Parks & Leisure Services survey 2014 Fire truck Cottonwood landfill closure Advance for Tower common costs Fire hoses PP14/05 & PP14/06 GMR \\mr.corp\docs\Fin\05-Finance\1630-Accts-Payable\01-General\AP Disbursements\2014\[Monthly_Council_Report_2014.x1sx]MAR'14 50,867 4,673 16,503 8,160 11,760 761,263 11,792 109,721 511 1,663 297 47 2,492 45,359 146,156 72,043 19,920 83,890 38,181 373,442 20,558 123,805 18,571 773,055 57,255 114,731 40,130 15,593 802,604 20,347 60,000 16,110 5,533,280 657,426 6,190,706 1,563,010 101,542 7,855,258 � •• � Deep Roots Greater Heights T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: April 14, 2014 And Members of Council FILE N0: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Committee of the Whole 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The 2013 Financial Statements have been prepared using the accounting standards and reporting model mandated by the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB). The statements have been audited and will form an integral part of the 2013 Annual Report. In order to satisfy current audit rules, Council must formally accept the financial statements before our auditors can issue their audit opinion. Two of the most important documents issued each year by a municipality are the Financial Plan and the Financial Statements. The Financial Plan is a forward looking document that answers the question `what are we going to do over the next five years and how are we going to pay for it?". In contrast, the Financial Statements focus on the previous year and answers questions about our financial condition at a point in time and the activities that contributed to that result. This report focuses on our Financial Statements for the fiscal year of 2013, explains key terms and reviews each of the statements. Overall financial results for 2013 were positive. Our Net Financial Position increased by $9.26 million to $41.98 million and our Accumulated Surplus balance increased by $47.38 million to $909.59 million, the details of which are discussed in the body of this report. RECOMMENDATION: That the 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements be accepted. DISCUSSION: Municipal financial statements are prepared using the accounting standards and reporting model prescribed by PSAB. From time to time PSAB introduces new standards and the District adopts them as required. In 2013, two new standards were adopted: "PS3410 - Government Transfers" and "PS3510 - Tax Revenue". Neither standard had a material impact on reported results as our previous accounting practices did not differ significantly from the new requirements. The 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements present the District's financial activities during the year and the financial position as at December 31, 2013. Actual financial perFormance is compared to the Financial Plan used to set property taxation rates, adopted in May of 2013, and to prior year results. The transactions reported in the consolidated financial statements are those that took place with outside parties; the effects of internal transactions, such as transfers between reserves, have been eliminated. BDO Canada LLP has conducted an audit of the 2013 Consolidated Financial Statements and, pending Council's acceptance of the statements, will finalize their audit report. The audit report is Page 1 of 6 1132 "unqualified" which is the highest form of assurance that an auditor can provide and indicates that the statements are free of material misstatements and that readers can rely on them for decision making. As noted above, financial statements report the financial condition of a municipality at a point in time and there are a few key terms that are important to understand before drawing any conclusions about our 2013 results: • Net Financial Position: This is the difference between our financial assets and our liabilities. It provides an indication of available financial flexibility. If the net financial position is negative it is referred to as net debt and indicates that revenues that will be collected in the future are needed to satisfy liabilities that already exist. If the net financial position is positive it is referred to as net financial assets and indicates a greater degree of flexibility. • Accumulated Surplus: This is the total of all assets, both financial and non-financial, less our liabilities. The largest component of our assets is the tangible capital assets used in day-to- day service provision; consequently, the accumulated surplus balance does not represent a source of cash available to finance our day-to-day operations. • Annual Surplus: This is the difference between our annual revenues and expenses. On the revenue side, we include items such as grants and development revenues received as funding for capital projects, whereas on the expense side the annual cost of using those assets is recognized over time through amortization, rather than the amounts invested in capital investment or renewal. This is why the reported annual surplus is high. The District's financial statements include the following: • Statement of Financial Position � Statement of Operations � Statement of Change in Net Financial Assets � Statement of Cash Flow • Notes to the Financial Statements � Segment Report • Supporting Schedules 1 - 6 The Notes to the Financial Statements provide additional information for the items found on the Statement of Financial Position and the Statement of Operations and are referenced on each of these statements. A discussion of the financial statements follows. Statement of Financial Position The Statement of Financial Position is the public sector version of a balance sheet. One of the key indicators on this statement is our Net Financial Position. It is calculated by subtracting all of our liabilities from our financial assets and provides an indication of the extent to which revenues that will be collected in the future are needed to satisfy the liabilities that exist today. It is one piece of information that can be used to begin to assess the degree of financial flexibility a municipality has. At the end of 2013, the District's net financial assets had increased from $32.7 million to $41.98 million, due to timing differences between revenues and related expenditures. Another key indicator that appears on this statement is our accumulated surplus. Accumulated surplus is the difference between all assets, both financial and non-financial, and all of our liabilities. It represents the net economic resources available for service provision. It does not represent cash that can be used to support operations, as the bulk of the number is comprised of the physical Page 2 of 6 assets that are used in service provision. At the end of 2013, the District's accumulated surplus had increased from $862.2 million to $909.6 million, due to factors discussed in the next paragraph. Key items to note on the Statement of Financial Position: • Combined cash and temporary investments and portfolio investments increased by $8.5 million. This is a result of increased cash balances available to invest as a result of timing differences between planned and actual expenditures. (Note 1) • Accounts payable increased by $3.3 million. Of this, $1.485 million relates to the accounting expense associated with the closure plan for the Cottonwood Landfill. The balance is a timing issue, with more capital progress draws recorded but not paid as at December 31St. (Note 6) • Debt decreased by $2.6 million as set out in the financial plan, due to the planned repayment of debt, most of which relates to the Town Centre Project. • Tangible capital assets increased by $38 million through a combination of developer contributed assets and our own investments offset by disposals and annual amortization. Statement of Operations The Statement of Operations is the public sector version of an income statement, reporting revenues and expenses for the year. The difference between revenues and expenses is the key indicator on this statement and is referred to as the annual surplus if positive, or the annual deficit if negative. The annual surplus, or deficit, indicates whether or not the revenues raised in a year were sufficient to cover the year's costs. It's important to note that on the revenue side of this equation we report all revenues earned in the year, including items such as grants received towards capital projects, but on the expense side, we include only the annual cost of using our assets through amortization, not the actual cash expended to acquire new or replacement assets. This timing difference results in an annual surplus, but does not represent a cash surplus. For example, in 2013, the District received contributed tangible capital assets exceeding $39 million that was recorded as revenue; on the expense side the amortization associated with these assets was $238,000. In 2013, the District recorded an annual surplus of $47.37 million. Council will recall that during business planning we ensure that all the planned sources of revenue balance to all the planned uses of revenues, resulting in a"balanced budget". Not all of the elements that result in this balanced budget are included in the Statement of Operations as some of them are internal transactions, such as transfers, that are eliminated for the purposes of our summary financial statements and others don't meet the definition of an expense. For example our planned investment in tangible capital assets will result in an expenditure of resources, but is not an expense and not included on the Statement of Operations. The annual cost of using those assets is an expense and is included on the statement. The reconciliation between the Financial Plan and the Financial Statements is shown in Note 14 to the Financial Statements. The following discusses actual results reported on the Statement of Operations for 2013: Consolidated Revenues - Actual: $158.1 million; Budget: $163.97 million Not all monies the District receives are recorded as revenues at the time of receipt. Monies such as DCCs or Parkland Acquisition fees that are collected for specific capital works are recorded as a liability when they are received. When we budget for capital expenditures that are funded from these sources we also budget to record the revenue, which results in drawing down the liability. If capital expenditures do not occur, no revenue is recognized and the funds remain on hand, recorded as a liability. Page 3 of 6 In 2013, consolidated revenues were below budget by $5.9 million. This is comprised of wide variances in a number of categories, particularly in relation to capital. The following highlights some of the key variances: • Development revenues below budget estimates by $26 million • Government transfers (grants) below budget estimates by $2.6 million • Developer contributed assets in excess of budget estimates by $23 million • Investment income in excess of budget estimates by $759,200 As noted above, negative variances in development revenues and grants do not represent a cash shortfall as the related expenditures did not occur. Consolidated Expenses - Actual $110.7 million; Budget $125 million Expenses are comprised of general operating expenses for goods and services, labour, debt servicing and amortization of our tangible capital assets. The actual cash expended to invest in replacement or acquisition of assets is not reflected on this statement. In 2013, consolidated expenses were below budget by $14.3 million. Key items contributing to this positive variance include: • Approximately $4.0 million in projects scheduled for 2013 that will proceed in 2014 � Overall cost containment • Approximately $5.2 million in capital related projects • $2.6 million in labour and succession planning costs • $2.4 million from the RCMP contract. Statement of Change in Net Financial Assets The change in Net Financial Position in a year is explained by the excess or deficiency of revenues over expenditures; if we recognize more revenues than we expend, then net financial position will increase; if less, then it will decrease. This statement starts with the annual surplus and then factors in the expenditures associated with non-financial assets such as the acquisition of tangible capital assets and land bank properties. As noted above, the District's financial position increased by $9.26 million to $41.98 million, the details of which were discussed in the previous sections. Statement of Cash Flow The Statement of Cash Flow explains the change in the balance of cash and temporary investments for the year. It shows the impact the various types of transactions have on the balance. For example, the statement indicates that $21 million was generated from operating activities and that $18.7 million was used for capital activities. Segment Report The Segment Report augments the information found on the Consolidated Statement of Operations. The information is laid out in the same fashion, but provides a finer level of detail. Municipal services have been segmented by grouping activities by function, as directed by PSAB. For example, protection of the public is achieved by activities such as bylaw enforcement and inspection services in addition to police and fire fighting services so all of these activities are reported as part of the Protective Services segment. Revenues that are directly related to the costs of a function have been reported in each segment, this includes revenues related to capital investment, such as government transfers that are recognized in full when earned. Expenses are broken down into the categories of Goods and Services, Labour, Debt Servicing, and Amortization. Amortization represents the annual cost of using our assets in service provision, so while the revenue for a particular asset is recognized at the outset of an asset's life, the expense of using that same asset will be recognized over time. Page 4 of 6 The segment report allows us to see how each segment contributes to the annual surplus before considering allocations of taxes and other municipal resources. As described earlier, annual surplus is the difference between annual revenues and annual expenses. The following table shows the Municipal departments included in each segment. Human Resources Clerks Administration Finance Purchasing Information Svc Legislative Svc Economic Dev Communications Reporting Segments Police Parks Fire Leisure Svc Bylaws Youth Svc Inspection Svc Arts Emergency Svc Library Planning Recycling Cemetery Social Planning Engineering Operations Drainage Roads Water Sewer The above discussion focuses on the Consolidated Financial Statements and, as noted, consists of transactions with outside parties; internal transactions, such as transfers, have been eliminated. It is also useful to look at some of the elements of the consolidated statements in isolation. The following discussion touches on the general revenue fund, the utilities and the reserves. While the statements don't show each element in isolation, aggregated information is shown on Schedule 1 and 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. General Revenue It's important to look at the General Revenue Fund in isolation, as many of the activities discussed during business planning are held in this area, and, to a large extent, the transactions that take place in this fund drive property taxation. As noted above, the information in the statements does not drill down to this level of detail, so while information is included in Schedule 1, it is part of the aggregated information about General Revenue and the Utilities. Council received a detailed report about the General Revenue Fund on March 3, 2014, noting that preliminary 2013 General Revenue results were positive and, after providing for various projects and initiatives identified for 2013 that will proceed in 2014 we expected a favorable variance to budget. Final results for 2013 show a General Revenue annual surplus of $803.9K. General Revenue Accumulated Surplus increased to $6.89 million, from $6.09 million in 2012. Utilities The Sewer and Water utilities are self-funded business units that manage the collection and distribution of water and liquid waste as well as the related infrastructure. A large portion of the costs in the utilities are driven by the Regional District and Council has used a rate stabilization policy for a number of years to smooth the impact of regional cost increases on our rate payers. Through this approach, we deliberately built the utility surplus amounts over time, so that when larger regional rate increases take effect we have the capacity to manage those increases. The planned 2014 rate increases are 5.5% for water and 4.6% for sewer. The accumulated surplus amounts in both utilities increased in 2013, mainly due to work projects that will proceed in 2014. Page 5 of 6 The following shows the accumulated surplus amounts in each of the utilities. 2013 2012 Sewer Utility 3,183,533 3,139,776 Water Utility 5,802,444 4,004,157 Reserves District reserves are an important financial planning tool, providing a mechanism to build capacity over time to undertake strategic projects. They are reviewed on a regular basis to assess their adequacy, with adjustments being made when capacity permits. The term "reserves" is often applied to both our reserve funds and reserve accounts but there are important distinctions between the two resources. Reserve Funds are statutory, meaning they are established by bylaw. Once monies are placed into a reserve fund, they can only be used for the purposes noted in the establishing bylaw. In contrast, Reserve Accounts are discretionary appropriations of surplus, established to meet business needs. They can be established or dissolved, as Council directs, to ensure that identified business needs are met and risks are managed appropriately. At the beginning of 2013, the District had $61 million in total reserves. The Financial Plan contemplated these resources being drawn down by $25 million, primarily to fund capital projects. At the end of 2013, the District reserves total $65.11 million ($32.15 million in reserve funds & $32.96 million in reserve accounts, as shown in Note 15) an overall increase of $4.04 million. This variance is the combined result of planned capital investment that will occur in the future, and end of year provisions for various operating projects and initiatives. A separate report provided on April 7, 2014 detailed information on our reserves. CONCLUSIONS: The District's reserves are sound and long-term financial plans reflect the ability of the District to meet its future obligations. Overall results for 2013 are positive. We ended the year with an annual surplus of $47.37 million, Net Financial Assets of $41.98 million and Accumulated Surplus of $909.59 million. "Original si ned bv Catherine Nolan" Prepared by: Catherine Nolan, CGA Manager of Accounting "Original si ned bv Paul Gill" Approved by: Paul Gill, CGA GM: Corporate and Financial Services "Original si ned bv Jim Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Office Page 6 of 6 � � . Deep itoots Greater Heights T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole 2015-2019 Business Planning Process EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The District has a comprehensive business planning process that is guided by parameters for the development of the five-year financial plan. These parameters are set each spring so that the following year's financial plan can be brought forward for Council's consideration in December. This timing provides a number of advantages for both Council and the community. During municipal election years however, this timing can be a challenge for incoming Council members who may not have had previous exposure to the District's current financial information. With municipal elections coming this fall, Council may want to consider changing the timing of the process, so that the first order of business for the incoming Council will be setting the longer term strategic direction. The next term of Council may also be extended to four years, making this change particularly advisable. In order to implement this change, an earlier and more detailed focus on the financial plan will be required. In the coming weeks, when Council considers the amendment to the 2014-2018 Financial Plan, we recommend that we spend time not only on the amendments impacting the 2014 tax increase, but also understand what the revenue requirements for 2015 will be. By doing this, we can deal with the 2015 budget in the coming weeks so that the incoming Council can focus on its strategic direction as a priority. As Council is aware, the earlier years of a five-year financial plan often include the phased impact of prior years' decisions. As a result, there is more latitude in making changes to the latter years of the plan than the earlier years. Having said this, the incoming Council may choose to go in a different direction. RECOMMENDATION: That staff adjust the Business Planning Framework timelines as outlined in the staff report dated April 14, 2014 entitled "2015-2019 Business Planning Process." Page 1 1133 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: The District has a comprehensive business planning process that is guided by parameters for the development of the financial plan. These parameters are set each spring so that the following years' financial plan can be brought forward for Council's consideration in December. There are a number of advantages to having a financial plan approved before the beginning of the year. This includes certainty for both Council and the community about the service levels that are to be provided. Citizens also get an early indication of the expected taxes for the coming year and this will assist them in their own financial planning. As well, it gives staff the ability to start planning for the works in the coming period. Council has already seen the favourable results of RFPs and tenders that were issued early in the year. In addition to the pricing advantages, early award of the tenders allows the works to be completed in a timely manner. Municipal elections are held in November and the incoming Council is sworn in in early December. Council spends considerable time in December going over the business and financial plans. The financial plan is based on the direction set by the outgoing Council so the presentations to Council for the most part wind up being an informational session about departmental workplans. Financial information presented throughout the fall provides a strong foundation for this important work. This context is critical in the overall consideration of the Financial Plan. Based on this, Council may want to consider some changes to our process that allow time for the incoming Council to focus early attention on our longer term strategic direction. A process along the lines of the following can accomplish this: December 2014 • Council Orientation including an overview of services provided. January, February, March 2015 • Review of Community Survey Data • Presentations from each division about the services that they provide and the results that they achieve. They will touch on efficiencies and effectiveness initiatives implemented in the recent past and will also identify areas to be reviewed in more detail in the coming year. These reviews will include cross-departmental involvement, and will consider best practices. April, 2015 • Council to evaluate the Corporate Strategic Plan and make changes as required. May, 2015 • Council to consider the budget guidelines for the 2016-2020 Financial Plan. Following this process, the setting of the strategic direction becomes the priority for an incoming Council. It appears that the next Council will be elected for a four year term. This is one more reason why the incoming Council should focus on reviewing the strategic direction at the earliest opportunity at the beginning of their term. Page 2 In the coming weeks and prior to the issuance of the 2014 property tax notices, Council will be asked to consider an amendment to our 2014-2018 Financial Plan. This is our normal practice, as it allows us to adjust the financial plan in consideration of property assessment numbers from BC Assessment. It is our expectation that the plan will include tax increases lower than what was contemplated this past December. This is because we expect revenue from real growth to exceed what was budgeted for. When Council considers the amendment to the 2014-2018 Financial Plan, we recommend that we spend time not only on the amendments impacting the 2014 tax increase, but also understand what the revenue requirements for 2015 will be. By doing this, we can deal with the 2015 budget in the coming weeks so that the incoming Council can focus on its strategic direction as its priority. As Council is aware, the earlier years of a 5 year financial plan often include the phased impact of prior years' decisions. As a result, there is more latitude in making changes to the latter years in the plan than the earlier years. Having said this, the incoming Council will have the discretion to go in a different direction if they so choose. b) Desired Outcome: The desired outcome is a business planning process that serves the needs of Council and the community, while allowing the organization to meet legislative requirements around the financial planning process and timelines. c) Strategic Alignment: Council's Corporate Strategic Plan addresses the need to review policies and process to ensure they meet the needs of the community while addressing other influencing factors. In addition, it is our normal practice to evolve the Business Planning Process to serve Council and the community. Council members have in the past raised the issue of the business planning timelines being problematic to new incoming Council members. This report's recommendation proposes to resolve this issue. d) Interdepartmentallmplications: Departments will continue to develop their business plans in alignment within the existing process timelines. The timing of presentations to Council will take place during the first quarter of 2015. The 2015 budget will require detailed analysis in the coming weeks, much earlier than would otherwise be dedicated. This will require the Finance Department to shift workload internally to accommodate the timing change, and may require other departments to provide budget inputs on an earlier timeline. In addition, live-streaming a public question and answer session draws on IT, Finance, Communications and support staff monitoring the media channels. e) Business Plan/Financial Implications: The outcome of the recommendation will result in a shift in timing that we should be able to accommodate within existing resources. Page 3 f) Alternatives: One alternative is to leave the process as it has been. This means that staff will prepare detailed business plans for presentation to Council in December. In order to do this, Council would have to set the budget guidelines for the 2015-2019 Financial Plan this spring. Leaving our process unchanged is not recommended as the focus of the incoming Council should be on reviewing our strategic direction. Another alternative would be to postpone consideration of the 2015-2019 Financial Plan until after Council's review of the Strategic Plan. This would mean that we would operate well past the first quarter of 2015 without a refreshed financial plan. This is not recommended because of the numerous advantageous of having a financial plan approved before the start of the year. The advantages are: • Certainty for both Council and the community about service levels; • Early indication of expected taxes for citizens and businesses; • Early opportunity to plan for upcoming projects; • Pricing advantages and timely completion of construction works. CONCLUSION: The changes to our business planning process outlined in this report will better serve the needs of the new Council as well as the community, while allowing the organization to meet legislative and workplan requirements. "Original si ned b�Laura Benson" Prepared by: Laura Benson, CPA, CMA Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning "Ori inal signed by Paul Gill" Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA General Manager, Corporate and Financial Services "Ori inal signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Page 4 MAPLE RIDGE British Columbla T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer 2014 Council Expenses MEETING DATE: 14-Apr-2014 FILE N0: MEETING: C.O.W. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In keeping with Council's commitment to transparency in local government, the attached Schedule lists Council expenses for 2014, updated to the end of March. The expenses included on the schedule are those required to be reported in the annual Statement of Financial Information and are available on our website. RECOMMENDATION: Receive for information Discussion The expenses included in the attached schedule are those reported in the annual Statement of Financial Information (SOFI), including those incurred under Policy 3.07 "Council Training, Conferences and Association Building". Monthly charges for cell phones and iPads are now included to make this report consistent with the information that will be reported in the SOFI. The 2013 expense report previously provided to Council will be amended to include this additional information. "Original signed bv Catherine Nolan" Prepared by: Catherine Nolan, CPA, CGA Manager of Accounting "Original signed bv Paul Gill" Approved by: Paul Gill, CPA, CGA GM, Corporate and Financial Services "Original si ned bv Jim Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer 1134 Ashlie, Cheryl January February March April May June July August September October November December Bell, Corisa January February March April May June July August Se pte m ber October November December Daykin, Ernie January February March April May June July August September October November December iPad charges iPad charges RM South Asian Cultural Society -Annual Gala Pitt Meadows Centenial Gala LMLGA Conference - Whistler UBCM Conference - Whistler iPad & cell phone charges iPad & cell phone charges Cell phone charges LMLGA Conference - Whislter UBCM Conference - Whistler iPad & cell phone charges BCRPA Membership iPad & cell phone charges Cell phone charges LMLGA Conference - Whistler UBCM Conference - Whistler 2014 Council Expenses 228.85 54.37 283.22 95.00 100.00 195.00 - 60.00 60.00 Schedule 1 5.35 18.19 23.54 218.54 93.09 93.09 53.50 239.68 239.68 98.50 78.83 58.84 236.17 579.39 Dueck,Judy January February March April May June July August September October November December Hogarth, AI January February March April May June July August September October November December Masse, Bob January February March April May June July August Se pte m ber October November December iPad charges iPad charges LMLGA Conference UBCM Conference - Whistler iPad charges iPad charges RM South Asian Cultural Society - Annual Gala Pitt Meadows Centenial Gala LMLGA Conference UBCM Conference - Whistler iPad & cell phone charges BC Economic Development Assoc - Ministers Dinner iPad & cell phone charges Cell phone charges LMLGA Conference - Whistler UBCM Conference - Whistler 228.85 54.38 283.23 125.00 54.37 179.37 95.00 100.00 195.00 - 5.35 5.35 10.70 10.70 39.59 18.19 57.78 536.01 55.64 89.88 50.29 195.81 375.18 Morden, Michael January iPad charges 39.59 February iPad charges 39.59 March RM South Asian Cultural Society - Annual Gala 95.00 - April Pitt Meadows Centenial Gala 100.00 May LMLGA Conference - Whistler 228.85 June July August September UBCM Conference - Whistler 54.37 October November December 283.22 195.00 - - - 79.18 557.40 Totals 1,029.04 585.00 - 60.00 - 842.86 2,516.90 MAPLE RIDGE British Columhla T0: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee ofthe Whole SUBJECT: Review of Telecom Tower Protocols and Recommended Changes EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In November 2012 Council adopted a Telecommunications Tower Siting Protocol applicable to tower building activities in Maple Ridge. Since that time, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) has endorsed a model tower siting protocol in February of 2013. This memo reviews the FCM model antenna siting protocol and compares it to the protocol adopted by Council in November 2012, but also now includes a review of the Vancouver model. In addition, recent developments announced by the Federal Industry Minister with respect to changes to the Industry Canada guidelines on tower consultation are summarized. Unfortunately, the recent Federal announcement of changes coming to the Industry Canada rules on cell tower siting lacked specifics. It appears that the intended changes are leaning towards greater consultation with the public, but may not devolve extra authority to Municipalities. As a consequence, staff are recommending we wait for the formal changes to the rules before contemplating additional changes to our protocol. Therefore only three changes are recommended to the Maple Ridge telecommunications tower siting protocol based upon our review of the FCM and Vancouver models. RECOMMENDATION: The Telecommunications Tower Siting Protocol be amended as follows: 1. Include a$500 review fee for `high impact' antenna structure applications; 2. The time frame for the District review of a telecommunications tower application be amended to make it consistent with the FCM model template, namely 60 days to finalize an application following a public meeting, in an overall review period of 120 days; and 3. Include a deadline of 3 years on tower construction following a successful public consultation process. 1 1135 DISCUSSION: Maple Ridge, FCM, Industry Canada, and the City of Vancouver A�proaches: In November of 2012 the District adopted our own Telecommunications Antenna Structures Siting Protocol.1 This protocol was based upon an attempt to redefine District expectations of the wireless industry when it comes to proposing or siting antenna structures. Compliance with our protocol is voluntary, however, we are finding industry support in undertaking requirements. In February of 2013, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) adopted a model consultation protocol for communication tower siting.2 The FCM developed their protocol in conjunction with representatives of municipalities and the wireless industry. Given this protocol `template' has industry support, it can be expected the industry will voluntarily comply. Up until this point, staff had been relying on the `default' Industry Canada tower siting protocol. The public consultation and notification requirements were considered inadequate in the application of the default protocol, but it was within the legislative purview of the Federal government. Importantly, towers under 15m in height were exempted from public consultation. Due to widespread dissatisfaction with the degree and timeliness of local input in the `default' consultation protocol, the Federal Industry Minister earlier in February announced impending policy changes to the type of public consultation and the regulations utilized in managing telecommunications towers. 3 In essence, the Minister noted the major changes that are coming are: - No exemption for towers under 15m in height; - Improved notification and consultation requirements; and - A time limit to construct a tower, following successful consultation. Although encouraging, there were no details or specifics on when these changes will be implemented. Staff will be monitoring any further developments in this area once more information becomes available. The City of Vancouver has also adopted their own version of an antenna structures siting protocol.4 Vancouver City Council was concerned about the proliferation of antennas, particularly on taller buildings. Vancouver staff noted that the City already has well developed classical cellular `tower' structures, but the demand from the industry is for `infill' sites. These `infill' sites are typically lower powered antenna systems on the face or roof tops of taller buildings. 1 DMR Tower Siting Protocol: \\mr.corp�docs\CA\01-Admin\0685-Special-Projects\30-Corporate\Wireless\Tower protocol\DMR protocol final.pdf 2 FCM Protocol Template: \\m r.corp\docs\CA\01-Ad m i n\0685-Special-Proiects\30- Corporate\Wireless\Tower protocol\FCM CWTA\FCM Antenna Svstem Sitin� Protocol.pdf 3 CBC article on the Industry Minister announcement: http://www.cbc.ca/news�politics/wireless-firms-must-consult-with-canadians-on-cell- tow e rs-m oo re-1.25 24203 4 City of Vancouver antenna siting approach: \\mr.corp�docs\CA\01-Admin\0685-Special-Projects\30-Corporate\Wireless\Tower protocol\Vanc memo 1.pdf 2 The City has also experimented with such lower powered antenna systems installed on street light poles in busy areas as a 2 year pilot project. The City of Vancouver has settled on design guidelines, and fees, for installing cellular antennas onto street light poles. They have initiated a couple of these type of installations as a pilot project and will be evaluating how it is working in 2 years' time. Again, their guidelines for this innovative usage deal more with aesthetics. As noted, for Vancouver, the emphasis has been on how to accommodate antenna systems to improve wireless service coverage, while minimizing the aesthetic impact. Neighbourhoods have objected to the visual impacts and the lack of input mostly on design issues. However, there was minimal concern expressed about the building of "towers". Tellingly, towers are not referenced in their design considerations. Activity in the telecommunications space was around denser neighbourhoods and the attachment of antenna structures on the sides and roof tops of high rise buildings. That activity led to the major emphasis in their design guidelines on how to minimize the visual impact of antenna installations. Protocol Comparison: The question has arisen, how does our protocol compare to others and can we improve it? Staff have reviewed the FCM protocol template, the City of Vancouver approach and have compared key areas as noted below. Generally, our protocol parallels the FCM template in most areas. The FCM model is necessarily vague when it comes to details such as preferred areas where towers should go, setbacks from different land uses, the radius of notice, any fees to be paid, and the like. They, understandably, allow the local municipality to `fill-in-the-blanks' depending on local preferences and conditions. For our protocol: -`high' impact towers have the following characteristics: • Towers of any height within 100m of residences; • Towers of any height within sensitive areas (ie - environmental, historic, strategic, or operational); • Towers greater industrial; than 15m height in areas designated as commercial, institutional, or • Increasing the height of an existing tower more that 25%. -`low' impact towers have the following characteristics: • Antennas on roof tops; • Street light poles or parking lots poles; • On utility towers; • Towers less than 15m in height that are not "high impact". We have differing requirements based upon that distinction, such as notification requirements and public meetings, but we do not have any `processing' fees identified for high impact tower applications and it is recommended we amend our protocol to include a$500 fee for staff time in reviewing `high-impact' applications. �� - the District protocol has tight timing on processing submissions, from 10 days for low impact submissions, to 31 days for high impact. The FCM protocol suggests an overall goal of 120 days. Staff are recommending amending the time frame in our protocol for review of a telecommunications tower application consistent with the FCM model template, namely 60 days to finalize an application following a public meeting, in an overall review period of 120 days. - the District protocol requires that all towers be required to go through a staff review process for degree of impact. The applicant submits documentation for review by staff and if it is determined to be `high impact', irrespective of height, it will need to go through a public consultation exercise. The FCM model protocol suggests the same if a municipality so requires. The recently announced Federal changes to Industry Canada rules note that towers under 15m in height will not be exempt anymore and will have to comply with notice, public meeting, and review requirements similar to other towers. This now makes our protocol more consistent with the FCM and the new Industry Canada versions when it gets finalized. - the District protocol leads to discussions between the proponent of the tower, the affected neighbourhood in some cases, and District staff, to ensure local considerations are addressed. This leads to a District letter of support or non-support, as the case may be, back to Industry Canada who then makes the final determination. The FCM protocol is designed to achieve the same objectives. From the table below, it is evident there is a lot that is similar in our respective protocols. The only divergence and areas of possible change is: - A longer application and consultation period consistent with FCM recommended standards; - A$500 processing fee for `high-impact' applications to cover staff time spent; - Incorporating design review of antennas attached to building surfaces or on top of buildings; and - Incorporating a construction deadline following successful public consultation, or the proponent begins again. FCM Protacol DMR Protocol City of Vancouver Protocol Purpose and It is a`template' that local government To establish procedural standards that They have noted that Objectives can customise for local conditions. will allow the District to effectively `tower' locations are well- participate in and influence the developed; demand is for To establish a local land use placement of telecommunication `infill' sites, mainly consultation framework that ensures the antenna structures proposed within antennas on buildings. municipality and the District mcmbers of the public contribute local They developed detailed knowledge that facilitates and design guidelines for influencesthesiting—location, antennas on buildings, and development and design (including have developed a pilot aesthetics) — of Antenna Systems within program for small low municipal boundaries; powered antenna systems usin street li ht oles. Municipal role To issue a statement of concurrence or To establish procedural standards that To establish guidelines and defined non-concurrence to the Proponent and will allow the District to effectively procedures for industry to Industry Canada. participate in and influence the proponents to minimize the placement of telecommunication `impact', mostly visual, on The statement considers the land use antenna structures proposed within neighbourhoods. compatibility of the Antenna System, the District. thc responses ofthe affected residents And the Proponent's adherence to this The Protocols are also intended to Protocol. The Municipality guides and assist Council, District Staff, Industry facilitates siting process by: Canada, representatives of the telecommunications industry, and • communicating to Proponents members of the public in being aware amcnitics, scnsitivitics, planning of, and understanding the priorities and other characteristics of the implementation methods, processes, area; procedures and criteria, used to • dcvclopingthc dcsign guidelincs for achieve this purpose. Antenna Systems contained in Section 6 ofthis Protocol; and • establishing a community consultation process, where warranted. FCM Protocol continued DMR Protocol continued Vancouver protocol continued Municipal role in Not defined District staff performs three main Implied. public meeting functions at a public consultation defined meeting. These are: L To scrutinize the consultation process; 2. To clarify the provisions of the District's Telecommunication Antenna Structures Siting Protocols as required; 3. To explain the DistricYs role in the deployment of telecommunication antenna structures Neighbourhood Designed to review issues Designed to review issues Implied. im act Design Included in proponent submission and Included in proponentsubmission and Detailed and extensive, but Characteristics ublic review ublic review a 1 to roof-to s onl . Residential Suggests they be defined Defined according to impact Implied. setbacks Commercial/Indu No distinction Usually defined as higher impact, but No reference. strial setbacks no public consultation meeting required because of no residential uses; design review does occur Low Impact No distinction Distinction made, no public meeting, Design guidelines address antenna structures minimal review. this specifically. Co-lo options Suggests they be addressed and Documentation required No reference identified documented Site investigation Required Implied Required Notice All antenna systems should be noted to All antenna systems should be Undefeined obligations municipality; although it notes limited referred to the District, if only for exem tions info if of low im act Notice form and Defined Defined Undefined content Notice area To be defined b munici alit Defined Undefined Public Meeting Defined Defined Undefined format Obligations after Post meeting discussions required Defined Undefined meetin Duration of 60 days after public meeting, 120 days 31 days after public consultation No reference. process overall meeting Fees Municipal determination Not referenced Referenced depending on rype. Concurrence More detail More general Implied. letters Time Limit to Concurrence is good for 3 years. No limit Silent. construct tower Building Permit Express requirement for buildings, Silent Implied for buildings Re uirement im lied for towers Building Permit: The issue of building permits is important. Telecommunication towers are a Federal responsibility. For stand-alone towers, Industry Canada typically requires engineered drawings of the construction of the tower and an attestation that it is properly designed. Presently, in Maple Ridge, towers typically have equipment kiosks or buildings, and electrical works, required for operation of the tower. It is through these improvements that the District requires a building permit and inspects the entirety of the works. As well, if the antenna structure is attached to a building, the District requires a building permit. 5 Both the FCM protocol and the Vancouver approach are silent on building permits for stand-alone towers. However, the FCM approach has an indirect reference to securing any necessary "applications or permissions" and paying appropriate fees from relevant Municipal departments. It is recommended the District continue our current practice of requiring building permits where there are works associated with operation of the tower. Beyond our current practices noted above, the District can also require a building permit application following a successful public consultation exercise for a tower and also as a condition of leasing District lands. Time Frame: The issue of time frame is important, there has not been enough of a test of our protocol to determine if the tight time frames of our protocol (eg - 31 days to conclusion from a public meeting) are sufficient. Early indications are they should be extended to allow staff time to coordinate and discuss/review with the proponent, and in some cases update Council. Given other more pressing matters, consideration of such `applications' may not receive the attention in a timely way that the industry or public expects. The FCM protocol template suggests a window of 60 days to finalize an application following a public meeting, in an overall review period of 120 days. Fees: With respect to fees, processing fees was not referenced in our protocol. It was considered premature to determine the extent of staff time involved. However, preliminary results suggest that such tower applications may well consume significant staff time and should warrant fees. For all towers, and antenna structures attached to buildings, building permit review fees will apply. Design Review: The FCM protocol notes a proponent who is adding to an existing antenna system, or is proposing to add an antenna system to the top of a building, should provide the municipality with details around the location, height, and design treatment (eg - screening or stealth treatment) being utilized. It notes that the treatment should be consistent with the "design preferences" of local government. This is obviously a concern for larger cities. In Vancouver, for example, their "protocol" deals almost exclusively with appearances of such antenna systems and they have extensive design guidelines to address their preferences. For Maple Ridge, our design protocol does note structures are encouraged to be disguised, unobtrusive and inconspicuous. However, the limited installation of antennas on roof tops does not justify extensive design guidelines, and there is no mechanism to have a design review of any that are proposed. Such installations do require a building permit, and the review at the permit stage concerns itself with appropriate installation and safety aspects, not design appearance. Given the discussion above, staff are recommendingthat: - the `high impact' antenna structure applications be charged $500 on the basis of staff time recovery; - the time frames for review of applications be amended to be consistent with the FCM template; and - that a time limit be placed on all new tower construction from a successful application. If Council approves that change to the protocol staff will review the proposed fee in a year and monitor any Federal changes for necessary adjustments to our approach. a) Desired Outcome: Council support for proceeding to amend the Maple Ridge Telecommunications Tower Siting Protocol as noted above. b) Strategic Alignment: Although the final approval authority remains a Federal responsibility, we have our own tower consultation protocol which we hope will garner more support from Industry Canada for District concerns. This would be consistent with community development objectives and the desire for local control of land use issues. c) Interdepartmentallmplications: The effort and work required to shepherd applications through review and consultation processes may well become significant. Given more pressing matters, such `applications' may not enjoy sufficient priority to see them to a timely conclusion. This is justification to ensure a realignment of our contemplated turn-around times, and those of the FCM template. Although building permits are required for towers and antenna installations on buildings, the permit process typically focuses on safety and construction, and not on aesthetics. The District does not have an appropriate mechanism to undertake design review. If there is a desire to take on a greater role in this area, staff will need to review our options and return for more discussion. It was noted above that an application and review fee should be considered to cover staff time. Additional Fee Bylaw and Procedures Bylaw amendments would need to be made to identify the application and review process and required fees should this receive Council support. d) Business Plan/Financial Implications: A$500 fee for the tower application process and review will be recommended to cover staff time required for high impact tower applications. The District will also be able to continue to raise building permit fees for stand-alone towers and antenna installations attached to buildings. CONCLUSIONS: Communication towers and antenna support structures are required for radio communication services, and are controlled under the Federal Telecommunications Act as administered by Industry Canada. Under the current regulatory regime, the District is constrained in its ability to influence matters of Federal control. However, the regulatory landscape is changing and there is more willingness on the part of the Federal authorities and the wireless industry to acknowledge and accommodate local concerns in siting and designing telecommunications towers. Modest changes are proposed to our siting protocol based upon our review of what others have done. As for design review considerations, staff have guidance in various documents, such as the FCM material and the City of Vancouver design guidelines, that we can utilize in reviewing the appropriateness of any tower or antenna siting issues where necessary. 7 Finally, the innovative use of street lights to accommodate cellular antennas is something that staff will be returning to discuss with Council should there be interest from the industry in developing such technology here in Maple Ridge. Presently, it is being piloted only in Vancouver, Surrey and Coquitlam. "Original si ned bvJohn Bastaia" Prepared by: John Bastaja Director Corporate Support "Original signed bv Paul Gill" Approved by: Paul Gill General Manager, Corporate and Financial Services "Original signed bv David Pollock" for Approved by: Frank Quinn General Manager, Public Works and Development Services "Ori inal signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer � � Uccp rtoors Greater Heigh[s T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer DATE: April 14, 2014 FILE N0: ATTN: Committee of the Whole Tax Rate Bylaws - Maple Ridge Road 13 Diking District and Albion Diking District EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Levies are collected from property owners within the Road 13 and Albion Diking Districts to maintain the dikes and equipment. Bylaws have been prepared for the collection of these levies in. A 2.2% Increase is proposed from the rates levied in 2013. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Maple Ridge Road 13 Diking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7079-2014; be given first, second and third readings and that. Albion Diking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7080-2014 be given first, second and third readings. DISCUSSION: The District serves as Interim Trustee of these two diking districts. No funds are allocated in the Capital Works budget for these dikes. All works must be funded through the diking districts. Provincial grants can be applied for but these generally require that the recipient pay 33°/o of all costs. An appraisal was undertaken in 2013 for the Diking District 13 pump station. The replacement value was determined to be $798,700 and insurance coverage has been adjusted accordingly. Providing for pump replacement in the event of a non-insured failure is important for both diking districts. Neither diking district has sufficient reserves at this time to do so, therefore, a moderate increase in rates is recommended in order to build up their reserves over multiple years. "Ori inal signed by Russ Carmichael" "Original signed by Paul Gill" Prepared by: Russ Carmichael Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA Director of Engineering Operations General Manager, Corporate & Financial Services "Original signed by Ceri Marlo" "Original signed bv J.L. (Jim) Rule" Prepared by: Ceri Marlo. Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Manager of Legislative Services Chief Administrative Officer 1136 CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0.7079-2014 A Bylaw for imposingtaxes upon lands in Maple Ridge Road 13 Dyking District The Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, acting on behalf of the Trustees for Maple Ridge Road 13 Dyking District, enacts as follows: 1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Road 13 Dyking District Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7079-2014". 2. The following rates are hereby imposed and levied for those lands within the boundaries of Maple Ridge Road 13 Dyking District: For purposes of dyke maintenance and improvements and equipment repair and maintenance: (a) a rate of $0.5003 per $1000 of assessment of land and improvements in all categories (b) a rate of $12.00 per acre of land with a minimum charge of $5.00. 3. If any section, subsection, clause or other part of this Bylaw is for any reason held to be invalid by the decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Bylaw. READ a first time on the day of , 2014. READ a second time on the day of , 2014. READ a third time on the day of , 2014. ADOPTED on the day of , 2014. PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0.7080-2014 A Bylaw for imposing taxes upon lands in the Albion Dyking District The Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, acting as Receiver for the Albion Dyking District, enacts as follows: 1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Albion Dyking District Tax Rates Bylaw No.7080-2014". 2. The following rates are hereby imposed and levied for those lands within the boundaries of Albion Dyking District: For purposes of dyke maintenance and improvements and equipment repair and maintenance: (a) a rate of $2.5536 per $1000 of assessment of land and improvements in all categories 3. If any section, subsection, clause or other part of this Bylaw is for any reason held to be invalid by the decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Bylaw. READ a first time on the day of , 2014. READ a second time on the day of , 2014. READ a third time on the day of , 2014. ADOPTED on the day of , 2014. PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER MAPLE RIDGE 6ritish Co[umhla T0: FROM: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer MEETING DATE: FILE N0: MEETING: SUBJECT: Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) Funding EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: April 14, 2014 COW On February 17, Council received a report from staff regarding the uncertainty of funding for the Iron Horse Youth Safe House (IHYSH) operated by Alouette Home Start Society (AHSS). There was a recommendation from the Social Planning Advisory Committee (SPAC) that Council write a letter to request information about the status of current and transitional funding for the Iron Horse Youth Safe House. In late February the Metro Vancouver Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness (RSCH) announced a call for proposals for transitional funding for current Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) projects. Alouette Home Start Society has successfully applied for transitional funding allowing both IHYSH and Outreach to remain in operation for a period of six months until September 30, 2014. In light of the new information supplied to Council at the February 25 meeting, the original recommendation was deferred. The SPAC directed staff to forward a new recommendation to Council. At the March 5, 2014 SPAC meeting, the HPS funding for AHSS Outreach and the IHYSH program was discussed. The discussion centered on three points. The first was the lack of timely communication about the transitional funding process as well as the short application timeline. The lack of information caused a great deal of distress for the organization, their staff and clients. Additionally, once information about the application was sent out the turnaround time was very short. The second point discussed by SPAC was in regards to the shift in the HPS funding criteria. The HPS seeks to address homelessness by working in partnership with communities, provinces and territories, other federal departments and the private and not-for-profit sectors. HPS funding is invested in local priorities identified by communities through a comprehensive community planning process involving a range of local stakeholders. Metro Vancouver is working on a community plan however, the federal government has redefined the criteria and 65% of the local projects identified in the plan need to have a`Housing First' focus which means that currently funded local programs may not receive funding. The third point discussed was that "Housing First" models require a great deal of services and supports to ensure success. There are different and varying capacities across the region to supply these services and supports. The access to housing stock and rental supplements is also inconsistent across the region. As a result, communities across Metro Vancouver have varying degrees of capacity to implement Housing First projects. 1151 RECOMMENDATION: That a letter be written to Service Canada, Member of Parliament Randy Kamp and the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness expressing concern over varying degrees of capacity within all Metro Vancouver communities to implement a Housing First model and that future communications around the funding process be timely and more comprehensive. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: The Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) funding from Service Canada funds a number of programs that address housing and homelessness across Metro Vancouver. A Community Plan has been developed by the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness identifying regional priorities for funding. A number of local programs including the IHYSH and Outreach operated by AHSS and the Cold Wet Weather (CWW) beds operated by the Caring Place are funded through HPS. In 2013, the federal government changed the criteria and made "Housing First" the focus for the HPS funding. Within the regional funding package, 65% of programs funded must use a"Housing First" model. Many currently funded programs across Metro Vancouver are not "Housing First" programs and are, therefore, at risk of not being funded. Both the IHYSH and CWW beds do not meet the criteria and, therefore, will likely not be funded and this will have a significant impact on our community. Since its inception, HPS funded projects that addressed priorities outlined in the Community Plan developed by the RSCH. The funding was directed to unique community-based programs aimed at preventing and reducing homelessness by providing direct support and funding. For 2011-2014, the Community Plan identified the need for services and housing for: populations affected by substance misuse or mental health issues, youth, and First Nations. There was no designated approach other than the need to be community based, engaged in partnerships, and targeting one of the identified populations. The shift to a"Housing FirsY' model is complex and the exact criterion for the funding is not yet known. The `Housing First' approach involves first giving people who are homeless a place to live, and then providing the necessary supports (e.g. for mental illness) to help them stabilize their lives and recover as best as possible. It targets individuals who are chronically or episodically homeless. The HPS funding cannot be used to fund services to support people to maintain housing and therefore local communities are dependent on existing services typically provided by the province and the non-profit sector. Not every community in the province has the same level of service, for example, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) teams often viewed as essential to a successful Housing First model, are not available in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows. The lack of appropriate resources could not only put a strain on existing supports and services but could also jeopardize the success of the Housing First projects in the community. Across the region, there are also different types of housing stock and access to rent supplements. Affordable and appropriate housing as well as rent supplements are a key component of a successful `Housing First' model. Furthermore, there is also recognition that certain segments of the population of homeless, including youth 13-17 years of age and seniors, are not well served by the `Housing First' modality. As noted, the current AHSS safe house model does not fit the criteria for Housing First funding. Additionally, the Caring Place's Cold Wet Weather beds currently funded by the HPS 2 will no longer be funded. Accordingly, a number of the community services addressing homelessness will not be available. In the interim, Metro Vancouver in partnership with the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness (RSCH) has announced a Call for Proposals (CFP) for Housing First Readiness & Capacity Building activities, under the Homelessness Partnering Strategy, to build capacity among the region's homeless-serving organizations to implement Housing First solutions to homelessness. The deadline to apply for this funding is May 2. It is likely that an application from our community will be going forward. CONCLUSION: The change of focus for the Homelessness Partnering Strategy funding to "Housing First" will have a significant impact on our community. The loss of funding for the Iron Horse Youth Safe House and the Cold Wet Weather beds will decrease access to shelter supports for marginalized populations in our community. The successful delivery of a Housing First model requires a level of support and services that not all communities across Metro Vancouver have access to. SPAC is recommending that Council send a letter outlining these concerns to Service Canada, the local Member of Parliament and the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness. `Original signed by Shawn Matthewson' Prepared by: Shawn Matthewson, Recreation Coordinator, Social Planning `Original signed by Sue Wheeler' Reviewed by: Sue Wheeler, Director Community Services `Original signed by Kelly Swift' Approved by: Kelly Swift, General Manager, Community Development Parks & Recreation Services `Original signed byJim Rule' Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer :sm 3 � � � Deep Roots Greater Heights T0: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE: April 22, 2014 and Members of Council FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Council SUBJECT: 2014-2018 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The 2014 property tax assessment roll has been received from BC Assessment which means that the 2014 property tax rates can now be set. Prior to setting these rates, it is desirable to update our financial plan to reflect information received since the plan's adoption in January. As outlined in the staff report presented to the April 14, 2014 Committee of the Whole meeting, attention has also been directed to the revenue requirements for 2015 and adjustments have been made. This will allow the incoming Council to focus on its strategic direction as a priority. The Property Tax Rates Bylaw must be adopted prior to May 15 each year. This is why three readings are required at Council on April 22, 2014 with final consideration of the bylaws at the Council Meeting on May 13. A live-streamed public question and answer period is scheduled for April 28 at 6:00 pm. The revenues and costs are fairly stable and predictable. Where there are risks, such as weather for snow removal costs or slower building activity impacting development revenues, financial reserves can be accessed. As in previous years and as reported to Council in the year end update, funding has been provided for required projects that were budgeted for in the prior year but were not completed. Council will note that the 2014 and 2015 property tax increases are lower than was projected in January due to growth in the tax base being higher than was expected. RECOMMENDATION(S): That Bylaw No. 7076 - 2014 be given first, second and third readings. 1201 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: The 2014-2018 Business Plans and an overview of the financial plan were presented to Council at public meetings in December of 2013. Business Plans from all areas including the Capital Works Program and the 2014-2018 Financial Plan Overview Report were provided and Financial Plan Bylaw 7043-2013 was adopted in January. The business plans, report, presentations and Financial Plan Bylaw are available on our website. b) Financial Plan Implications: The financial plan is amended as follows: 1. The actual real growth in tax property revenue of 2.05°/o compared to a previously budgeted 1.65%. A significant portion of this growth was due to a review that BC Assessment did that captured previous improvements. 2. The property tax increase for general purposes can be lowered by 0.30% in 2014 and by an additional 0.28°/o in 2015. 3. The recycling area has been updated to reflect the contract with Multi Material BC (MMBC). Estimated annual revenues of $1,065,000 from MMBC have been included in the financial plan. Projected payments to Ridge Meadows Recycling Society have been increased by $720,000 to compensate them for the commodity revenues that will be lost due to the MMBC contract. These figures have been prorated base on a mid-May 2014 start date. Any revenues in excess of expenses will be transferred to the Recycling Reserve. 4. Recycling rate increases were previously forecast to be 2.75% in each of 2014 and 2015. We recommend that no increase in rates apply for 2014 and 2015. This can be achieved due to the increased revenues from MMBC. 5. Minor changes have been made to grants in lieu of taxes and benefit costs. The inflation contingency has been reduced to provide for the increase in hydro rates that was announced late last year. 6. As in previous years and as reported to Council in the year end update, funding has been provided for required projects that were budgeted for in the prior year but were not completed. 7. The transfer to accumulated surplus for General Revenue is $51,134 for 2014 and $4,968 for 2015 as a result of the above noted adjustments. c) Desired Outcome: A Financial Plan that accurately reflects the planned expenditures and methods of funding and is consistent with corporate strategic plans, policies and Council direction. Page 2 d) Strategic Alignment: All departments Business Plans are prepared using the Business Planning Guidelines. These guidelines are reviewed and amended annually in consultation with Council. The Financial Plan reflects Council's Strategic Financial Sustainability Policies and Infrastructure Funding Strategy. e) Citizen/Customer Implications: The business plans have far reaching citizen and customer implications. The Financial Plan reflects the financial impact of the business plans. Property tax revenue and user fees are planned to increase as detailed in the above discussion. These 2014 and 2015 rate increases have been reduced slightly compared to the Financial Plan previously approved. Historv and projected propertv tax increases General Purpose Town Park & (GP) Infrastructure Centre Fire Levy Drainage Rec. Total Increase 2018 2.00% 0.70% 0.30% 0.25% 3.25% 2017 2.00% 0.70% 0.30% 0.25% 3.25% 2016 2.20% 0.50% 0.30% 0.25% 3.25% 2015 1.92% .° 0.50% 0.30% 0.25% 2.97% .° 2014 1.90% .° 0.50% Inc. in GP 0.30% 0.25% 2.95% .° 2013 2.25% 0.50% 300,000 0.30% 0.13% 3.50% 2012 3.00% 1.00% 600,000 4.88% 2011 3.00% 1.00% 600,000 4.99% 2010 3.00% 1.00% 600,000 5.13% 2009 3.00% 1.00% 600,000 5.18% 2008 3.00% 1.00% 600, 000 5.31 % 2007 3. 75 % 1.00% 600, 000 6.18 % 2006 3. 75 % 1.00% 600, 000 6. 37 % 2005 3.00% 1.00% 600,000 5.70% 2004 3.00% 1.00% 0 4.00% 2003 3.00% 1.00% 0 4.00% Historv of revisions to planned propertv tax increases Property Tax Increases 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2012 - 2016 AdOpted BUdg@t (2012 ACtUaI) 4.89% 5.17% 4.80% 4.80% 4.80% 2013 - 2017 Adopted Budget (2013 Actual) 3.50% 4.05% 4.55% 4.55% 4.55% n/a 2014 - 2018 Council Adopted Guidelines 3.30% 3.65% 3.65% 3.85% 3.85% 2014 Reduction vs. Prior Adopted Budget 0.75% 0.90% 0.90% 0.70% - 2014 - 2018 Budget Adopted in January 2014 Reduction vs. 2014 Council Adopted Guidelines 2014 - 2018 Budget Currently Proposed 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% 0.05% 0.40% 0.40% 0.60% 0.60% 2.95% 2.97% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% Page 3 Impact to the a home assessed at $405,000 in 2013 Average Home Municipal Levies: General Purpose (Gen. & ISR) Drainage Parks & Recreation Subtotal Property Taxes User Fees Recycling (fixed rate) Water (fixed rate) Sewer (fixed rate) Total Property Taxes and User Fees 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 1, 728.2 6 1, 769.89 1, 813.11 1, 862. 7 6 1, 914.03 1, 966.96 4.58 9.78 15.14 20.66 26.36 32.24 1.90 6.24 10.70 15.30 20.05 24.95 1,734.74 1,785.91 1,838.95 1,898.72 1,960.44 2,024.15 70.20 70.20 70.20 72.15 74.15 76.20 475.70 501.90 529.50 558.60 589.30 621.70 309.45 322.05 335.25 349.05 363.50 378.60 2,590.09 2,680.06 2,773.90 2,878.52 2,987.39 3,100.65 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Average Home Municipal Levies Increases: General Purpose 2.25% 1.90% 1.92% 2.20% 2.00% 2.00% Infrastructure Replacement 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.70% 0.70% Parks & Recreation 0.125% 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% Drainage 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% Total Property Tax Increase % 3.18% 2.95% 2.97% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25% Recycling Increase % 3.01% 0.00% 0.00% 2.78% 2.77% 2.76% Water Increase % 5.50% 5.51% 5.50% 5.50% 5.50% 5.50% Sewer Increase % 4.05% 4.07% 4.10% 4.12% 4.14% 4.15% Total Property Taxes and User Fees Increase 3.91% 3.47% f) Statutory Requirements and Policy Implications: 3.50% 3.77% 3.78% 3.79% The Financial Plan has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements and Municipal financial policies. As required by the Community Charter, the Financial Plan Bylaw includes: disclosure of the proportions of revenue proposed to come from various funding sources, the distribution of property taxes among property classes, and the use of permissive tax exemptions. In 2009 we reported our assets and the related amortization expense to comply with accounting rules in PSAB 3150. The Financial Plan Bylaw now includes a figure for the annual amortization expense and an offsetting entry to draw down the value of the Tangible Capital Assets. These items are accounting entries and do not represent cash being spent. The amortization figure does have some relevance for financial planning, even if it is based on historic cost rather than replacement costs. If we compare the annual amortization expense to the amount we spend on replacement of our existing assets or transfers to reserves to later fund the same, one would see that the amortization expense is considerably more. This highlights the fact that we currently have an infrastructure funding gap which Page 4 means that we are consuming more of our assets than we are replenishing. Fortunately, we have relatively new infrastructure so we have some time to bridge this funding gap. Public consultation is an important and legislated component of preparing financial plans. Public input during business planning this December was invited through advertisements in the local paper and on the corporate website. Input was accepted through many different mediums including: in person at the business planning presentations which were open to the public or through email, voicemail, Facebook, Twitter and regular mail. Regular feedback and interaction with the public is also taken into account in developing the business plans. For this amendment to the Financial Plan an advertisement will be placed in the local paper. Public input into the financial plan and departmental business plans is incorporated indirectly through regular feedback and interaction with customers and the public as well as through the results of surveys. A public question and answer period, with the use of social media, is planned for April 28t" at 6:00 pm. g) Alternatives: In the event that this bylaw is not adopted, the District is not authorized to make any expenditure other than those identified in the 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw No.7043- 2013. CONCLUSIONS: The Financial Plan is a multi-year planning, reviewing and reporting tool that represents Council's vision and commitment to providing quality services to the residents of Maple Ridge. The Plan provides a forecast of the financial resources that are available to fund operations, programs and infrastructure for the five year period. "Ori inal signed by Trevor Thompson" Prepared by: Trevor Thompson, BBA, CPA, CGA Manager of Financial Planning "Ori inal signed by Paul Gill" Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CPA, CGA General Manager, Corporate & Financial Services "Original signed by J.L. Uim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Page 5 CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7076-2014 A bylaw to amend Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw No. 7043-2013 WHEREAS, through a public process in an open meeting the business and financial plans were presented; AND WHEREAS, the public will have the opportunity to provide comments or suggestions with respect to the financial plan; AND WHEREAS, Council deems this to a process of public consultation under Section 166 of the Community Charter; The Council for the District of Maple Ridge ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited as Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw No. 7076-2014. 2. Statement 1, Statement 2 and Statement 3 attached to and forming part of Maple Ridge 2014- 2018 Financial Plan Bylaw 7043-2013 are deleted in their entirety and replaced by Statement 1, Statement 2 and Statement 3 attached and forming part of Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7076-2014. READ a first time the READ a second time the day of April, 2014. day of April, 2014. READ a third time the day of April, 2014. PUBLIC CONSULTATION completed on the day of May, 2014. ADOPTED the _ day of PRESIDING MEMBER 2014. ATTACHMENT: Statement 1, Statement 2 and Statement 3 CORPORATE OFFICER Page 6 Attachmentto Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw 7076-2014 Statement 1 Consolidated Financial Plan 2014-2018 (in $ thousands) 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 REVENUES Revenues Development Fees Developer Contributed Assets 16,500 16,500 16,500 16,500 16,500 Developer Cost Charges 15,611 9,606 11,418 7,594 5,955 Developer Specified Projects - - - - - Parkland Acquisition 200 200 200 200 200 Contributionsfrom Others 3,116 1,256 1,275 1,249 1,238 Development Fees Total 35,427 27,562 29,393 25,543 23,893 Property Taxes 68,373 71,632 75,312 79,487 83,619 Parcel Charges 2,857 2,957 3,058 3,163 3,243 Fees & Charges 37,143 39,032 41,029 42,690 43,974 Interest 1,853 1,853 1,853 1,853 1,853 Grants (Other Govts) 5,370 4,984 3,921 4,309 3,421 Property Sales - 4,250 - - - Total Revenues 151,023 152,270 154,566 157,045 160,003 EXPENDITURES Operating Expenditures Interest Payments on Debt Amortization Expense Other Expenditures Total Expenditures ANNUALSURPLUS Add Back: Amortization Expense (Surplus) Less: Capital Expenditures Less: Developer Contributed Capital CHANGE IN FINANCIAL POSITION OTHER REVENUES Add: Borrowing Proceeds OTHER EXPENDITURES Less: Principal Payments on Debt 2,240 2,439 19,391 20,124 108,903 98,438 130,534 121,001 20,489 31,269 19,391 20,124 67,388 30,109 16,500 16,500 (44,008) 4,784 18,495 - 2,660 3,953 2,304 2,165 20,929 21,766 101,976 106,701 125,209 130,632 29,357 26,413 20,929 21,766 27,260 21,181 16,500 16,500 6,526 10,498 4,047 4,143 2,081 22,637 110,669 135,387 24,616 22,637 21,344 16,500 9,409 4,184 TOTAL REVENUES LESS EXPENSES (28,173) 831 2,479 6,355 5,225 INTERNALTRANSFERS Transfer from Reserve Funds Capital Works Reserve Equipment Replacement Reserve Fire Department Capital Reserve Land Reserve Local Improvement Reserve Sanitary Sewer Reserve Transfer from Reserve Fund Total Less :Transfer to Reserve Funds Capital Works Reserve Equipment Replacement Reserve Fire Dept. Capital Acquisition Land Reserve Local Improvement Reserve Sanitary Sewer Reserve Total Transfer to Reserve Funds Transfer from (to) Own Reserves Transfer from (to) Surplus Transfer from (to) Surplus & own Reserves 4,973 549 549 549 701 6,045 2,272 3,092 1,074 3,474 3,578 250 1,750 - - - 4,250 - - - 14,596 7,321 5,391 1,623 4,175 916 815 2,722 3,080 1,332 725 5 4,255 30 30 5,005 8,905 19,379 (1,089) (797) 1,842 18,582 753 1,354 783 3,169 3,321 820 950 5 5 30 30 5,378 5,089 (296) (2,110) (2,196) (779) (2,492) (2,889) 1,338 3,448 1,079 5 30 5,900 (2,499) (1,001) (3,500) TOTALINTERNALTRANSFERS 28,173 (831) (2,479) (6,355) (5,225) Page 7 Attachmentto Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw 7076-2014 Statement 2 Revenue and Property Tax Policy Disclosure Revenue Disclosure Revenue Proportions 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 $('OOOs) % $('OOOs) % $('OOOs) % $('OOOs) % $('OOOs) % Revenues Property Taxes 68,373 40 71,632 47 75,312 48 79,487 51 83,619 53 Parcel Charges 2,857 2 2,957 2 3,058 2 3,163 2 3,243 2 Fees & Charges 37,143 22 39,032 26 41,029 27 42,690 27 43,974 27 Borrowing Proceeds 18,495 11 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 Other Sources 42,650 25 38,649 25 35,167 23 31,705 20 29,167 18 Total Revenues 169,518 100 152,270 100 154,566 100 157,045 100 161,003 100 Other Sources include: Development Fees Total Interest Grants (Other Govts) Property Sales Objectives & Policies 35,427 1,853 5,370 42,650 21 27,562 18 29,393 19 1 1,853 1 1,853 1 3 4,984 3 3,921 3 0 4,250 3 - 0 25 38,649 25 35,167 23 25,543 1,853 4,309 31, 705 16 1 3 0 20 23,893 15 1,853 1 3,421 2 - 0 29,167 18 Propertv Tax Revenue is the District's primary revenue source, and one which is heavily reliant on the residential class. Diversification of the tax base and generation of non-tax revenue are ongoing objectives, outlined in Financial Sustainability Policy 5.52 section 6. The Financial Plan includes property tax increases totaling 2.95% annually for: • General Purposes • Infrastructure Sustainability • Parks and Recreation Master Plan implementation • Drainage Improvements Additional property tax revenue due to new construction is also included in the Financial Plan at 2.05% in 2014 and 2% annually for 2015 through 2018. Additional information on the tax increases and the cost drivers can be found in the 2014-2018 Financial Plan Overview Report. Specific policies discussing the tax increases are included in the Financial Sustainability Plan and related policies which were adopted in 2004. Property tax revenue includes property taxes as well as grants in lieu of property taxes. Parcel Char es are largely comprised of a recycling charge, a sewer charge and, on certain properties, a local area service or improvement charge. Parcel charges are a useful tool to charge all or a subset of properties for a fixed or variable amount to support services. Unlike property taxation the variable amount does not need to be related to property assessment value, but can be something that more accurately reflects the cost of the service. Page 8 Attachmentto Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw 7076-2014 Statement 2 �cont.� Revenue and Property Tax Policy Disclosure Fees & Charges The Business Planning Guidelines call for an increase of 5°/o in fees as a guideline. Actual fee increases vary depending on the individual circumstances, the type of fee and how it is calculated. Fees should be reviewed annually and updated if needed. Recent fee amendments include recreation fees, development application fees, business license fees and cemetery fees. A major amendment to the Development Costs Charges (DCC), recommended no more frequently than every five years, was completed in 2008. Minor DCC amendments are done more frequently. Some fees are used to offset the costs of providing specific services. The utility fees are reviewed annually with a view towards using rate stabilization practices to smooth out large fluctuations in rates, as set out in the Business Planning Guidelines. Borrowing Proceeds - Debt is used where it makes sense. Caution is used when considering debt as it commits future cash flows to debt payments restricting the ability to use these funds to provide other services. The source of the debt payments needs to be considered as does the justification for advancing the project. More information on borrowing previously approved can be found in the 2014-2018 Financial Plan Overview report. Other Sources will vary greatly year to year as it includes: • Development fees which fund capital projects from the DCC Reserve • Contribution from others in relation to capital • Grants which are sought from various agencies and may be leveraged with District funds PROPERTY TAX DISCLOSURE Property Tax Revenue Distribution Property Class 1 Residential 2 Utility 4 Major Industry 5 Light Industry 6 Business/Other 8 Rec./Non-Profit 9 Farm Tota I Taxation Revenue ('OOOs) 51,558 77.9% 516 0.8% 621 0.9% 2,701 4.1% 10,639 16.1% 37 0.1% 151 0.2% Assessed Value ('OOOs) 11,554 91.4% 13 0.1% 18 0.1% 208 1.6% 840 6.6% 3 0.0% 5 0.0% 66,224 100% 12,640 100% Tax Rate Multiple ($/1000) (Rate/Res.Rate) 3.8979 1.0 40.0000 10.3 34.2734 8.8 12.1045 3.1 12.1045 3.1 11.3283 2.9 25.1767 6.5 Page 9 Attachmentto Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw 7076-2014 Statement 2 �cont.� Revenue and Property Tax Policy Disclosure PROPERTY TAX DISCLOSURE Obiectives & Policies Property taxes are the District's largest source of revenue and are contained by efficient business practices. Annual business planning practices are the mechanism for resource allocation decisions. The District's Financial Sustainability Policy section 6 discusses the necessity of diversifying the tax base. Development of employment related properties is one method of diversification; therefore a key performance measurement in Strategic Economic Initiatives tracks the increased investment and development of non-residential properties. A policy in the Financial Sustainability Plan that calls for stable tax increases and the adoption of the annual increase early in the prior year in the Business Planning Guidelines provides citizens with a more stable and predictable set of cost increases. In some cases costs are phased in over multiple years to stay within the set tax increases. Property Tax Rates It is policy to adjust property tax rates annually to negate the impact of fluctuations in the market values of properties. Tax rates are reduced to negate the market increases. Property tax increases are then applied at the same relative increase for all classes, unless legislation restricts the rates, as with Class 2, Utility. The Business Class and Light Industry Class properties have the same tax rate and are treated as a composite class when setting the tax rates, as the types of businesses in each class are similar. A review was done on the Major Industry Class rates and the recommendation from the Audit and Finance Committee and Council was a 5°/o property tax reduction in both 2009 and 2010 to support additional investments in the subject property and to keep rates competitive. In the 2014 - 2018 Financial Plan, propertytaxes charged to major industrial class properties have been reduced; it starts at $70,000 in 2014, increasing by $70,000 in each year of the plan. In reviewing the tax rates to ensure competitiveness, absolute rates, tax multiples and overall tax burden are considered. The impact that assessed values have when comparing other geographical areas must be considered in a comparison of tax rates. Permissive Tax Exemptions Council has set policies around the use of permissive tax exemptions. These are Council Policies 5.19 through 5.24. These policies discuss Churches, Community Halls, Heritage Sites, Homes for the Care of Children and the Relief of the Aged, the Poor, the Disabled and the Infirm, Municipal Recreational Services, Private Hospitals and Daycares, Private School and Youth Recreation Groups. Revitalization Tax Exemption A revitalization tax exemption is available within a defined downtown area and provides a financial incentive to encourage development in the town centre. Further financial incentives are available for buildings that qualify; additional information on the town centre incentives can be found on our website. For more information on the tax exemption, please refer to both Bylaw 6789-2011 and 7010-2013. Page 10 Attachmentto Maple Ridge 2014-2018 Financial Plan Bylaw 7076-2014 Statement 3 Capital Expenditure Disclosure The sole purpose of this statement is to meet legislative requirements, highlighting the value of the DCC program; no other conclusions should be drawn from the figures as the information could be misleading. This disclosure is required under the Local Government Act s. 937(2); Capital costs attributable to projects to be partially funded by Development Cost Charges (DCC) must be included in the financial plan. The DCC program includes projects as far out as 2035 so the capital expenditures must be extended to match. Certain types of projects are not planned past the five year time horizon of the financial plan. Much less scrutiny is given to projects that are planned in years 2019 through 2035. Projects in these years typically exceed likely funding available. Capital Works Program for 2019 - 2035 (in $ thousands) Capital Works Program Source of Funding Development Fees Development Cost Charges Parkland Acquisition Reserve Contribution from Others Borrowing Proceeds G ra nts Transfer from Reserve Funds Capital Works Reserve Cemetery Reserve Equipment Replacement Reserve Fire Department Capital Reserve Infrastructure Sustainability Reserve Transfer from Reserve Funds Revenue Funds Source of Funding 327,177 127,540 6,756 134,296 6,319 41,987 8,935 115 2,303 310 11, 663 132,911 327,177 Page 11 � � � Deep itoois Greater Heights T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer 2014 Property Tax Rates Bylaw EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: DATE: April 22, 2014 ATTN: Council The Property Tax Rates Bylaw needs to be adopted prior to May 15. In order to do so, the bylaw requires first through third reading on April 22 and final consideration at the Council meeting on May 13. The 2014 tax rates are based on the Financial Plan Amending Bylaw dated, April 22, 2014. Due to the new revenue associated with growth in assessments, the 2014 property tax rate increase has been reduced by an additional 0.30% from the Financial Plan adopted in January. The property tax increase for 2014 totals 2.95%. Municipal property tax rates continue to be calculated using the same methodology that Council has set and reviewed. The methodology being, that tax rates for each property class are adjusted for market related assessment changes and then the planned tax increase is applied. As part of the Financial Planning discussions in December, 2013 Council authorized $70,000 to reduce the Major Industrial Class property tax rate and this is reflected in the 2014 property tax rates. Property tax rates are set by property class. The actual increase in the property tax bill for any individual property will vary depending on change in assessed value. The Province of BC is phasing out the Light Industrial Property Tax Credit on school tax levies. The credit was first introduced in 2009 at 50°/o of school tax levies and was increased in 2011 to 60%. The credit was reduced to 30% in 2013 and has been eliminated in 2014. RECOMMENDATION: That Bylaw No. 7078-2014 be given first, second and third readings. 1202 DISCUSSION: The 2014 taxation revenue increase is 2.95% and consists of: • 1.90°/o for general purposes, • 0.50°/o for the infrastructure replacement, • 0.30°/o for drainage improvements and • 0.25°/o for Parks and Recreation improvements. This increase is less than what was included in the Financial Plan approved in January, as a result of 2014 property tax revenue due to new growth exceeding the budgeted amounts. There have been several initiatives from the province that impact property taxation or property assessments including: • A temporary property tax deferment program was put in place for 2009 and 2010 which allows people who attest that they are experiencing serious financial difficulties due to current economic conditions, to defer their property taxes. Although this program is closed to new applicants, anyone who was approved during those two years is able to continue to defer. • The criteria for the existing property tax deferment program was expanded to include homeowners that have children living at home, previously it was just for homeowners that were 55 or older. • A Provincial Industrial Property Tax Credit was introduced in 2009 to reduce the school tax levy for major industrial and light industrial properties. The original 50% reduction was increased to a 60% reduction in 2011. For Light Industry Class properties the credit has been effectively reduced to 30% in 2013 and will be eliminated in 2014. • The Farm Land Tax Credit, a 50% reduction in the school tax levy, was introduced for 2011 for Farm Class properties. In 2011, this saved the Farm Class Property Class about $9,000. The Property Assessment Roll which is used in calculating the tax rates has been received from BC Assessment. Council policy is to reduce the property taxes to reflect average market value increases in each property class. This policy has been applied to calculate the municipal tax rates included in the attached bylaws. The Residential Class assessments decreased in market value by just over 1%. Once the tax rates are adjusted for market change, the rates are increased based on the tax increase approved in the Financial Plan. Previous year's supplementary adjustments in assessed values are reviewed ensuring those changes are also considered using the same methodology. The property tax bill includes other taxing authorities (Trans Link, BC Assessment and Municipal Finance Authority, Metro Vancouver and the Province for school taxes). The current bylaw only includes the GVRD property tax rates as it is the only one that we are actually setting. The others set the rates through their own bylaws and we are required to levy that rate. Council has no direct control in the amount of these levies or the methodology used in the calculations. For illustrative purposes, the tax levies highlighting the 2014 property tax increase for a residence valued at $405,000 can be found in the appendix. The Business and Light Industry Class are treated as a composite resulting in municipal tax rates that are identical. Staff will continue to review property taxes and the distribution between property classes to ensure that tax rates remain competitive. Page 2 CONCLUSIONS: The property tax rates are reflective of the decisions made during the public process of business planning and decisions that are incorporated in the Financial Plan. "Original signed by Trevor Thompson" Prepared by. Trevor Thompson, BBA, CPA, CGA Manager of Financial Planning "Ori inal signed by Paul Gill" A,n,nrovedby.- Paul Gill, BBA, CPA, CGA General Manager, Corporate & Financial Services "Ori inal si ned by J.L. (Jim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Page 3 Appendix A- Illustrative Residential Property Tax Comparison Property Taxes on Residence assessed at $405,000 in 2013 Assessed Value Municipal Property Taxes: General & Infrastructure Drainage Improvement Parks & Recreation Improvements Subtotal Property Taxes User Fees: Water Sewer Recycling Municipal Subtotal Other Agency Levies: BCAA, M FA GVRD Trans Link School Tax * Less: Home Owner Grant Net School Taxes Total Property Taxes 2013 2014 Change $ , % $ 405,000 $ 400,205 $ (4,795) -1.18% $ 1,728.26 $ 1,769.91 $ 41.65 4.58 9.77 5.19 1.90 6.24 4.34 $ 1,734.74 $ 1,785.92 $ 51.18 2.95% $ 475.70 $ 501.90 $ 26.20 5.51% 309.45 322.05 12.60 4.07% 70.20 70.20 - 0.00% $ 2,590.09 $ 2,680.07 $ 89.98 3.47% $ 24.79 $ 24.85 $ 0.07 0.27% 25.27 23.45 (1.82) -7.20% 131.71 132.67 0.96 0.73% 825.80 830.91 5.12 0.62% (570.00) (570.00) - 0.00% $ 255.80 $ 260.91 $ 5.12 2.00% $ 3,027.65 $ 3,121.95 $ 94.30 3.11% * The rates for School Taxes are not known at this time. For illustrative purposes an annual increase of 2°/a is used. Page 4 DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7078-2014 A bylaw to establish property tax rates for Municipal and Regional District purposes for the year 2014 WHEREAS pursuant to provisions in the Community Charter Council must, by bylaw, establish property tax rates; The Council of the District of Maple Ridge ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. 2. 3. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge 2014 Property Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7080-2014". The following rates are hereby imposed and levied for the year 2014: (a) For all lawful general purposes of the municipality on the assessed value of land and improvements taxable for general municipal purposes, rates appearing in Row "A" of Schedule "A" attached hereto and forming a part hereof. (c) For the purposes of improving drainage services the assessed value of land and improvements taxable for general municipal purposes, rates appearing in Row "B" of Schedule "A" attached hereto and forming a part hereof. (d) For the purposes of improving parks and recreation services the assessed value of land and improvements taxable for general municipal purposes, rates appearing in Row "C" of Schedule "A" attached hereto and forming a part hereof. (e) For purposes of the Greater Vancouver Regional District on the assessed value of land and improvements taxable for regional hospital district purposes, rates appearing in Row "A" of Schedule "B" attached hereto and forming a part hereof. The minimum taxation upon a parcel of real property shall be One Dollar ($1.00). READ a first time the READ a second time the READ a third time the ADOPTED the day of ATTACHMENTS: SCHEDULES "A" AND "B" day of day of day of 2014. PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 2014 2014 Page 5 A General Municipal B Drainage Improvements Levy C Park & Recreation Improvements Levy Tota I District of Maple Ridge Schedule 'A' to Bylaw No. 7078-2014 Tax Rates (dollars of tax per $1,000 taxable value) 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 Major Light Business/ Rec/ Residential Utilitv Industrv Industrv Other Non-profit Farm 4.4225 39.2811 34.2499 12.8678 12.5239 12.6683 29.8988 0.0244 0.2205 0.2125 0.0712 0.0693 0.0700 0.1659 0.0156 0.4984 0.4539 0.0711 0.0692 0.0697 0.2836 4.4625 40.0000 34.9163 13.0101 12.6624 12.8080 30.3483 District of Maple Ridge Schedule 'B' to Bylaw No. 7078-2014 Tax Rates (dollars of tax per $1,000 taxable value) 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 Major Light Business/ Rec/ Residential Utility Industry Industry Other Non-profit Farm A Greater 0.0586 0.2051 0.1992 0.1992 0.1436 0.0586 0.0586 Vancouver Regional D i stri ct Page 6 � � � Deep itoois Greater Heights T0: FROM: SUBJECT: District of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer Recycling Charges Amending Bylaw EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DATE: April 22, 2014 ATTN: Council During the 2014-2018 business planning presentations, an overview of the Recycling program was provided to Council. The Financial Plan adopted by Council included a rate increase of 2.75°/o for recycling charges for each of the five years of the financial plan. However, due to the agreement with Multi Material BC (MMBC) the recommendation is to remove the rate increases for 2014 and 2015. The bylaw includes rates for the next five years with rate increases of 2.75 % remaining in 2016 through 2018. Recycling rates will be revisited once we have some experience under the new MMBC agreements. Holding the recycling rates constant and deferring rate review until the financial results are better known ensures that the rate payers are not subjected to rate volatility. RECOMMENDATION(S): That Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Amending Bylaw No. 7051-2014 be given first, second and third readings. DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: As of mid-May 2014 the arrangements for collection of recycling changes under the contracts with MMBC. Revenue will be received from MMBC and revenues that the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society (RMRS) would have otherwise received from the collected commodities be reduced. Maple Ridge is well positioned, through the agreements with RMRS and the structure of how the recycling collections occur, to address the terms of the MMBC contracts. The money collected from MMBC will likely more than offset the lost commodity revenue and any additional operational costs associated with the new contract. The recycling rates will be reviewed once we have some experience and are more certain of the financial implications of new agreements. 1203 b) Desired Outcome: To obtain Council approval to amend the recycling charges to reflect no increases in 2014 and 2015 recycling rates. c) Citizen/Customer Implications: Single family residences, which have these services, will now see no increase in recycling fees for 2014 or 2015 where they would have otherwise seen an increase of about $2.00 each year. d) Business Plan/Financial Implications: The rates as well as the revenues received from MMBC, estimated at $1,065,000 annually and the increased expense to compensate RMRS for the lost commodity revenue and increased operating costs, estimated at $720,000 annually are included in the 2014-2018 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw No.7076-2014. The net financial impact of the MMBC contracts is expected to be positive. The amounts for 2014 are prorated base on a mid-May start. Revenues in excess of expenses are budgeted to be transferred to the Recycling Reserve. e) Alternatives: Rates other than what is proposed could be adopted which would impact the balance in the Recycling Reserve and would influence future rate increases or the ability to make future operating or capital expenditures. If the existing bylaws are not amended, the rate increases of 2.75% for recycling charges currently in the bylaw would be charged. CONCLUSIONS: The rate freeze for 2014 and 2015 is a direct result of increased revenues from MMBC which are expected to exceed the lost revenues from commodity sales and increased operating cost to comply with the new contract. These rates will continue to be reviewed as part of our business planning practices. "Original signed by Trevor Thompson" Prepared by: Trevor Thompson, BBA, CPA, CGA Manager of Financial Planning "Original signed by Paul Gill" Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CPA, CGA GM: Corporate and Financial Services "Original signed bv J.L. Uim) Rule" Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Page 2 DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW N0. 7051-2014 A Bylaw to further amend Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Bylaw No. 4655-1992 WHEREAS the Council has by bylaw imposed charges against the owners of real property to fund recycling programs and wishes to amend those charges for all uses; AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to further amend Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Bylaw No. 4655-1992; The Council of the District of Maple Ridge ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw shall be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Amending Bylaw No. 7051-2014". 2. That Schedule "B" of Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Bylaw No. 4655-1992, as amended, be deleted in its entirety and Schedule "B" attached hereto be substituted thereto. READ a first time the day of , 2014. READ a second time the day of , 2014. READ a third time the day of , 2014. ADOPTED the day of , 2014. PRESIDING MEMBER Attachment: Schedule "B" CORPORATE OFFICER Page 3 7051-2014 District of Maple Ridge Maple Ridge Recycling Charges Bylaw No. 4655-1992 SCHEDULE "B" Recycling Charges (Annual Rates) Recycling Charge A. Single Family Residential (1) Per Taxable Property B. Multi-Family Residential (1) Where individual curbside collection is provided or no collection is available: Per Taxable Property (2) Where centralized collection is provided the Recycling Charge is included in the Curbside Collection Charge: Per Taxable Property C. Industrial, Commercial, Institutional (1) Per Taxable Property Curbside Collection Char�e A. Single Family Residential (1) Per Dwelling Unit B. Multi-Family Residential (1) Where individual curbside collection is provided: Per Dwelling Unit (2) Where centralized collection is provided: � Per Dwelling Unit v �a c� � 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 $ 34.60 $ 34.60 $ 35.55 $ 36.55 $ 37.55 $ 34.60 $ 34.60 $ 35.55 $ 36.55 $ 37.55 Not Applicable $ 34.60 $ 34.60 $ 35.55 $ 36.55 $ 37.55 $ 35.60 $ 35.60 $ 36.60 $ 37.60 $ 38.65 $ 35.60 $ 35.60 $ 36.60 $ 37.60 $ 38.65 $ 35.35 $ 35.35 $ 36.30 $ 37.30 $ 38.35