HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-09-30 Council Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL MEETI/VG AGENDA
September 30, 2014
7.•00 p.m.
Counci/ Chamber
MEET/lVG 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 City's 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 September 9, 2014
502 Minutes of the Public Hearing of September 16, 2014
503 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of
September 3(2), 4, 8 and 16, 2014
600 PRESENTA T/ONS A T THE REQUEST OF COUNC/L
Page 1
Council MeetingAgenda
September 30, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 2 of 7
700 DELEGA T/ONS
701 Communities in Bloom Awards Presentations
• Charlotte Mitchell, Co-Chair, Communities in Bloom Committee
• Cyndy Johnson-McCormick, Co-Chair, Communities in Bloom Committee
• Geoff Mallory, Manager, Parks & Open Space, City of Maple Ridge
800 UNF/N/SHED BUS/NESS
Note: Item 801 has been forwarded from the September 15, 2014 Council
Workshop Meeting
801 Housing Action Plan
Staff report date September 15, 2014 recommendingthatthe Housing
Action Plan be endorsed and that staff be directed to prepare an
Implementation Plan.
900 CORRESPONDENCE
1000 BYLAWS
Bvlaws for Third Readin�
Note: Items 1001 to 1004 are from the Public Hearing of September 16, 2014
1001 2013-080-RZ, 24086 104 Avenue
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7027-2013
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) to permit a development of 18 townhouse units
Third reading
1002 2012-034-RZ, 12101208 Street
1002.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6920-2012
To designate from Urban Residential to Conservation and to add
Conservation area
Third reading
Council MeetingAgenda
September 30, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 3 of 7
1002.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6921-2012
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) to permit construction of 8 townhouse units
Third reading
1003 2011-019-RZ, 10515 240 Street
1003.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871-2011
To designate from Urban Residential to Conservation and to add
Conservation area
Third reading
1003.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864-2011
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) to permit construction of 52 townhouse units
Third reading
1004 2013-107-RZ, 24005, 24009 and 24075 Fern Crescent
1004.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7088-2014
To adjust conservation designation boundaries
Final reading
1004.2 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-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density]
Residential), RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) and R-2 (Urban
Residential District) to permit a future subdivision of 34 single family lots
Third reading
Bvlaws for Final Readin�
1005 2013-013-RZ, 24286 102 Avenue
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013
Staff report dated September 30, 2014 recommending final reading
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) to permit the future subdivision into approximately 18
single family lots
Final reading
Council MeetingAgenda
September 30, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 4 of 7
1006 RZ/087/08, 23103 136 Avenue
Staff report dated September 30, 2014 recommending final reading
1006.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014
To revise boundaries of land use designations
Final reading
1006.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012
To rezone from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to R-1 (Residential District), R-2
(Urban Residential District), RS-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density]
Residential), P-1 (Park and School) to permit a future development that
includes 38 single family lots, a municipal park site, and a linear park (trail)
Final reading
1007 Maple Ridge Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 7105-2014
To exempt certain types of properties from municipal property taxation in
2015
Final reading
COMM/TTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDA T/ONS
1100 COMM/TTEE OF THE WHOLE
1100 Minutes - September 15, 2014
The following issues were presented at an earlier Committee of the Whole meeting with
the recommendations being brought to this meeting far 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%pment Services
1101 2014-013-RZ, 23895 124 Avenue and 12507, 12469, 12555 and 12599
240 Street
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that first reading for
properties located at 23895 124 Avenue; 12507, 12469, 12555 and
12599 240 Street be denied.
1102 2014-061-RZ, 24205 Alouette Road
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that first reading for
the property located at 24205 Alouette Road be denied.
Council MeetingAgenda
September 30, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 5 of 7
1103 2014-053-DVP, 10476-10518 McEachern Street (east side lots only)
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that the Corporate
Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2014-053-DVP to increase maximum
building height for eight uphill lots on the east side of McEachern Street.
1104 Award of Contract ITT-EN14-54: Larch Avenue Road Extension
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommendingthat Contract ITT-
EN14-54, Larch Avenue Road Extension be awarded to Frazer Excavation
Ltd., that a 5% contingency be approved, that the Financial Plan be
amended to advance funds from LTC 7840, and further that the Corporate
Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
Financia/ and Corporate Services (including Fire and Po/ice�
1131 2014 Council Expenses
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 providing Council expenses for
2014 updated to the end of August 2014.
For information only
No motion required
Communitv Deve%pment and Recreation Service
1151
Correspondence
1171
Other Committee /ssues
1181
Council MeetingAgenda
September 30, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 6 of 7
1200 STAFFREPORTS
1300 RELEASE OF/TEMS FROM CLOSED COUNC/L
1400 MA YOR'S REPORT
1500 COUNC/LLORS' REPORTS
1600 OTHER MA TTERS DEEMED EXPED/ENT
1700 NOT/CES OFMOT/ONAND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEET/NG
1800 QUEST/ONSFROMTHEPUBL/C
Council MeetingAgenda
September 30, 2014
Council Chamber
Page 7 of 7
1900 ADJOURNMENT
QUESTION PERIOD
The purpose of the Question Period is to provide the public with an opportunity to
ask questions of Council on items that are of concern to them, with the exception of
Public Hearing by-laws which have not yet reached conclusion.
Council will not tolerate any derogatory remarks directed at Council or staff
members.
Each person will be permitted 2 minutes to ask their question (a second
opportunity is permitted if no one else is sitting in the chairs in front of the podium).
Questions must be directed to the Chair of the meeting and not to individual
members of Council. The total Question Period is limited to 15 minutes.
Council reserves the right to defer responding to a question in order to obtain the
information required to provide a complete and accurate response.
Other opportunities are available to address Council including public hearings,
delegations and community forum. The public may also make their views known to
Council by writing or via email and by attending open houses, workshops and
information meetings. Serving on an Advisory Committee is an excellent way to
have a voice in the future of this community.
For more information on these opportunities contact:
Clerk's Department at 604-463-5221 or clerks@mapleridge.ca.
Mayor and Council at mayorandcouncil@mapleridge.ca.
Checked by:
Date:
District of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL MEETING
September 9, 2014
The Minutes of the Municipal Council Meeting held on September 9, 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
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
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 OF REFLECTION
300 INTRODUCTION OFADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS
Item 601 will be dealt with following Item 703
400 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was approved with the revision to deal with Item 601 after
Item 703
501
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 2 of 11
500
501
ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of August 26, 2014
R/2014-388 501
Minutes
Regular Council It was moved and seconded
August 26, 2014
That the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of August 26,
2014 be adopted as circulated
CARRIED
502 Minutes of the Public Hearing of August 26, 2014
R/2014-389
Minutes
Public Hearing
August 26, 2014
502
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Public Hearing of August 26, 2014 be
adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
503 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meeting of August 20
and 25 and September 3, 2014
R/2014-390 503
Minutes
Development Agmt It was moved and seconded
Committee
That the minutes of the Development Agreements Committee
Meeting of August 20 and 25 and September 3, 2014 be
received.
CARRIED
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 3 of 11
600 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
Note: Item 601 was dealt with following Item 703
601 Maple Ridge 140 Year Birthday Bash Preview
- Emerald Pig Theatrical Society
As a preview to Maple Ridge's 140 Year Birthday Bash, Mayor Daykin
announced members of the Emerald Pig Theatrical Society who will portray
past leaders of the community. He introduced James Rowley as Nelson
Lougheed, Chris Carver as John A. Mclvor, John Stuart as Solomon
Mussallem, Christopher Stanwood as Peter Jenewein, Kathleen Hatley as
Betty Dube and Simon Challenger as John Mclvor, Senior.
700 DELEGATIONS
701 Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Arts Council
• Bonnie Telep, Chair
• Lindy Sisson, Executive Director
Ms. Sisson provided information on the entertainment scheduled for the
upcoming season at the ACT. She provided a video with clips of
entertainers scheduled to perform.
702 Ridge Meadows Youth Diversion Program
• Ranjit Kingra, Program Coordinator
• Brendan Koyanagi, Gio Armani
Mr. Koyanagi and Mr. Armani showcased their presentation outlining the
work done by the Ridge Meadows Youth Diversion Program which won first
place as part of the Youth Philanthropy Initiatives.
703 Benjo Holdings Ltd - Joanne Pinkney - President
• Concerns over the Salvation Army Caring Place
Mrs. Pinkney read a statement expressing concerns with the Salvation
Army Caring Place and the impact on the surrounding businesses and
neighbourhood. She provided a PowerPoint presentation outlining social
issues associated with the homeless, particularly in the vicinity of the
Caring Place.
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 4 of 11
Mayor Daykin expressed appreciation to Mrs. Pinkney for her attendance at
the Council Meeting and indicated that in response to her presentation he
will forward the presentation to the Province and that the Good Neighbour
Agreement between the city and the Salvation Army will be reviewed. He
invited Mrs. Pinkney and any other concerned residents to meet with him
for further discussion.
800 UNFINISHED BUSINESS - Nil
900 CORRESPONDENCE - N i I
1000 BYLAWS
Bvlaws for Final Readin�
1001 Maple Ridge Corporate Records Management Bylaw No. 7097-2014
To provide for the retention and disposition of records
Final reading
R/2014-391
BL No. 7097-2014 It was moved and seconded
Final reading
That Bylaw No. 7097-2014 be adopted.
CARRIED
Note: Councillor Hogarth removed himself from the discussion of Item 1002 at
8:11 p.m. as he manages the subject property.
1002 Maple Ridge Highway Closure and Dedication Removal Bylaw No. 7104-
2014
Staff report dated September 9, 2014 recommending final reading
To close the highway located north of property at 12018 Edge Street and
remove the road dedication to allow for a three tower
residential/commercial development
Final reading
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 5 of 11
R/2014-392
BL No. 7104-2014
Final reading
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7104-2014 be adopted.
CARRIED
Note: Councillor Hogarth returned to the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Minutes - August 25, 2014
R/2014-393
Minutes
COW
August 25, 2014
1101
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Committee of the Whole Meeting of
August 25, 2014 be received.
CARRIED
Public Works and Development Services
2014-054-RZ, 23627 and 23598 Dogwood Avenue, Text Amendment
Staff report dated September 8, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7103-2014 to allow for a reduced lot area in
exchange for dedication of developable lot area for tree protection
purposes be given first reading and that the applicant provide further
information as described on Schedules A, B, F and G of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information required
for a Subdivision application.
R/2014-394
2014-054-RZ It was moved and seconded
BL No. 7103-2014
First reading
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:
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 6 of 11
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. 7103 - 2014 be given first reading; and
That the applicant provide further information as described on
Schedules A, B, F and G of the Development Procedures
Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with the information required
for a Subdivision application.
CARRIED
Note: Councillor Masse excused himself from discussion of Item 1102 at
8:15 p.m. as he lives in the vicinity of the property.
1102 2013-103-RZ, 12366 Laity Street, RS-1 to R-1
Staff report dated September 8, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7042-2013 to rezone from RS-1(One Family
Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to permit a subdivision of 4
lots in the first phase and 2 lots in a second phase be given second reading
and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
R/2014-395
2013-103-RZ It was moved and seconded
BL No. 7042-2013
Second reading
Forward to PH
1. That Bylaw No. 7042 - 2013 be given second reading,
and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 7 of 11
N ote
1103
2
�3
That Council require, as a condition of subdivision
approval, the developer to pay to the District an amount
that equals 5% of the market value of the land, as
determined by an independent appraisal, in lieu of
parkland dedication in accordance with Section 941 of
the Local Government Act; and,
That the following terms and conditions be met prior to
final reading:
i. Road dedication on Laity Street, as required;
ii. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for Tree
Protection;
iii. In addition to the Site Profile, a disclosure
statement must be submitted by a Professional
Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of
underground fuel storage tanks on the subject
property. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report
is required to ensure that the subject property is
not a contaminated site.
CARRIED
Councillor Masse returned to the meeting at 8:16 p.m.
Request for Accessory Employee Residence - 28487 108th Avenue
Staff report dated September 8, 2014 recommending that the practice of
seeking approval from the Agricultural Land Commission for a non-farm use
application for an accessory employee residential use on lands within the
Agricultural Land Reserve continue.
R/2014-396
28487 108 Avenue
Issue Building Permit
1103.1
It was moved and seconded
That staff be directed to issue a Building Permit for the
proposed dwelling unit at 28487 108th Avenue, Maple Ridge,
subject to meeting all the relevant code and bylaw
req u i rements.
CARRIED
The Manager of Legislative Services advised that the resolution being
presented to the Council Meeting differs from the resolution in the staff
report presented at the September 8, 2014 Committee of the Whole Report.
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 8 of 11
R/2014-397
Requests for
Accessory
1103.2
It was moved and seconded
1. That all future requests for an accessory employee
residential use, as defined in the Maple Ridge Zoning
Bylaw No. 3510-1985, be required to apply for a non-
farm use application as outlined in the Agricultural Land
Commission Act Policy #9; and
2. That future reports include an alternative that identifies
Council's authority under Section 18 of the ALC Act to
allow an additional residence that is necessary for farm
use.
CARRIED
1104 Award of Contract ITT-EN14-46: Lorne Avenue Pedestrian Improvements
Staff report dated September 8, 2014 recommending that Contract ITT-
EN14-46: Lorne Avenue Pedestrian Improvements be awarded to Imperial
Paving Limited, that a contract contingency be approved, that the Financial
Plan be amended to reallocate funds from LTD 8861; and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
R/2014-398
Award of Contract
Lorne Avenue
It was moved and seconded
That Contract ITT-EN14-46, Lorne Avenue Pedestrian
Improvements, be awarded to Imperial Paving Limited in the
amount of $353,241.92 excluding taxes; and
That a contract contingency of 5% or $17,633.75 be
approved to address additional contract items; and
That the Financial Plan be amended to reallocate
$103,290.00 from LTC 8861; and
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the
contract.
Councillor Hogarth - OPPOSED
CARRIED
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 9 of 11
N ote:
1131
Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police�
Councillor Bell excused herself from discussion of Item 1131 at 8:52 p.m.
as she has a child attending Meadowridge school.
2015 Permissive Tax Exemptions
Staff report dated September 8, 2014 recommending that Maple Ridge Tax
Exemption Bylaw No. 7105-2014 be given first, second and third readings.
R/2014-399
BL No. 7105-2014
Three readings
N ote:
1151
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7105-2014 be given first, second and third
readings.
CARRIED
Councillor Bell returned to the meeting at 8:53 p.m.
Communitv Development and Recreation Service
Panorama Strata LMS - 4011 Proposed Bylaw Revision
Staff report dated September 8, 2014 recommending the amendment of
Panorama LMS 4011 bylaws to reflect cost distribution in place since
1999.
R/2014-400
Panorama LMS
4011 Bylaws
Amend
It was moved and seconded
That staff be directed to work with the Panorama Stata
Council to amend the Panorama LMS 4011 Bylaws to reflect
the cost distribution that has been in place since 1999.
CARRIED
Correspondence - Nil
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 10 of 11
OtherCommittee Issues - Nil
1200 STAFF REPORTS - N i l
1300 RELEASE OF ITEMS FROM CLOSED COUNCIL - Nil
1400 MAYOR'S REPORT
Mayor Daykin attended the True North Fraser Bluegrass Festival and a
meeting of the volunteers with the Maple Ridge Ham Radio Club.
1500 COUNCILLORS' REPORTS
Councillor Masse
Councillor Masse attended a meeting of the Maple Ridge Community
Heritage Commission. He encouraged members of the public to attend
upcoming discussions regarding Riverview and to attend the 50tn
Anniversary celebration of the Maple Ridge Funeral Chapel.
Councillor Dueck
Councillor Dueck attended a Community Policing Open House and a
meeting of the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society.
Councillor Bell
Councillor Bell reported that the committees she sits on have not had
meetings since the return of Council from summer break.
Councillor Hogarth
Councillor Hogarth attended a meeting of the Metro Vancouver
Environment and Parks Committee.
Councillor Morden
Councillor Morden attended meetings of the Ridge Meadows Seniors
Society, the Downtown Maple Ridge Business Improvement Association
and a Maple Ridge Towing event. He encouraged residents to attend and
support the upcoming Terry Fox Run.
1600 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT - N i I
1700 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS - Nil
Council Minutes
September 9, 2014
Page 11 of 11
1800 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Laura Zeller, Owner, Canvas Hair Salon
Ms. Zeller expressed concern over safety and the impact on her business as well as
other businesses in the area as a result of negative behaviours on the streets. She
asked whether consideration has been given to the introduction of a police force
other than the RCMP, whether dealing with crime is a direct priority of the City
Planning and Economic Development Offices, whether the return of new street
population to perspective communities of origin has been considered and whether
inclusion and requests for local services to transitioning at-risk individuals out of a
life of drugs and crime have been made.
Ms. Zeller provided her notes to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Resident
The resident advised that she lives in the immediate vicinity of the Caring Place and
outlined the issues she has been dealing with relating to criminal activity and
homelessness which she feels result from the location of the Caring Place. She
asked for more policing, more Bylaws officers and more effective bylaws.
Grover Telford
Mr. Telford expressed concern with the issues brought forward by local residents and
business owners which they feel result from the location of the Caring Place. He
asked whether thought has been given to a relocation of the Caring Place.
Brad Dollv
Mr. Dolly echoed the sentiments of previous speakers. He expressed concern that
the issues raised by residents and businesses in the vicinity of the Caring Place over
the last 10 years have not been addressed.
1900 ADJOURNMENT - 9:20 p.m.
E. Daykin, Mayor
Certified Correct
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
City of Maple Ridge
PUBL/C HEAR/NG
September 16, 2014
The Minutes of the Public Hearing held in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 11995 Haney
Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia on September 16, 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
Councillor M. Morden
Appointed Staff
J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services
C. Carter, Director of Planning
C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental
Services
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
F. Quinn, General Manager of Public Works and
Development
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 September 30, 2014.
The Mayor then called upon the Manager of Development and Environmental Services to
present the following items on the agenda:
1) 2013-O80-RZ
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7027-2013
Lega I:
Location:
From
To:
Purpose:
Lot 7, Section 3, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 11176
24086 104 Avenue
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
To permit a future development of 18 townhouse units.
The Manager of Legislative Services advised that no correspondence was received on this
item.
502
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 2 of 9
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation
providing the following information:
.
.
.
.
Application Information
Subject Map
OCP Context
Neighbourhood Context
Site Characteristics
Development Proposal
Proposed Site Plan
Building Elevations
Proposed Landscape Plan
Terms and Conditions
There being no comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
2a) 2012-034—RZ
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6920-2012
Lega I:
Location:
Purpose:
From:
To:
And
Purpose:
Lot 6, District Lots 241 and 242, Group 1, New Westminster District,
Plan 24517
12101208 Street
To amend Schedule "B" of the Official Community Plan
Urban Residential
Conservation
To amend Schedule "C" of the Official Community Plan to add to
Conservation
2b) 2012-034-RZ
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6921-2012
Legal: Lot 6, District Lots 241 and 242, Group 1, New Westminster District,
Plan 24517
Location: 12101 208 Street
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 3 of 9
To
Purpose:
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
To permit the future construction of 8 townhouse units
The Manager of Legislative Services advised that letters in opposition to the application
were received from Mark Saunders, Kelly Bryans, Lurinda Rinehart, Robyn Berg, Danielle
King-Coe and Travis Coe and that a letter commenting on conservation of habitat was
received from Wilhelmina Budau.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation
providing the following information:
.
.
.
.
Application Information
Subject Map
OCP Context
Neighbourhood Context
Site Characteristics
Development Proposal
Building Elevations
Landscaping Plan
Terms and Conditions
There being no further comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
3a) 2011-019-RZ
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6871-2011
Lega I:
LOCATION:
PURPOSE:
FROM:
T0:
AND
PURPOSE:
Lot 9, District Lots 406 and 408, Group 1, New Westminster District,
Plan 29456
10515 240 Street
To amend Schedule "B" of the Official Community Plan
Urban Residential
Conservation
To amend Schedule "C" of the Official Community Plan to add to
Conservation.
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 4 of 9
3b) 2011-019-RZ
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6864-2011
Legal: 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
Location: 10515 and 10595 240 Street and 23950 Zeron Avenue
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
To: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
Purpose: To permit the future construction of 52 townhouse units.
The Manager of Legislative Services advised that no correspondence was received on this
item.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services advised on changes to the
application which warranted it coming forward to Public Hearing again. He gave a power
point presentation providing the following information:
• Application Information
• Subject Map
• OCP Context
• Neighbourhood Context
• Site Characteristics
• Development Proposal
• Proposed Site Plan
• Elevations
• Terms and Conditions
Tanya MacDonald
Ms. MacDonald asked whether there will be access to the proposed development from
Zeron Avenue
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services advised that there will be no
vehicle access to Zeron Avenue from the proposed subdivision.
There being no comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 5 of 9
4a) 2013-107-RZ
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7088-2014
Legal: North 126 feet Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772), Lot 15, Section
22, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 9364;
Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772), Lot 15, Except: North 126 feet,
Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 9364;
Lot 30, Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan
24120
Location: 24005, 24009 and 24075 Fern Crescent
Purpose: Amendment to Official Community Plan Schedule "A", Chapter 10.3,
Part VI, A- Silver Valley, Figure 2- Land Use Plan, and Figure 3D -
Horse Hamlet for that parcel or tract of land and premises known
and described above
From: Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and
Low/Medium Density Residential
To: Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential and
Low/Medium Density Residential
4b) 2013-107-RZ
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014
Legal: North 126 feet Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772), Lot 15, Section 22,
Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 9364;
Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772), Lot 15, Except: North 126 feet,
Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 9364;
Lot 30, Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan
24120
Location: 24005, 24009 and 24075 Fern Crescent
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 6 of 9
To: RS-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential) ,
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) and
R-2 (Urban Residential District)
Purpose: To permit the future subdivision of 34 single family lots.
The Manager of Legislative Services advised that correspondence opposing the application
was received from Lyn Peters, Bill and Susan Scott, Gavin Roache, Dennis and Sue Arne,
Kathleen Newman, Redd Oosten, Tim Bishop and Donna Clay and that correspondence in
favour of the application was received from Dr. William Lim, James Hawboldt, Steve
Campbell, Frank Zimbaro, Po Shih and Ping Tsang, David Johnson, Diane Todd and Richard
and Coleen Chan. She also advised that correspondence expressing concerns and making
comments from Maureen Fisher, Greg and Hilda Desjarlais and Rebecca and John Moore.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation
providing the following information:
• Application Information
• Subject Map
• OCP Context
• Neighbourhood Context
• Site Characteristics
• Development Proposal
• Proposed Subdivision Plan
• Terms and Conditions
Lynne Potter
Ms. Potter spoke in opposition to the application. She read from a petition in opposition to
the application which outlined the concerns of residents. She provided a photograph of the
Alouette River to show the silt levels in the river behind her yard.
Jeanette (Redd) Oosten
Ms. Oosten is opposed to the application. She read from a prepared statement outlining
why she is opposed. She provided the material to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Jennifer Potter and Amanda Potter - speaking on behalf of Ron Potter
Ms. Potter read a letter written by her father, Mr. Ron Potter, expressing concerns with the
proposed development and outlining his opposition to the application. The letter was
submitted to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Elizabeth Rosbv - speaking on behalf of Bill and Susan Scott
Ms. Rosby read a statement prepared by Bill and Susan Scott speaking in opposition to the
proposed development. The statement was submitted to the Manager of Legislative
Services
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 7 of 9
Chris Mundv
Mr. Mundy did not feel the proposed development is suitable for the area. He outlined his
reasons as to why he is opposed to the application which included impact on the
environment, a lack of protection for wildlife, lack of infrastructure and the inability to leave
the area in a disaster as there are no secondary routes out.
Gordon Smith
Mr. Smith spoke in favour of the application as he felt that the buildings currently in
disrepair on the site will be removed, there could be a possible increase in services and
perhaps drops in the prices of housing in Maple Ridge. He expressed concern with traffic in
the area.
Carla Krentz - speaking on behalf of Janice Krentz
Ms. Krentz read a letter prepared by Janice Krentz expressing opposition to the proposed
development and providing reasons as to why she feels the proposed development should
not be approved. The letter was submitted to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Joel Krentz - speaking on behalf of Robert Krentz
Mr. Krentz read a letter prepared by Robert Krentz stating his opposition to the proposed
development and providing reasons as to why he is opposed. The letter was submitted to
the Manager of Legislative Services.
Doug Stanger
Mr. Stanger is not in favour of the proposed development. He read a statement outlining the
reasons for his opposition to the application. His statement was submitted to the Manager
of Legislative Services.
Loralee Clarke
Ms. Clarke is opposed to the application and read a statement providing reasons for her
opposition. She submitted her written statement to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Patricia Morrison
Ms. Morrison read a statement outlining her concerns and reasons for opposing the
proposed development.
John Dale
Mr. Dale spoke in opposition to the application. He read from a statement expressing his
concerns with the proposed development and listing reasons as to why he is opposed.
Wes Eaton
Mr. Eaton is opposed to the application. He feels that the Official Community Plan is not
being followed and that a second access route to Silver Valley is a necessity prior to further
development. He did not agree with the density proposed.
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 8 of 9
Tim Bishop
Mr. Bishop is opposed to the application. He read a statement expressing his concerns with
the proposed development.
Harvey Gigun
Mr. Gigun read a statement in opposition to the application. He expressed concern over the
impact of increased traffic and the nature of the proposed development on Fern Crescent.
He submitted his written statement to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Lvnne Potter
Ms. Potter continued to read from a petition in opposition to the application. She expressed
concern over the increased potential of a forest fire in the area. She advised that persons
she spoke with during the collection of petition names all expressed concerned with the
increased traffic. Ms. Potter requested consideration of deer crossing signs to prevent
deer/vehicle accidents and asked that higher density for this area not be considered. She
submitted the petition to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Patricia Morrison
Ms. Morrison agreed with the suggestion of a deer crossing and advised that deer currently
sleep on the land proposed for development. She continued to read her statement in
opposition to the application. The statement was submitted to the Manager of Legislative
Services.
Tim Bishop
Mr. Bishop continued to read from a statement expressing his opposition to the application.
He suggested methods of development which could bring revenue and tourism into the
area. He advised that a copy of his statement was provided to Mayor and Council prior to
the meeting.
John Dale
Mr. Dale continued to read from his statement outlining reasons for his opposition to the
application. He provided a PowerPoint presentation with further details on why he is
opposed to the proposed development.
John Dale
Mr. Dale continued his PowerPoint presentation during 3Yd call.
Eric Phillips
Mr. Phillips spoke to issues of concern for the Fraternal Order of Eagles, whose hall is
located on Fern Crescent. He advised that traffic issues, particularly speeding are the main
concern. He felt that the road needed to be improved and that development should not go
forward until the road situation is dealt with.
There being no further comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
Public Hearing Minutes
September 16, 2014
Page 9 of 9
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
8:50 p.m.
E. Daykin, Mayor
Certified Correct
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS COMMITTEE
MINUTES
September 3, 2014
Mayor's Office
PRESENT:
Ernie Daykin, Mayor
Chairman
J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Member
1. NOORI, Aziz Ahmed and Farida
LEGAL:
LOCATION:
OWNER:
REQUIRED AGREEMENTS:
Jill Holgate, RecordingSecretary
Lot D, District Lot 248, Group 1, New Westminster
District, Plan NWP13448
21396 River Road
Aziz Ahmed and Farida Noori
Detached Garden Suite
Detached Garden Suite Parking Covenant
THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDWG
DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO NOORI, AZIZ AHMED AND FARIDA.
CARRIED
J.L. (Jim Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Memb r
503
N
District of
Langley
0
21396 River Road
�
o ��� � 0 25 50 75 100 m
� ...;:�:,�;•..., �
� �� _�,;,;�x���•�.. 0 90 180 270 360 ft
y... ,_._..
� . � TheCorporationofiheDlstriclofMapleRidgemakes
� '�' ofinelnformatio9ahownonthisr� �orpresentstatus
Scale:1:2,5001 '�`����`'- . Y -"� Department:Engineering Date:Sep3,2014
FRdCco� n ��..
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITTEE
MINUTES
September 3, 2014
Mayor's Office
PRESENT:
Ernie Daykin, Mayor
Chairman
J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Member
1. TEDDER,1ohn Christopher
LEGAL:
LOCATION:
OWNER:
REQUIRED AGREEMENTS
Jiil Holgate, RecordingSecretary
Lot 1, District Lot 242, Group 1, New Westminster District,
Plan NWP10831
21203 Dewdney Trunk Road
John Christopher Tedder
Detached Garden Suite
Detached Garden Suite Parking Covenant
THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPOR,4TE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING
DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO TEDDER, JOHN CHRISTOPHER.
CARRIED
J.L. (Jim) Ru
Member
�
Chief Administrative Officer
District of
Langley
21203 Dewdney Trk Rd
� 0 10 20 30 40 m
ml~'�' � 0 30 60 90 120 ft
The Corporation of �h e District of Maple Ridge makes
no g uaranlee reg arding the amura cy or present siaWs
oftheinfarmation shown on ihis map.
Scale:1:1,0001 '� �`�� - ��. °�� Department:Engineering Date:Sep4,2014
FRd.Cco o �
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITTEE
MINUTES
September 4, 2014
Mayor's Office
PRESENT:
Ernie Daykin, Mayor
Chairman
J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Member
1. VAN SCHAGEN, Arie, Cornelia, Brian and Lisa
LEGAL:
LOCATION:
Jill Holgate, RecordingSecretary
Lot 2, District Lot 247, New Westminster District, Plan
N W P80407
21428 River Road
OWNER: Arie Van Schagen
Cornelia Van Schagen
Brian Van Schagen
Lisa Van Schagen
REQUIRED AGREEMENTS: Detached Garden Suite
Detached Garden Suite Parking Covenant
THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING
DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO VAN SCHAGEN, Arie, Cornelia, Brian and Lisa.
Ernie D in,
Chair
CARRIED
J.L. (Jim)
Member
� ��'���-_�
le, Chief Administrative Officer
N
District of
Langley
a
N
�
0
U
N
0
21428 River Road
0 25 50 75 100 m
���� 0 90 980 270 360 ft
� . � TheCorporationoftl�eDistric[ofMapleRidgemakes
no g uarantee reg arding the axuracy or p rese nt status
ofthe informalion shown on this map.
Scale: 1:2,500' `� � F^ �� `'` �"' ``� Department: Engineering Date: Sep 3, 2014
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS COMMITTEE
MINUTES
September 8, 2014
Mayor's Office
PRESENT:
Ernie Daykin, Mayor
Chairman
J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Member
1. SEHN, Lawrence, Barbara, Adam and Rebecca
LEGAL:
LOCATION:
OWNER:
REQUIRED AGREEMENTS:
Jiil Holgate, RecordingSecretary
Lot B, Section 23, Township 12, New Westminster District,
Plan 16420
25135 124 Avenue
Lawrence Sehn
Barbara Sehn
Adam Sehn
Rebecca Sehn
Sump Pump Covenant
THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING
DOCUMENT AS IT RELATES TO SEHN, Lawrence, Barbara, Adam and Rebecca.
Ernie
Chair
C CARRIED
/ �F
r ,' 1
+ + .��..�� yC
� � �.----""""u......,�-..,H
�
J.L. (�i�i) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
M em kisr
N
District of
Langley
SANITARY SUMP PUMP COVENANT
25135 124 AVENUE
° ��
- �.,
o -
�
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
LICENSES, PERMITS 8 BYLAWS DEPT.
Scale: 12,000 � ��� __.__ _°�{� DATE: Sep 5, 2014 FILE: Untitied BY: JSTOLL
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTS COMMITfEE
MINUTES
September 16, 2014
Mayor's Office
PRESENT:
Ernie Daykin, Mayor
Chairman
J.L. (Jim) Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Member
1. RZ/087/08
LEGAL:
LOCATION:
OWNER:
REQUIRED AGREEMENTS:
Jill Holgate, RecordingSecretary
Lot 10, Section 32, Township 12, New Westminster
District, Plan 38408, Except Plans BCP48908 and
EPP27588 and EPP44846
23103 136 Ave
Campton Services Corp.
Rezoning Servicing Agreement
Geotechnical Covenant
THAT THE MAYOR AND CORPORATE OFFICER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AND SEAL THE PRECEDING
DOCUMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO RZ/087/08.
CARRIED
J.L (Jim) ule, Chief Administrative Officer
Member
,'
SCALE 1:3,000
District of
Langley
� . � ��
• •-.•.. •_ •
� - •
'MAPLE�RI�OGE� � � � �
I �. e.itin.�awmt'n=
DATE: Mar 13, 2012 FILE: RZ/087/OS
BY: PC
; MAPLE RIOGE
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT
City of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
Housing Action Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
MEETING DATE: September 15, 2014
MEETING: Workshop
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the finalized version of the Housing Action Plan
(HAP). The HAP has been reviewed by the Social Planning Advisory Committee (SPAC) on August 27,
2014. The following resolution was passed:
That the Social Planning Advisory Committee endorse the Final Housing Action Plan, and that the
Final Housing Action Plan be forwarded to Council for approval.
The final version of the Housing Action Plan is included as Appendix A.
Completion of a Housing Action Plan is a requirement of the Regional Growth Strategy. Following this,
the Regional Context Statement in the Official Community Plan will be updated to identify how the
policies align with achieving Regional Growth Strategy's Goal Four to Create Complete Communities.
If endorsed, a draft Implementation Plan will be brought back to Council for consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That the Housing Action Plan, prepared by CitySpaces Consulting dated August 2014, be
endorsed.
2. That staff be directed to prepare an Implementation Plan for the Housing Action Plan based on
the framework outlined in the report dated September 15, 2014, and titled "Housing Action
Plan".
DISCUSSION:
a) Background
The Housing Action Plan is a Council-endorsed process led by the Social Planning Advisory
Committee (SPAC), providing leadership and making recommendations on decision items to
Council. The Housing Action Plan began in September, 2013 with the hiring of CitySpaces
Consulting. Over the last year, the Housing Action Plan process has provided analysis on the
current housing situation in Maple Ridge and undergone comprehensive consultation with the
community. This produced a Working Draft of the HAP in the spring, which was further refined to
reflect input from SPAC, Council, staff and the community.
The following table shows the process over the last year for the Housing Action Plan.
HAP WORKPLAN LEVEL OF COMPLETION
Council Update July 21, 2013 Complete
Council Update September 9, 2013 Complete
Research and analysis of the current housing
context (September-November, 2013) Complete
Situation Report (December, 2013)
Consultation program design and scheduled Complete
events (October, 2013 - March, 2014)
Council Update February 3, 2014 Complete
Consultation Program report Complete
(March-April 2013)
Council Update (April, 14, 2014) Complete
Draft Housing Action Plan (May, 2014) Complete
SPAC Workshop (May 22, 2014) Complete
Presentation of Working Draft HAP to Council Complete
(June 16, 2014)
Public Open Review (June 24 - July 28, 2014) Complete
Final Edits (August, 2014) Complete
SPAC Review (August 27, 2014) Complete
Presentation of finalized HAP to Council September 15, 2014
b) Housing Action Plan Process:
There are three key milestones of the Housing Action Plan:
The Situation Report provides a baseline of information about the current status of housing
in Maple Ridge. It is a snapshot of the current demographics and financial information
related to housing in the City. It includes a community profile, information on both market
and non-market housing, and a summary of the current legislation and policy at the
municipal, provincial and federal levels that regulates and guides the provision of housing in
Maple Ridge. The Situation Report was finalized in January 2014 and reported to Council on
February 3, 2014.
The Consultation Summary Report presented the results from the consultation program that
was developed to engage with targeted stakeholders and the community about housing in
Maple Ridge. Outcomes include the identification of those groups in the City that are most in
need of housing. The groups identified as experiencing the greatest challenges finding
housing are:
o Renters
o Seniors
o Low-income and Single-Parent Families
o At-Risk Women
2
• The issues that emerged as a result of the consultation program regarding housing issues
and opportunities in Maple Ridge were grouped into themes which are:
o Housing Mix and Homeownership
o A Mix of Housing Options
o Market Rental Housing
o Non-Market Housing
o Seniors
o Development Approvals Process
o Leadership Role
The Consultation Summary report was received in March 2014 and presented to Council on April 14,
2014.
The third milestone for the Housing Action Plan process is the final version of the Housing
Action Plan, which is the subject of this report. The finalized document was endorsed by
SPAC on August 27, 2014, and forwarded to Council for endorsement.
c) Working Draft Revisions
A working draft of the Housing Action Plan was submitted by the consultant in May, 2014.
Revisions were made to the Working Draft following a workshop with SPAC, and a staff workshop
on May 22, 2014, and the June 16, 2014 Council Workshop. The Working Draft of the HAP was
revised to reflect this input, revising some of the language to increase clarity. One substantial
change was the following:
• A strategy was added to protect existing rental housing. Strategy #8 Minimize the Loss of
Existing Rental Housing was added to the Market and Non-Market category.
The revised document became the Draft HAP, and made available for Open Review from June 24
to July 28, 2014.
d) Open Review Process and Revisions
The Open Review consisted of an online questionnaire and community consultation activity at a
local community event on July 26, 2014. In each activity, community members were asked to
choose their top three priorities from the 18 strategies in the HAP framework, and provide
additional comments about the Housing Action Plan. The results of the online questionnaire are
attached as Appendix B.
There were 30 respondents to the online questionnaire and 52 respondents at the community
consultation event, which was held at the July 26, Haney Farmers' Market. The top three
priorities for each consultation activity are listed below with the respective number of
respondents for each:
Online Questionnaire:
1. Strategy #4 - Create new rental housing opportunities -12
2. Strategy #11- Introduce a community amenity policy for affordable housing - 9
3. Strategy #1- Support the development of a mix of housing types - 8
3
HAP Community Outreach
1. Strategy #15 - Continue to support local community groups - 20
2. Strategy #1- Support the development of a mix of housing types - 18
3. Strategy #6 - Expand the garden suites program - 15
Revisions
1. The top priorities selected by community members are reflected in the Actionable Timeline
(page 28), which is a general timeline for implementation of the HAP. It proposes short,
medium, and long-term time steps for the proposed strategies to be implemented. All of the
strategies identified as top priorities are now in the short-term time step to reflect their
importance based on community input.
2. The vision statement was changed to address concerns raised at the July 16, 2014 Council
Workshop and the July 2, 2014 SPAC meeting. The revised vision statement reads as follows:
Access to safe, affordable, and appropriate housing that meets the diverse and changing
needs of the community is a priority.
e) Housing Action Plan Framework
The Housing Action Plan framework is composed of a Vision, Goals, Principles, and Strategies to
support the development of market and non-market housing in Maple Ridge. The content of the
framework reflects gaps and opportunities that were identified in the Situation Report and the
Consultation program. For reference, the Vision, Principles and Goals and Strategies have been
provided here.
Vision Statement
Access to safe, affordable, and appropriate housing that meets the diverse and changing
needs of the community is a priority.
Key Principles
1. A community priority.
2. Achievable.
3. Incentive-driven.
4. Pragmatic and evidence-based.
5. Aligns with current policy and practice.
6. Housing issues are multi-faceted.
7. Partnerships are key.
8. Community support and understanding.
9. Responsive to change.
10. Relevant and effective.
Goals
1. To improve housing choice for all current and future households.
2. To encourage the provision of atfordable, rental, and special needs housing in Maple Ridge.
3. To increase the opportunity for low income residents and those with unique needs to access
appropriate housing and supports.
4. To raise awareness and increase support for initiatives that improve housing choice and
affordability.
5. To build the capacity of the community to innovate and improve access and opportunity for
affordable housing and housing choice.
4
Strategies
Housing Mix & Innovation
1. Support the development of a mix of housing forms.
2. Incentivize medium density development.
3. Introduce an adaptable housing policy.
Market & Non-Market Rental Housing
4. Create new rental housing opportunities.
5. Continue to monitor secondary suites policies and bylaws.
6. Expand the garden suites program.
7. Maintain rental housing standards.
8. Minimize the loss of existing rental housing.
9. Support the non-market housing sector.
Financial Measures
10. Expand the density bonusing practice.
11. Introduce a community amenity policy for atfordable housing.
12. Establish a housing reserve fund.
13. Use financial incentives to support housing goals.
14. Continue to review opportunities to lease land.
Information & Advocacy
15. Continue to support local community groups.
16. Continue to advocate to senior levels ofgovernment.
17. Continue to educate and create awareness.
18. Expand or enhance the roles of advisory groups to assist with HAP implementation.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon endorsement of the Housing Action Plan, the next steps will be the preparation of a draft
Implementation Plan for all of the strategies contained within the Housing Action Plan. This draft
Implementation Plan will be presented in a future report that will include a discussion on priorities,
timing and financial capacity for Council's consideration.
CONCLUSION:
Under the leadership of SPAC, the Housing Action Plan has undergone a comprehensive process
including input from the community, technical assistance from staff, and Council feedback. This
process has resulted in a plan that is specifically designed to strengthen and enhance the existing
tools and practices that facilitate the development of market and non-market housing in Maple
Ridge.
5
With the endorsement of the HAP, the City will be able to update the Regional Context Statement in
the Official Community Plan to show how the City is meeting its commitment to the Regional Growth
Strategy's Goal Fourto Develop Complete Communities.
"Original signed by Siobhan Murphy"
Prepared by: Siobhan Murphy, MA, MCIP, RPP
Planner II
"Original signed by Sue Wheeler"
Approved by: Sue Wheeler
Director Community Services
"Original signed by Jim Charlebois"
Concurrence: Jim Charlebois, MCIP, RPP
Manager Community Planning
"Original signed by Kelly Swift"
Approved by: Kelly Swift
General Manager, Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services
"Original signed by Jim Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A- Housing Action Plan, August 2014
Appendix B- Online Questionnaire results
Appendix C- HAP Consultation - Community Outreach July 26, 2014
C�
APPENDIX A
MAPLE RIDG
Housi ng
Action Pla n
Housing Action Plan
FI NAL
AUGUST 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................1
1 � INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................3
OVERVIEW..................................................................................................................................................................3
FRAMEWORK FOR HOUSING ACTION PLAN ............................................................................................4
2 � TH E ROLE OF TH E DISTRICT ...............................................................................................7
3 � RECAP OF ISSUES .....................................................................................................................8
AFFORDABLE HOMEOWNERSHIP ..................................................................................................................8
MARKET RENTAL HOUSING ..............................................................................................................................8
SENIORSHOUSING ................................................................................................................................................9
NON-MARKET & SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING ...........................................................................................9
OTHERISSUES ..........................................................................................................................................................10
4 � PROPOSED STRATEGIES ........................................................................................................11
HOUSING MIX & INNOVATION ......................................................................................................................11
MARKET & NON-MARKET RENTAL HOUSING ........................................................................................16
FINANCIALMEASURES ........................................................................................................................................21
I N FORMATION AN D ADVOCACY ....................................................................................................................25
SUMMARY OF TOOLS & ACTIONS .................................................................................................................27
5 � IMPLEMENTATION ...................................................................................................................28
APPENDIXA .......................................................................................................................................30
APPENDIXB .......................................................................................................................................33
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan � August 2014
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report represents the final stage of the development of a Housing Action Plan (HAP) for Maple Ridge.
The earlier stages, a Situation Report and Consultation Summary Report, involved background research and
community consultation that was intended to assess the local housing market conditions and identify
housing challenges and gaps. This HAP report outlines a framework and set of strategies and actions that
will guide decision-making related to market and non-market housing in the District of Maple Ridge.
The following framework outlines a vision, key principles, and goals upon which the Housing Action Plan
strategies and actions correspond.
'��ON
Access to safe, affordable, and appropriate housing that meets the diverse and changing needs of the
community is a priority.
K�, �� :IP
1. A community priority.
2. Achievable.
3. Incentive-driven.
4. Pragmatic and evidence-based.
5. Aligns with current policy and practice.
6. Housing issues are multi-faceted.
7. Partnerships are key.
8. Community support and understanding.
9. Responsive to change.
10. Relevant and effective.
",LS
1. To improve housing choice for all current and future households.
2. To encourage the provision of affordable, rental, and special needs housing in Maple Ridge.
3. To increase the opportunity for low income residents and those with unique needs to access appropriate
housing and supports.
4. To raise awareness and increase support for initiatives that improve housing choice and affordability.
5. To build the capacity of the community to innovate and improve access and opportunity for affordable
housing and housing choice.
A set of specific actions have been recommended to assist the District with implementing the following
strategies:
�ou��ng Mix & Innovation
1. Support the development of a mix of housing forms.
2. Incentivize medium density development.
3. Introduce an adaptable housing policy.
4. Create new rental housing opportunities.
5. Continue to monitor secondary suites policies and bylaws.
6. Expand the garden suites program.
7. Maintain rental housing standards.
8. Support the non-market housing sector.
9. Minimize the loss of existing rental housing.
M �s
10. Expand the density bonusing practice.
11. Introduce a community amenity policy for affordable housing.
12. Establish a housing reserve fund.
13. Use financial incentives to support housing goals.
14. Continue to review opportunities to lease land.
15. Continue to support local community groups.
16. Continue to advocate to senior levels of government.
17. Continue to educate and create awareness.
18. Expand or enhance the roles of advisory groups to assist with HAP implementation.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 2
1 I NTRODUCTION
OVERVIEW
APPROACH & PURPOSE
The District of Maple Ridge engaged CitySpaces Consulting Ltd. to prepare a Housing Action Plan. A Housing
Action Plan (HAP) assesses the local housing market conditions; identifies housing challenges and gaps
along the housing continuum; and outlines tools to address these issues. A Housing Action Plan also
provides the framework for the District of Maple Ridge to work with other levels of government, the private
sector, and non-profit organizations to facilitate the development of housing.
As the role of municipalities is to act as a facilitator, as opposed to a builder, it is further noted that a
Housing Action Plan assists municipalities to develop the tools, policies, and regulations that allow them to
effectively respond to development applications and to advocate to other levels of government towards the
development of affordable, rental, and special needs housing. When endorsed, the HAP will guide decision-
making related to market and non-market housing in the District of Maple Ridge.
Maple Ridge's Housing Action Plan consists of three major phases:
1. THE SITUATION REPORT — Assessing the housing context in Maple Ridge by identifying and analyzing key
housing data and relevant information.
2. CONSULTATION REPORT — A series of workshops, a community questionnaire, and additional
engagement approaches to identify gaps in the housing continuum and identify issues affecting specific
population groups, such as seniors and young families.
3. HOUSING ACTION PLAN REPORT (Current) — In response to the issues and gaps identified in earlier
stages, a set of policy directions, strategies, and actions are recommended for review and consideration
by Council and the Community.
Figure 1.1 outlines the different phases of work in the Housing Action Plan and what stage the project is
currently at.
FIGURE 1.1: Housing Action Plan Project Outline
REVIEW OF
STATISTICS SITUATION
& POLICY REPORT
DOCUMENTS
ONLINE STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION
& POP-UP yyORKSHOPS REPORT
OUESTIONNAIRE
IDENTIFY GAPS PREPARING
IN HOUSING TOOLBOX OF DRAFT HOUSING
CONTINUUM POLICIES & ACTION PLAN
STRATEGIES
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014
The following framework outlines the overall vision for the Housing Action Plan, as well as a set of principles
and five overarching goals. On the basis of this framework, a proposed set of strategies and actions have
been developed to respond to the issues and gaps identified by the background research and community
consultation completed in earlier stages.
V
The following statement presents the District's vision and commitment towards housing in Maple Ridge:
`Access to safe, affordable, and appropriate housing that meets the diverse
and changing needs of the cornmunity is a priority."
KEY DDII►I/'IDI ES
The Housing Action Plan will be guided by the following 10 principles:
1. A community priority. Housing choice and affordability are social sustainability goals to which the
District is committed.
2. Achievable. Strategies and actions will be achievable and within thejurisdiction of the municipality to
implement.
3. Incentive-driven. Financial and non-financial incentives are used to encourage innovative approaches
and new forms of housing.
4. Pragmatic and evidence-based. Strategies and actions will be guided by local housing need as well as the
market realities.
5. Dovetails with current policy and practice. Strategies and actions will build on and dovetail with existing
plans, policies, initiatives, and resources.
6. Housing issues are multi-faceted. Multiple approaches and solutions are needed for every
neighbourhood and project.
7. Partnerships are key. The District will collaborate with the private sector, senior government, its
municipal neighbours, the region, and community agencies in the interests of improving housing choice
and affordability.
8. Community support and understanding. Engagement with the community is a pre-requisite to new
initiatives; it helps to inform and seek input.
9. Responsive to change. Ongoing research and review of changes in local needs and priorities is
important.
10. Relevant and effective. Ongoing monitoring of the Housing Action Plan progress will ensure it continues
to relevant and effective.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 4
""AL�
1. To improve housing choice for all current and future households.
2. To increase and enhance the stock of rental housing in Maple Ridge.
3. To support low income residents and those with unique needs to access appropriate housing and
supports.
4. To raise awareness and increase support for initiatives that improve housing choice and affordability.
5. To build the capacity of the community to innovate and improve access and opportunity for affordable
housing and housing choice.
In Canada, housing affordability usually refers to housing that does not exceed 30% to 35� of household
income. While this is generally a good benchmark to use, the methods and data sources used to estimate the
population living in affordable housing can often be challenged. For the purposes of Maple Ridge's Housing
Action Plan, it is suggested that two broader definitions of housing be used to inform policy and planning.
Affordable housing is housing that is adequate in standard and does not cost so much that
individuals and families have trouble paying for other necessities such as food, health, and
transportation on an ongoing basis.
Housing choice refers to a household's ability to have alternative housing options within
their community in terms of the type of housing, location, number of bedrooms, or other
factors to meet their current and changing needs as they age through the different stages
of their lifecycle.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014
Th� ..
The housing continuum is a visual concept used to describe and categorize different types of housing.
On the non-market end of the continuum (the left) are emergency shelters and transitional or supportive
housing, which represent a temporary and less stable housing form. These housing forms typically involve
various levels of support services and often require the most public funding.
Towards the middle of the continuum is non-market housing for households that do not require support
services, both in dedicated buildings or in the private market by way of rent supplements. Below-market
ownership bridges between the non-market and market segments and is represented by different options
that support low and moderate income households to get into the homeownership market.
Lastly, on the market end of the continuum (the right), are rental and ownership housing available through
the private market. Implicitly, the continuum suggests that residents should have the opportunity to move
across the housing continuum and find housing that is most appropriate and best suited to their needs and
ci rcu msta nces.
FIGURE 1.2: The Housing Continuum
EMER
SHE
HOUSING CONTINUUM
- � �
Maple Ridge's Housing Action Plan will focus on all aspects of the Housing Continuum, with particular
emphasis on market rental housing, non-market rental housing (including independent and supportive), and
also ensuring there is a mix of housing options across the entire housing continuum.
2 TH E ROLE OF TH E DISTRICT
The District of Maple Ridge has made great strides towards addressing issues of housing diversity and choice
in the past two decades. The District has also worked with and supported other groups to respond to urgent
housing challenges.
The Housing Action Plan provides a framework for future action in the area of housing, building on the
policies, regulations, and other practices already implemented. While the District plays an important role in
facilitating development and community change, it cannot immediately or independently address every
housing need and issue. In order to successfully implement the HAP, there is an implicit assumption that
other partners and groups will need to participate. This includes private market developers, non-profit
housing providers, senior government, and other agencies. The HAP will also require a high level of
awareness and support by Maple Ridge residents.
There are eight major categories of practice or implementation. Some of these areas, and the specific actions
outlined in the HAP, will involve considerable time and resources on the part of the District, while others will
require much less direct effort. The implementation plan (Section 5) will prioritize and take into
consideration the complexity, level of effort, and resourcing requirements on the District. The specific steps
involved with implementation, including policy language and resourcing, will be detailed at later stages and
on an incremental basis. Figure 2.1 outlines the eight primary areas of implementation.
FIGURE 2.1: Eight Major Areas of Implementation
�
Maintaining a clear and consistent policy that demonstrates a commitment towards
affordable housing.
Establishing a zoning regulation that encourages the development of affordable,
rental, or special needs housing.
Applying priority processing of the approvals process to further the development of
affordable housing.
Identifying funding that can be directed towards affordable housing.
Facilitating the development of partnerships with private sector, non-profit agencies,
and other institutions towards the creation of affordable housing.
Advocating to senior levels of government for additional funding, program support,
financial incentives, and other matters that contribute to affordable housing at the
locallevel.
Staying informed; helping to raise awareness of available programs and resources; and
improving the community's understanding of the benefits of affordable housing.
Researching innovative approaches to affordable housing suitable for local
• •' implementation; monitoring and reporting on Housing Action Plan progress.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan � August 2014
3 RECAP OF ISSU ES
This section summarizes the top housing issues and gaps as identified by the background research and
consultation.
Maple Ridge's housing stock is largely ground-oriented (84%) and predominantly owner-occupied (81%).
Compared to other parts of the region, real estate prices are relatively affordable, with a 2o12-benchmark
price that was $200,000 less than that of the region. Median incomes are also higher in Maple Ridge than
the region as a whole? However, there is a large discrepancy between what couple families earn and the
incomes of lone parent families or single person households. For those earning less than the median
income, there are fewer options available that are suitable and affordable.
For middle or higher income households, the shortfall is related to housing diversity and choice. Maple Ridge has
limited options that are suitable for an aging population; for seniors who wish to downsize, for families who
cannot afford to buy a single detached family home, or for those who wish to step up the ownership ladder.
Under homeownership, the primary gap is therefore related to housing diversity and choice. A focus on
diversifying the product mix and increasing the supply of inedium to high density forms is needed.
The availability of rental housing, and the quality and condition of the existing stock, are two key priorities
in Maple Ridge. These two aspects were ranked as high or moderate priority issues among a majority of
questionnaire respondents. Consultation participants noted some rental buildings to be in poor condition,
with concerns around safety and maintenance standards. In particular, the location, safety, and
appropriateness of rental housing for children and seniors was reported. Lower income households, or
households with special circumstances, were said to have the least choice in the rental market.
Suites that are within the primary residence or detached in a garden suite are a source of rental income for
homeowners, increasing affordability and choice for purchasers and renters alike. Many participants
commented on the need to support the development of legal secondary suites and garden suites.
Therefore, the priority issues for the District are the enforcement of safety standards and building conditions
among the existing rental housing stock, including the purpose-built rental buildings and the secondary
rental market. The other consideration is how to increase the supply of rental units in a variety of locations
and forms to best respond to the continued and changing demand for rental housing.
1 The median income for all families in Maple Ridge was $83,60o in zolz and $z6,7oo for single person households. By comparison,
Metro Vancouverfamilies had a median income of $70,30o and $25,60o for single person households.
In the coming decade, Maple Ridge's population will age considerably. By 2021, it is estimated there will be
an additional 7,60o seniors over the age of 65. Meanwhile, the percentage of children and youth under 25
will decline during those years. To be responsive to these demographic shifts, future housing starts will need
to include a range of seniors-friendly housing forms, including single-level apartments or townhouses;
seniors-specific independent living buildings; as well as assisted living and residential care options.
Lower income seniors often have few housing options available, with reported waitlists and a mix of quality
or standards in existing buildings. Finding housing that is affordable and appropriate to their needs has
been reported to be a challenge. More moderate income seniors, and those who own their homes, face
difFerent limitations. Many are seeking access to services that allow them to age in place or units that are
suitable for downsizing.
Another priority area is the shortage of seniors-specific support services that would assist seniors to
maintain their housing and live independently; improve their access to information and resources; advocate
to senior levels of government; and coordinate services across agencies.
Ouestionnaire respondents ranked persons on fixed incomes and single parents as the two groups facing
the greatest challenge with finding suitable and affordable housing in Maple Ridge. Some individuals and
families were also reported to be in particular risk, living one pay cheque away from losing their housing.
Similarly, population groups who have mental health issues, challenges with addiction, or other support
service needs are often at high risk of homelessness. For these groups, finding rental housing that is stable,
affordable, and appropriate is potentially a considerable challenge.
There is also concern about non-market housing developments that were built in the 196os and 197os that
are facing expiring operating agreements. There is a concern that many of these units are at risk of building
condition decline or the loss of these units to market housing.
Overall, the need for a range of non-market housing has been identified as a key priority. This may include
facilitating access to rental units through the private market, by way of rent supplements and mobile
support services where needed, or the acquisition and construction of new non-market housing units. In this
regard, and in a limited funding context, the District's role as advocate, facilitator, and partner was
repeatedly acknowledged by the community. Non-market housing and rental housing should be located in
areas that are accessible to services and transit.
With 267 square kilometres in land area (66,000 acres), many Maple Ridge residents live in neighbourhoods
that are not within walking distance to services or shopping. The costs of car ownership and use are
therefore inextricably linked to housing affordability for many residents. Accessibility to transit, services and
shopping was identified by consultation participants to be a high priority. Similarly, the availability of local
employment options is a consideration, with many residents needing to travel to other communities for
work. These issues have been noted, although they may not be addressed directly as part of the Housing
Action Plan.
Working in partnership with the development community in a positive and collaborative environment will
help to facilitate a broader mix of housing options in the community. This includes having an understanding
of the market realities; the opportunities to exchange ideas; clear and consistent policy and regulations; and
the availability of incentives.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 10
4 PROPOSED STRATEGIES
Chapter 3- Neighbourhoods and Housing of the Official Community Plan (OCP) contains principles,
objectives, and policies for residential land use in Maple Ridge. This framework articulates policies for land
use and supply; infill and compatibility criteria; and support for the provision of affordable, rental, and
special needs housing. The intent of the proposed strategies in this section is to build upon and further
enhance this robust framework. For reference, Appendix A includes a summary of key housing policies from
Maple Ridge's OCP.
This section summarizes a set of strategies and specific actions that respond to the goals of the Housing
Action Plan. For each of the suggested strategies, a set of specific actions are described, as well as the
implications on policy or practice at the District. Where relevant, examples of similar practices (how they
were implemented, and what they achieved), are included for reference.
The list of proposed strategies have been organized into broad categories to simplify the review process.
Please note that there are situations where a strategy and set of actions can be used in one or more
categories, and that the proposed strategies are not presented in any particular order of priority.
STRoTFr,y #r� • CIIDP(1RT TFIF nF\/FI 4DMFNT OF � MIX f1F NnUSINr. Fl1RMC
At the heart of any strategic effort to facilitate housing affordability, is a focus on increased housing
diversity and choice. This is underscored in the District's Official Community Plan (OCP) under Principles 2g
and 37, which outlines the importance of housing choice in meeting the needs of a diversifying community.
Housing choice can present seniors with more opportunities to age in place, potentially increase the supply
of rental market housing in the District, and facilitate more affordable homeownership.
As a key action towards achieving those Principles, the District also encourages sensitive infill and
intensification in existing low and medium density neighbourhhoods towards creating a broader mix of
housing options, revitalizing older neighbourhoods, achieving high quality design, and enhancing laneways
and streetscapes. The District has taken a lead in this area by introducing policies for Housing and Land
Requirements (3-1), Neighbourhood Residential Infill (3-19) and Major Corridor Residential Infill (3-Zo). Such
policies focus on a select variety of housing forms.
Municipalities throughout the region are exploring and addressing similar issues, drawing upon a variety of
approaches, prototypes or housing forms. While the District has expressed an interest in exploring forms of
a similar scale and massing as a single detached dwelling (front-back duplexes; triplexes, four-plexes, etc.),
based on the success of other municipalities, it may wish to consider additional housing type such as: zero-
lot line housing; courtyard, cottage, or pocket housing; modular or pre-fabricated homes; container housing;
family-oriented condominium apartments; and stacked townhouses or other seniors-friendly products.
E X'�
€ R�
Container Housing Cottage/Courtyard Housing
_ '`i.
����
_ �\�
a
� • ' � .5' }� . -
R'
.. -�: : '�•� � f��i .
E'•� �3�;���' � �y .
� --. '- � �'�' i �'
' --�� �.-- -- - -�-�---- �����uiting
�
Pre-Fab/Modular Housing
-� -
� .�,� •
_ ': -
�
� � � - !
`
�� :-, .,� � : �i. � - _ ;�
Alternative forms of tenure and ownership are also increasing and the District can support or encourage the
development sector to pursue these models. For example, fee simple rowhousing, life lease housing for
seniors, co-housing, co-operative housing, and community land trusts.
Recommended actions include:
Continue to encourage the development of a mix of housing forms by considering new zones or new
permitted uses to existing zones; as well as subdivision regulations relating to the minimum lot size or
configuration. This would facilitate a wider array of dwelling types throughout the District.
Consider expanding the District's infill policies to include a wider range of housing types (e.g. courtyard
housing) and this type of development could be most directly facilitated by the above-noted policy and
regulatory initiatives for those areas.
Establish design guidelines for new infill housing that help to maintain the character of existing
neighbourhoods, while enabling flexibility and innovation in terms of siting, layout, and design.
Continue to support medium to higher density housing and expand provisions in zones that are applied
to transition areas, walkable centres, and in the Downtown core.
Encourage the development of alternative ownership models such as fee simple row housing, life leases,
community land trusts, or other forms of tenure arrangements.
Investigate the opportunity to introduce secondary suites in duplexes.
Prepare information guides that present examples of these housing types, while demonstrating their benefits.
To further support the introduction of wider and innovative housing options, the District could put out a
call for builders, developers and landowners interested in working on innovative housing pilot projects.
The District could work with selected developers to facilitate such demonstration projects through
expedited processing or other incentives. Such pilot initiatives would result in lessons learned for the
District that would then be used to inform zoning bylaw amendments and further streamline the
approval process for such projects.
I ��
The City of Coquitlam adopted the initial Housing Choices program in 2011. This was introduced to facilitate sensitive infill
and intensification in low density neighbourhoods. Prior to adoption, a study was undertaken that involved the development
of prototypes; financial analysis; community consultation; neighbourhood tours with staff and Council; zoning bylaw review;
and the development of area plan policies, checklists, and design guidelines. The Housing Choices program was intended to
facilitate new, innovative, small-scale, ground-oriented housing types that are added in low-density residential areas of
Southwest Coquitlam. It includes carriage homes, garden cottages, narrow-lot one family, attached and detached triplexes
and quadruplexes.
Credit: Prototypes (above) prepared by Ramsay Worden Architects for City of Coquitlam
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 13
� ' ' � � � � . Y . Y . � � 1 �
While this strategy is consistent with current District policy (OCP 3.2o and 3.27) as well as the objectives of
the Town Centre Area Plan, there is an opportunity to further respond to several housing goals by supporting
the development of apartments and multi-unit housing in transit-accessible areas and areas with a core of
services and amenities such as in the Town Centre. This involves drawing upon the already successful Town
Centre Investment Incentive Program. In this context, and given the background research of the HAP which
identified a particular need for rental housing, housing options for older residents to downsize into, as well
as the demographic projections that support the need for more apartments and single-level units suitable
for an aging population, recommended actions include:
Consider re-introducing elements of the Town Centre Investment Incentive Program to specifically target
apartment construction in selected areas of the District. This may include density bonusing, parking
relaxations, fast-tracking approvals, and other aspects.
� Work with the local development community to identify the medium-to-high density product mix that
would be in highest demand by future investors and owner-occupiers.
�T� .� . � i ��l' � �PTAB r I"';
In 2009, the Province of BC approved new adaptable housing standards as part of the BC Building Code.
Adaptable housing includes accessibility, design and construction features that can be modified over time
with minimal cost to accommodate individuals who develop mobility limitations. Including these features at
the design stage is inexpensive and reduces the cost of renovation at a future time. These features may
include basic accessibility characteristics such as: wider doorways and corridors; features to support future
installation of grab bars in bathrooms; wiring for visual alarms; continuous counter tops; and accessible
positioning of electrical outlets and switches. Recommended actions include:
Consult with the development industry and other key stakeholders on the elements for an adaptable
housing policy.
Prepare a policy that encourages or requires developers to provide a percentage of units in new
subdivisions or multi-family developments as adaptable units (e.g. 10% or 15%).
Support the policy with incentives such as density bonusing, parking relaxations, or permit fee reductions.
Promote adaptable design standards that are consistent with the provincial standards for adaptable housing.
Prepare fact sheets that outline benefits, options, and considerations regarding the development of
adaptable housing.
The Township of Langley approved a policy in 2010, implemented in the Yorkson Neighbourhood Plan and Willoughby
Community Plan, that provides adaptable housing guidelines for new developments. If developers choose to build to the
"planned" densities in the new neighbourhood plans, as opposed to the current zoning densities, then the need for basic
adaptable housing requirements is triggered. At the time of rezoning, the Township would thereby require a minimum of 5%
of single family and townhouse units and 10% of apartment units in any development to meet the standards of the adaptable
housing requirements.
In 2014, this policy had resulted in 106 completed units (39 single detached,l8 apartments, and 49 townhouses). An
additional 34 townhouses were under construction. The adaptable homes have been noted to be very marketable.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 15
crRqTFrv tra• CREATE NEW RENTAL HniitiNr OPPORTUNiTiFt
Municipalities can support the development of new rental housing through a set of incentives, such as a
reduction in parking requirements or waiving permitting fees. The units could be "secured" as market rental
housing, with a covenant on title. Another type of rental housing that may warrant consideration is a
secondary suite in a duplex, which would increase the stock of rental units as well as improve affordability
for homeowners.2 Lastly, investor-owned condominiums help to contribute to the secondary rental market,
but are often limited over time by rental restrictions introduced by by strata councils. As a result of changes
to the Strata Act in 2009, developers have the opportunity to prohibit or limit rental restrictions.
Specific recommended actions include:
Facilitate the development of new rental units above commercial developments or as other forms of
secured market rental housing. The widening of the District's residential-over-commercial zoning
regulations to more zones, especially for zones that apply to areas of density transition, along with the
use of density bonusing, reduction in permit fees, or parking relaxations can be used to encourage this
type of investment. The units can be restricted for the purposes of market rental use by way of a
housing agreement and covenant on title.
Ensure developers are aware of rental disclosure statement provisions under the Strata Property Act
that prevents future owners from restricting strata units from being rented.
Investigate the opportunity to introduce suites in duplexes.
Review the definitions and regulations associated with shared living arrangements, such as home-
sharing, boarding use, and others; and consider their relevance in the Maple Ridge context. Future
amendments to local policies and bylaws may be considered if relevant.
2 Additional suites in residential buildings can be created if they conform to the suite provisions of the Building Code and local
bylaws. BC Information Bulletin. March 19, 2013. Suites and Secondary Suites. Building and Safety Standards Branch. No.B13-02.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 16
New Westminster's Secured Market Rental Housing Policy seeks to increase the supply of rental housing in order to address
the shortage of rental housing and ongoing affordability pressures. New Westminster's policy includes a number of financial
incentives and bylaw relaxations that are targeted towards the retention and renewal of the existing stock and the creation
of new rental housing. A guiding principle for the policy is that the most generous incentives and bylaw relaxations are
reserved for proposals with a higher degree of rental housing security of tenure. For example, rental housing that is secured
for 6o years or the life of the building versus housing secured for 3o to 59 years or short term rental that is secured for a
minimum of 10 years. The incentives include:
+
♦
�
♦
+
Relaxation of parking requirements
Density bonus without paying for the additional density
50% reduction in building permit fees
Relaxations to the City's servicing requirements
Concurrent processing of rezoning and development permit applications
Payment of legal fees for the preparation of housing agreements and related documents
i' ,
• � � � � 'r' . i: `'x ` __
•�.�". _�.
�' � �.. .�_ / .
' °�Y'�.'l, r:��4
. �� Y,'.
�N ��
' _ ^.��v..��.... �'�?�`
�'{i� ' �ti.0
r .. �. . r. _ ,�..� a� i
Photo Credit: City of New Westminster
�� �;� ��. Y �3�' '�
I:: • '
�i� � r :�
��i. . .— i
,'/eFl � Y''+ �i:�
�� .
�::.. i!! - � _; s�
'�i:� fif ...- �i. ti�` �x�
k� �[ .. •.. E ' �19 r.��
.��:: :�� • �11�A �■i: :.
� "�".'i�,'iFJy ■'..
�.��:�V �/MY �i^ ��
r-��: :2� �rr+r : :: , �I
*;;I - if1 : f••.; �i: !1 - �I
.�o�:� �t. ��� :; . �i
�y��: �:i i�- �'� `� ii
. f�ll: ei1, x�: !1; :� c i?
,��g��.ss::. E3e�,
� rl�!; :°� 'a�r-r 1-:
■
. �S'�FI :.. L i: c„ y
: 7 � :7li �� i:T� '. . �
�
+R.
_,�._�. ., ��._.. _ �� .a.... ,�1'�. —� • ' '•—r•--�
Secondary suites have been allowed in the District since lggg and, according to the consultation with local
developers, there continues to be a strong market for houses with suites throughout the District. A number
of suggestions are made to further enhance secondary suites policies and process. In fact, a recent review of
secondary suites by District staff has resulted in a number of recommendations, several of which are noted
here as they directly support the goals of the HAP. Recommended actions include:
Work with the community to identify the reasons for low take-up of registered secondary suites and
introduce bylaw amendments to encourage registration.
Consider monitoring the requirement for owner-occupancy for homes with secondary suites.
Consider the introduction of additional utility charges to all houses with unauthorized suites and a
reduced charge or no charge for authorized suites. Owners for homes without active suites would need
to submit a declaration or use other means to confirm the suite is not rented.
Prepare a policy that outlines alternative health and safety standards for secondary suites in structures
built before 2004. By identifying equivalencies to the Building Code, the District would reduce the
difficulty associated with retrofitting suites into older structures.
Encourage all newly constructed single detached homes, in zoning districts where suites are permitted,
to be built as "suite ready". This means that fire separation requirements, as well as rough-ins for the
basement plumbing and electrical systems, would be included in the structure and notation made to
this effect in the final occupancy permit.
Under West Vancouver's Secondary Suites Program, in effect since 2010, property owners are able to legalize an
existing suite or construct a new suite. A secondary suite is a separate residential unit within a house, with a
maximum size that is less than 968 sq.ft. (go sq.m.) or 40% of the floor area of the house. In 2011, the program
was expanded to allow suites in non-owner occupied homes and the District encouraged registration by not
charging permit fees for a short period of time. As of 2012, 724 suites had been approved. While legalization of
existing suites does not increase the rental housing supply, the legalization process provides assurance of
quality and safety of these units.
Photo Credit: CitySpaces Consulting Ltd.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan � August 2014 18
.lIR. . . L... .1� ...✓L � . .a.....
The District of Maple Ridge was one of the first municipalities to introduce a policy on garden suites, also
known as coach houses, carriage homes, or laneway housing (when located adjacent to a lane). An increasing
number of municipalities, such as Coquitlam, West Vancouver, Vancouver, North Vancouver, Port Moody, and
Surrey, have garden suites policies with varied levels of success and take up. Recommended actions include:
Identify barriers to implementation of garden suites and revisit the policy and bylaws to encourage the
development of new garden suites.
Expand the garden suites program to permit suites above garages.
I EXAMPLES FROM WEST VANCOUVER AND VANCOUVER I
Photo Credit: CitySpaces Consulting Ltd.
Many municipalities have adopted measures that seek to maintain basic standards of health, safety, and
well-being in rental buildings and secondary suites. The District, for example, adopted a standard of
maintenance bylaw in 2008 that requires owners to maintain their rental premises according to a set of
basic standards. Recommended actions include:
Review the bylaw enforcement practices of the District with respect to rental housing and ensure they
are effective and practical.
Continue to use standards of maintenance regulations to facilitate basic repairs and urge upgrading,
and if necessary closure, of blatantly substandard premises.
In the case of secondary suites, require owners to purchase an annual license for each residential unit
that is rented. This recommendation was also made as part of the z013 comprehensive review of
policies and bylaws related to secondary suites.
Support the RCMP in the implementation of the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program in Maple Ridge and
actively encourage property managers to participate in the program.
S�._ ... .�- - -�..
There is concern regarding the potential loss of units in the existing rental stock. This includes units in older
buildings that have historically been rented to lower income households at relatively affordable rents and
also homes located in manufactured home parks in the District. In both cases, the potential redevelopment
or conversion of such units could displace tenants, reduce the supply of affordable rental units, and, in some
cases, result in the loss of a supportive community environment. The District currently has a number of
policies in place that support and protect rental housing. The recommended actions, therefore, include:
Review the District's Modular Home Park Redevelopment Tenant Assistance Policy and identify
opportunities to further strengthen the policy as needed.
Continue to limit the demolition or strata conversion of existing rental units and identify opportunities
to further strengthen this policy as needed.
A1 n
There are limited funding options for capital construction or acquisition of units for non-market housing.
Non-market housing providers increasingly have to identify capital funding from a variety of sources as well
as identifying ways to increase revenues through mixed projects. The municipality can support the non-
market housing sector and help to build its capacity to deliver affordable housing.
Many of the recent successful development projects have involved partnerships between several different
agencies. The municipality itself can act as a key partner by providing land, discounted lease rates, permit fee
reductions, or other incentives. In addition, the private sector can act as a major player that contributes a
number of discounted units or cash towards the development of non-market housing. Similarly, other
agencies can contribute by providing health and support services. The municipality can play an additional
effective role by bringing together and/or supporting organizations in forming partnerships that lead to the
creation of new affordable and non-market housing. Recommended actions include:
Work with non-profit organizations seeking acquisition and renovation or redevelopment of their land
and building assets that would lead to the addition of new affordable housing. The District can help
identify creative solutions and support them with the design, planning, and approval process.
Identify a staff person to support and help to expedite the processing of applications for rental, non-
market, or seniors housing.
Expand the District policy on special needs or supportive housing to allows this type of use to be
distributed in all neighbourhoods and amend the zoning bylaws to permit this use in the majority of
zoning districts.
Encourage private market and non-profit partnerships that result in non-market units being built on- or
off-site. This may involve connecting non-profit organizations with private sector developers that would
be amenable to the addition of non-market units as part of a density bonus arrangement.
Work with Fraser Health, BC Housing, or other government institutions to address the shortage of
seniors housing, supportive housing, or other services for at-risk population groups, such as a hospital
discharge program or transitional housing for at-risk youth.
� Expand the permissive property tax exemptions to non-market housing providers.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 20
The District has taken initiative in the area of housing, investigating and implementing various practices
that address housing choice, affordability, and housing for special needs groups. The following strategies and
actions propose new ideas, offer additional validation of current policy, or suggest adjustments to existing
practices that would further the goals of the Housing Action Plan.
.,.._ 'AI ,,.ill--
In BC, through Section go4 of the Local GovernmentAct municipalities have the authority to establish a
stepped series of density options, as well as the conditions required of an applicant in order to achieve the
various levels of density. These can include requiring an in-kind, cash, or other types of amenity contributions
valued by the community. It is important to recognize that each project's potential for an amenity
contribution will vary depending on the scale of the project, the characteristics of the site, and the current
market context. The District of Maple Ridge recently completed amendments to its Official Community Plan
and Zoning Bylaw to facilitate a density bonus scheme in the Albion Area Plan. Specific actions include:
Support the development of various types of housing, such as rental housing, non-market housing, seniors
housing, or innovative housing forms, through a widening of the District's existing density bonusing policy
language to identify preferred areas where such products and housing types would be desirable.
Revise the appropriate zoning districts with a density bonusing scheme and estimate the potential
amenity contribution value that is equivalent to the steps of density set out density bonus regulations.
.....ATEG. #11: .N'....,DI,..E A COM....,NITY �....ENI.Y POLICY F.,._
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
In the earlier noted Albion Area Plan context, affordable housing was not identified as a possible community
amenity.3 Many municipalities identify affordable housing as a community amenity alongside other
benefits, such as parks, community centres, public art, or other features, structures, and assets.
Recommended actions would include:
Consider amending the District's Official Community Plan, and potentially other Area Plans, to insert
clear policy language that identifies the range of amenities, including affordable housing, that are
should be targeted through amenity zoning.
3 Section 904 of the Local Government Act empowers municipalities to identify areas in their zoning bylaw, where increased
density would be allowed if certain conditions and/or amenities for a community are provided. Affordable and special needs
housing may be included as one of these conditions or amenities.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 21
.1. . t .. . .1 .. �...�� � � � . L IY�
A housing reserve fund is an account set up by the municipality to receive funds that are then spent on the
delivery of affordable housing, providing capital to acquire land or fund the construction of affordable
housing projects, or to contribute to grants to enable local non-profit agencies to facilitate the provision of
affordable housing. Funds can come from any sources that the municipality identifies, including property
taxes or a community amenity program. A Housing Reserve Fund can be used to leverage or support
opportunities to create affordable housing that help to achieve the District's housing goals. Once a housing
fund is large enough to be able to make grants, municipalities typically set up an application process for
providers to be able to apply for a grant. The recommended actions are:
Establish a Housing Reserve Fund to assist with the development of non-market housing for special
needs groups or other housing priorities.
Once the fund is well established, the District could establish a process to determine eligibility criteria,
review applications, and provide grants.
� -� �
Coquitlam's Affordable Housing Reserve Fund was a key strategic action in the City's Affordable Housing
Strategy, which was originally adopted in 2007. The Fund, which has now reached $1.7 million, could be used to
support the development of new affordable housing by acquiring and leasing land; reducing development fees
and charges; or other types of financial support. Contributions to the fund have come primarily from cash-in-
lieu contributions from major developments. No allocations have been made yet from this fund.
5
There are a number of additional financial tools that can be implemented by municipalities to help reduce
the capital or ongoing operating costs associated with residential development. The District may wish to
consider the development or refinement of such a basket of financial tools that can be selectively used to
support housing projects. It is suggested that the package of incentives that is provided reflect the level of
contribution to the District's housing goals that is being proposed by the development. The following
financial tools are presented for consideration.
WAIVING OR REDUCING FEES
Waiving or reducing fees related to permits and approvals is a common tool for supporting affordable housing
projects. The District may wish to support developers, market or non-market, who build affordable housing
through reductions in the costs associated with fees and permits. The following approach is suggested:
Undertake a review of all current fees and costs associated with development permits and approvals,
and identify a list of possible fee reductions where a project supports the District's housing goals.
Prepare a policy that identifies different tiers of cost savings, depending on the extent of the contribution
towards affordability or other housing goals. For example, when a project contributes 10% of total units or
cash equivalent towards affordable housing it would receive one level of fee reductions versus when it
contributes 20% of total units or cash equivalent when it would receive a more substantial cost reduction.
This may be most effective when combined with a density bonus policy as well.
PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS
Municipalities can also assist with long-term financial assistance approaches such as property tax
exemptions or reductions for eligible projects for a period of time. For three years, the District implemented
a Town Centre Investment Incentive Program that used property tax exemptions as one of a host of benefits
to facilitate private sector investment in the town centre. There is an opportunity to apply tax exemptions to
non-profit organizations that provide services seen to contribute to the wellbeing of the community.
Consider offering municipal property tax exemptions for a fixed period of time, and as part of a package
of incentives. Given the reliance on property taxes as a revenue source, this particular tool should be
resigned to those projects that offer the most generous affordable housing contributions.
Consider expanding the practice of offering permissive tax exemptions to non-profit housing providers
and other related service providers such as emergency shelters, safe houses, or transition homes for
women and children fleeing violence.
�;7 N1;7 � �'� �;ZiZ� ��� 1 �[�]
Fast track development applications that help to achieve the District's housing goals. This may involve
assigning a staff person to shepherd selected projects through the review and approval process as well
as expediting the application.
RELAXATION OF PARKING REOUIREMENTS
The reduction in parking requirements is often a considerable financial incentive for new developments.
This approach should be restricted to those areas where transit and services are more readily accessible.
Maple Ridge's Town Centre Area Plan include policies that may support reduced residential parking
requirements in frequent transit development areas and as a means to facilitate affordable housing. The
following action is recommended:
The District may consider reductions in parking requirements in the Downtown or other areas near
transit and services as part of a package of incentives to encourage the inclusion of affordable, rental
housing, or other innovative housing forms that meet the District's housing goals.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN Housing Action Plan I August 2014 Z3
��n . . .. _ �._.. �� ' -
The District has a history of land banking and continues to lease the properties it owns to various agencies,
including youth and family emergency housing and supportive housing for people with mental health issues.
The District could continue to identify opportunities to purchase land that can be used to support housing
projects. The land could be given as a gift or leased at a discount to non-profit housing providers. The
following actions are recommended:
Continue to review opportunities for strategic land banking and the acquisition of property for
housing purposes.
Continue to lease District property to non-profits that provide emergency services, community services,
or non-market housing.
The Alouette Heights supportive housing project was completed in 2012 in Maple Ridge. The 46-unit development, which is
operated by the Alouette Home Start Society, was constructed on land that is leased from the District, with capital and
operating funds from BC Housing. The development provides affordable housing and support services to individuals who are
from Maple Ridge or those with connections to the community.
� v`
Photos Credit: CitySpaces Consulting Ltd.
.. •,
Information, outreach, and advocacy are often undervalued, but highly effective areas of practice. By making
information available, a municipality can help to raise awareness about the need for affordable housing;
encourage other levels of government to increase their support levels or change legislation; and ensure
tenants, landlords, builders, and residents are aware of the resources and opportunities that are available
and their rights and responsibilities towards achieving livable communities.
5�... - ,�..� � ���� -.�., COM'` ��iY
The District's Social Planning Advisory Committee continues to work on housing and homelessness. It includes
senior staff and Council representation and continues to provide direction in the area of housing priorities. In
addition, the District participates in regional housing and planning advisory committees. Recommend actions
a re:
Continue to participate in local, regional, and provincial housing tables and initiatives.
Continue to develop community-based strategies for responding to homelessness and the needs of at-
risk populations.
�.
The District can work in partnership with community networks to raise awareness about critical issues that
impact housing choice and affordability. Recommended actions to include:
Use municipal networks and opportunities to continue to advocate to senior government for changes to
funding, legislation, and taxation improvements.
Advocate through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and other groups for changes to
taxation and the introduction of incentives to support the development of market and non-market
rental housing.
Seek increased funding for non-market housing, rent supplements, and related programs that
facilitate access to housing for low-income households.
Seek increased funding for support services for at-risk seniors and other special needs groups.
�N A� LA
The municipality can communicate housing and related information through its website, information
sheets, through mail-outs, and at local events.
Use the District website to provide housing information and to promote community resources,
government programs, and other initiatives. For example, rental assistance programs (Shelter Assistance
for Elderly Renters and Rental Assistance Program for families) or home renovation funds for persons
with disabilities (Home Adaptation For Independence program).
Prepare a guide or partner with others to prepare a guide for landlords and tenants regarding their
rights and responsibilities, including information regarding basic standards of maintenance as well as
fire, health and safety requirements.
Prepare information sheets on innovative housing forms, alternative ownership models, and other
practices to help showcase and encourage innovative approaches.
��.. _� ., :�� �. ..r�
The Social Planning Advisory Committee (SPAC) advises Council on social planning issues, including housing,
in the District. Two additional committees are suggested to help provide advisory services to the District
throughout the various stages of HAP implementation. The following actions are recommended:
Establish a local builders and developers advisory group to provide input and insight on new policy and
regulatory changes and suggest solutions for regulatory roadblocks. It is suggested that the
Development Advisory Committee have senior planning staff person at the table.
Establish an affordable housing committee to establish eligibility criteria, application process details,
and review applications for grant funding from a future housing reserve fund.
5, ,�� �� � QY OF TO�" ��. �,-T,,,�,�
The following table summarizes the role of the District in relation to each of the strategies and the
implications on policy, regulation, and other action areas.
FIGURE 4.1: Summary of Strategies and Actions
1. Support development of a mix of
housing forms
Z. Incentivize medium density
development
3. Introduce an adaptable housing
policy
4. Create new rental housing
opportunities
5. Continue to update secondary
suites policies
6. Expand the garden suites
program
7. Maintain rental housing
standards
8. Minimize the loss of existing
rental housing
g. Support the non-market housing
sector
10. Develop a density bonusing
approach
11. Introduce a community
amenity policy
12. Establish a housing reserve
fund
13. Use financial incentives to
support housing goals
14. Continue to review
opportunities to lease land
15. Continue to support local
community groups
16. Advocate to senior government
17. Make information available
18. Establish local advisory groups
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 z7
5 IMPLEMENTATION
The draft Housing Action Plan is the outcome of community consultation, background research and analysis,
as well as research into the policy and practice of benchmark communities. The draft HAP outlines five main
goals, 17 strategies, and over 5o specific action items. The detailed steps associated with implementation
will be finalized by District staff with direction from Council. A high level implementation approach and
timeline is suggested here.
R
DF. : S
It is suggested that an annual report to Council be prepared which outlines achievements to date and
progress on the actions associated with the HAP. As the data comes available, progress reports should also
provide updates on a set of key housing indicators.
A general timeline is proposed for implementing the HAP. This takes into consideration the complexity of
various action items as well as the limited staff or financial resources that are available. The following table
sets out recommended time frames for the implementation of the 17 strategies. Short term priorities,
considered immediate items, are either urgent or relatively simple to achieve within the coming one or two
years. Medium term items will be prioritized in the coming three to five years, while longer terms items will
be the focus in the 6 to 8 year time frame. Within each of these strategies, there will be elements that are
prioritized in the short, medium, or long terms. These details will be determined by the District over time.
Figure 5.1 Suggested Timeline
1. Support development of a mix of housing forms �/
z. Incentivize medium density development
3. Introduce an adaptable housing policy
4. Create new rental housing opportunities
5. Continue to update secondary suites policies + bylaws
6. Expand the garden suites program
7. Maintain rental housing standards
8. Minimize the loss of existing rental housing
g. Support the non-market housing sector
10. Develop a density bonusing approach
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓ ✓
✓ �
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 28
11. Introduce a community amenity policy
12. Establish a housing reserve fund
13. Use financial incentives to support housing goals
14. Continue to review opportunities to lease land
15. Continue to support local community groups
16. Advocate to senior government
17. Make information available
18. Establish local advisory groups
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
J
J
!�
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 z9
APPENDIX A
Summary of Selected Housing Policies - Maple Ridge Official Community Plan
Maple Ridge will:
a) designate an adequate supply of residential land to accommodate future residents;
b) accommodate growth through infill by:
i. Promoting a mix of housing types and tenures to support diverse needs (e.g. income and abilities)
lifestyles (e.g. age and values), and preferences. Examples include housing for older residents;
housing for persons with disabilities; rental and ownership housing; new homeowners and empty
nester housing; and ecologically sensitive design; and
ii. Developing other strategies as appropriate for meeting the future housing needs of residents.
Maple Ridge will support Healthy Community Land Use Strategies and community wellness principles
by:
a) recognizing the link between the provision of a range of housing options and social sustainability;
b) promoting affordable housing developments that incorporate access to services through
interconnecting roadways, bicycle paths, and pedestrian links;
c) promoting activities that contribute to the needs, health, development, and well-being of
individuals within the community, as well as the overall community;
d) encouraging the provision of an appropriate scale of services at the neighbourhood level;
e) promoting diverse, safe and secure neighbourhoods that facilitates neighbourly support, resulting in
a healthier, more resilient community;
fl encouraging public spaces that offer opportunities for community interaction; and
g) promoting affordable housing developments that meet diverse housing needs.
Maple Ridge will continue to support garden suites as a form of infill in Rural Residential areas. See
Zoning Bylaw for more details
Maple Ridge will continue to support garden suites as a form of infill in Suburban Residential areas.
See Zoning Bylaw for more details
Maple Ridge will continue to support garden suites as a form of infill in Estate Suburban Residential
areas. See Zoning Bylaw for more details
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 30
Maple Ridge will support a range of densities within the Urban Area Boundary. Urban Residential
consists of two residential categories with the following characteristics:
1) Neighbourhood Residential — General Characteristics:
a) A maximum of one principal dwelling unit per lot and an additional dwelling unit such as a
secondary suite or garden suite;
b) Density that is based on the current zoning of the property, or surrounding neighbourhood context;
c) Single detached dwellings will remain the predominant housing form within neighbourhoods.
Other housing forms are possible, subject to compliance with the Neighbourhood Residential Infill
policies;
d) Is not within a neighbourhood with an Area Plan, a Community Commercial Node, or located on a
Major Corridor as illustrated on Figure 4.
2) Major Corridor Residential — General Characteristics:
a) Major Corridor Residential is characterized by the following:
i. Has frontage on an existing Major Road Corridor as identified on Figure 4 Proposed Major Corridor
Network Plan, or has frontage on a road built in whole or part to a collector, arterial, TransLink
Major Road, or Provincial Highway standard;
ii. May be adjacent to Community Commercial Node, or designated commercial centre.
b) Includes ground oriented housing forms such as single detached dwellings, garden suites, duplexes,
triplexes,fourplexes, townhouses, apartments, or small lot intensive residential, subject to
compliance with Major Corridor Residential Infill policies.
Neighbourhood Residential Infill is permitted subject to compliance with the following criteria:
1) Infill development on a property that is larger than the prevailing lot size of the surrounding
neighbourhood or existing zoning of the lot may include the following:
a) A possible change in lot size and configuration providing that:
i. The proposed lot area and widths should be not less than So% of the lot area and width prescribed
under the predominate or adjacent zoning in the surrounding neighbourhood;
ii. The proposed lot configuration is similar to the prevailing lot pattern that exists within the
neighbourhood; and
iii. The proposed housing form is consistent in scale and massing to that of the surrounding
neighbourhood.
b) A change in unit type - unit types such as single detached dwellings, secondary suites, garden
suites, duplexes and triplexes that resemble a single detached dwelling, with an emphasis on
orientation to the street.
2) Neighbourhood Residential infill must be designed to be compatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood and will be evaluated against Policy 3-21.
Major Corridor Residential Infill developments must be designed to be compatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood and will be evaluated against the following criteria:
a) Buildingforms such as single detached dwellings, duplexes,triplexes,fourplexes,townhouses,
apartments, and small lot intensive residential developments subject to Policy 3-21;
b) A maximum height of two and one-half storeys with an emphasis on ground oriented units for all
developments except for apartments;
c) A maximum height of four storeys for apartments; and
d) Adherence to Development Permit Guidelines for multi-family and intensive residential
developments as outlined in Chapter 8 of the Official Community Plan.
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 31
Maple Ridge will regularly update its affordable housing strategy to identify specific targets, objectives,
opportunities and municipal incentives for affordable, rental, and special needs housing. The affordable
housing strategy will be initiated at the discretion of Council and in consultation with the Social Planning
Advisory Committee.
Maple Ridge will encourage partnerships with government and non-government agencies to support the
creation of affordable, rental and special needs housing in the community.
Maple Ridge recognizes that secondary suites and other detached dwelling units in residential
neighbourhoods can provide affordable and/or rental housing in the community. Maple Ridge is
committed to ensuring that bylaws and regulations are current, and responsive to community issues and
needs
Maple Ridge will consider density bonus as a means of encouraging the provision of affordable, rental and
special needs housing, and amenities
Maple Ridge supports the provision of rental accommodation and encourages the construction of rental
units that vary in size and number of bedrooms. Maple Ridge may also limit the demolition or strata
conversion of existing rental units, unless District-wide vacancy rates are within a healthy range as
defined by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
Maple Ridge supports the provision of affordable, rental and special needs housing throughout the
District. Where appropriate, the provision of affordable, rental, and special needs housing will be a
component of area plans.
Maple Ridge will encourage housing that incorporates "age-in-place" concepts and seniors housing
designed to accommodate special needs
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 3z
APPENDIX B
BENCHMARK MUNICIPALITIES - Overview of Housing Policies & Initiatives
Housing Action Plan
or equivalent
OCP Policies to create a
mix of housing types
Zoning to increased
density for rental or
affordable housing
Zoning to facilitate infill
and intensification
Secured market rental
practices, e.g. above
commercial
Adaptable housing
requirements
Secondary suites -
modified standards
Suites in non-owner
occupied housing
Garden suites policy
Rental housing
standards/enforcement
Providing approval
assistance
Expedited approvals
✓ ✓ Pending ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
I I
✓
✓ ✓
✓ ✓ I
✓ ✓
� ✓ �
✓
Negotiated ✓ ✓
Y
Y
Y
Y
V
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 33
Housing reserve fund
Density bonus policy
Affordable housing as a
community amenity
Waiving or reducing fees
Parking relaxations I
Property tax exemptions �
Land banking/leasing
municipal land
Grants �
Affordable housing �
committee or similar
Development/builders
advisory group
Information guides and
how-tos, etc.
Regular monitoring
and reporting
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓ �
✓ I ✓
✓
✓
✓
�
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Housing Action Plan � August 2014 34
APPENDIX B
Draft HAP Questionnaire Results
(Completion rate: 90.0%)
Does the Housing Action Plan framework capture the groups in need and the
top issues for affordable housing in Maple Ridge?
Response Chart Percentage Count
. .� �.
Yes 50.0% 14
No 50.0% 14
TotalResponses 28
If your answer is no, please list what you think are additional groups in need
and/or other top issues for affordable housing in Maple Ridge and why.
The 9 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
The proposed 18 strategies in the Draft Housing Action Plan are listed below.
What do you think are the top three priorities the District of Maple Ridge
should focus on to facilitate the development of affordable housing?
Response Chart Percentage Count
1. Support the development of a mix of housing
forms
2. Incentivize medium density development
3. Introduce an adaptable housing policy
4. Create new rental housing opportunities
5. Continue to monitor secondary suites policies
and bylaws
6. Expand the garden suites program
7. Maintain rental housing standards
8. Support the non-market housing sector �
9. Minimize the loss of existing housing
10. Expand the density bonusing practice I
29.6% 8
3.7% 1
14.8% 4
44.4% 12
18.5% 5
11.1%
18.5%
18.5 %
7.4 %
7.4 %
3
5
5
2
2
11.Introduce a community amenity policy for
affordable housing
12. Establish a housing reserve fund
13.Use financial incentives to support housing
goals
14. Continue to purchase and lease land
15. Continue to support local community groups
16. Continue to advocate to senior levels of
government
17. Continue to educate and create awareness
18. Expand or enhance the roles of advisory
groups to assist with HAP implementation
Any additional comments or suggestions?
The 12 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
33.3% 9
11.1% 3
14.8 % 4
11.1% 3
7.4% 2
11.1% 3
3.7% 1
14.8 % 4
Total Responses 27
Appendix
If your answer is no, please list what you think are additional groups in need and/or
other top issues for affordable housing in Maple Ridge and why. �
� ��
1. I would have preferred my answer to be "I don't know" because I would like to know how
"the groups in need" and "the top issues for affordable housing in Maple Ridge" have been
determined and if they are actually accurate or just estimated.
2. There is not enough provision for suitable affordable housing for low income seniors, and
none for those requiring affordable Assisted Living units (as in housekeeping, 3 meals a day,
staff supervision, activities). Currently, there are lots of high-end AL units in the community,
a few affordable, but most is out of reach of most of our basic income seniors.
3. the need for transitional housing does not seem to be addressed. with the funding cuts to
programs and supports, overall there needs to be discussion between all agencies to
implement a program that enables the transition from emergency shelters into self
sustaining rental/housing options.
4. Most often as seniors age, their requirement to spend money on health related/personal care
rises exponentially. (incontinent care, pain management, skin care, diet supplements such as
"boost", etc.) At the same time, we find that provincial authorities take more and more
medications off prescription requirements and thus off pharmacare eligibility. Eventually,
many seniors also require some sort of intervention/assistance to manage their activities of
daily living. Especially when a senior lives alone. The trouble thus begins for seniors,
particularly single seniors, to find housing that is affordable. I think the development of any
Housing Action Plan needs to consider this growing segment of our population. A large
majority of this segment of our population does not want to be a burden on either their
family or the rest of sociery - but, let's at least recognize their need to be housed in
comfortable, centrally located places and still have enough money left from their fixed
incomes to cover the essential health and personal care items. Thank you.
5. Children and teens with special needs grow to be adults with disabilities who require
housing. Adults without disabilities eventually all require growing varieties of supports and
services to remain as independent as possible. While the plight of seniors is mentioned in a
few places in the report, I only found one place where adults with disabilities and their
supported housing concerns is touched upon (Page 9). There are currently 440 people with
disabiiities living in Pitt Meadows and Maple Ridge receiving supports and services from
agencies in the area. There is currently ONE unit listed in one of the tables that is
"supported". It is critical to remember also that all adults will eventually need some
measure of support to live independently if they live long enough. This niche market is not
addressed adequately at all in your report.
6. A profound lack of new apartment buildings for rent. I am a senior 82 years old needing an
apartment. I no longer want to pay taxes, costs of maintenance, etc. all that belongs to owning
a place. Independent living places are not affordable nor do I want to live in a restricted
style.....I love to cook and maintain myself as many of us are very healthy and able to take
care of ourselves. Most districts have life-lease plans which are desirable however the list is
long to get in and a move to another district is hard to leave friends, etc. Most new Falcon
buildings are undersold and rich companies are buying the condos and renting for 1500 a
month. This district has had very poor Planners with a short vision for the taxpayers i.e. our
natural setting along the River is a missed opportunity for example. We have to travel to
New West./Steveston/ leaving our own territory when we have it right here. My pension is
small but thankful I have one from working all my life.
What we would like to see in the Maple Ridge area: * stop the clear cutting of trees making
the environment an unhealthy desert with no place for the wildlife to live. Developers
destroy nature 100% by stripping everything! * build communities being more conscience of
our fragile ecosystem, and the wildlife that cohabitates with us * stop allowing profiteers
(developers and their realtor colleagues) from deciding what our community needs to look
like * Maple Ridge needs to have a bylaw in place that insists developers must provide a
decent sized lot where children can play safely in their own backyard as opposed to the
streets. Playgrounds are not altogether safe nor do they offer as much parental guidance as
does one's own backyard. * Houses should not cover the entire plot of land and be so close to
each other that you can almost touch your neighbor from your kitchen or bedroom window.
This is a serious fire hazard waiting to happen. Vinyl siding is a plastic product derived from
petroleum, and it will burn very quickly and very well. * Trapping and killing animals
because they are inconvenient, when the developer should have built in existing areas rather
than clear cutting a forest to build homes with no yards, is and always has been unacceptable.
We don't think you should be making mini-communities in the rural municipal areas like that
of 256 street plopped in the middle of nowhere, and then having to provide public paid
services that would otherwise cost a fraction had it been built out from the city core.
Revitalizing existing older areas in Maple Ridge is a good initiative. We feel it would be
optimum to design new developments in areas where the infrastructure already exists or
there is minimal cost to upgrade. When planning a new community area, please consider cul-
de-sacs and no thru streets as it builds closer and better knit communities. People get to
know their neighbors which can decrease crime. Speed bumps and circle drives are helpful
and should be implemented. Seniors need adequate housing which ought to be both
affordable and respectful to their needs. A great example of a seniors housing complex is the
one shown on W5 this past year. W5 show cased a seniors home in Saskatoon called
Sherbrooke Community Centre. A centre that cares very deeply and takes great care of not
only the physical needs but the spiritual needs of its seniors. A holistic approach to housing
would be beneficial to Maple Ridge as well. We humans are far too destructive and short
sighted. No longer can we look to short term gain for long term pain. We need to think about
all the generations, now and in the future. Maple Ridge has the potential to be the model for
the entire Lower Mainland, and the envy of other communities across Canada provided we
design everything with respect for both the environment [ecosystem] and the people who are
going to live there.
8. There is not enough information in the plan specific to seniors' affordable housing needs.
Specifically, how Council will encourage the construction of new assisted living and
independent living units that are badly needed.
9. This Action plan is a plan of "inaction" Where is the action? There is nothing that affectively
addresses the real problems of affordable housing nor ways of providing it
Any additional comments or suggestions? �
Before development of outlying areas continues, development from the centre of Maple
Ridge outward should be required. Allowing the development in the north and east of MR
has ignored the spirit of the OCP, avoided densification to support good transit, added
unnecessary costs (paid for with taxes) for outlying infrastructure, destroyed farmland and
catered to the developers.
2. Looking at new housing development on Thornhill and Silver Valley areas I see very little
commercial building, stores or restaurants etc. This leads to a lot of drives into town to pick
up a few groceries or coffee etc. This type of zoning should appear more frequently as the
community grows.
3. More high density housing downtown. Work to expand transit. Continue to draw
business/bars/restaurants to a concentrated area downtown to create neighbourhoods that
people want to live in.
4. I have chosen my top three, but was interested also in #2, to incentivize medium density
development --- which may be included in 10, to expand the density bonusing practice. I
was also interested in #8, to support the non-market housing sector, but feel that this may
also be included in # 10. It is critical that a more focused approach be made on the issue of
supported housing for people with disabilities, close to transit. If we get this demographic
of the population housed safely in community, we will be better able to address the needs of
the burgeoning senior population. Please address density bonusing (by allowing a builder
to add a storey to his building in exchange for allotting a number of units to housing for
people with disabilities for rental or to be purchased at below market value by their
families. If you have any further questions or comment or would like further input from me
on this issue, I can be reached at 604.463.1611 --- Laurie
5. Raise the height for buildings in the ALR so garden suites can be constructed above garages.
6. I live on 112th Avenue east of 240th Street. New housing along 112th Avenue east of 240th
appears to be progressing and the lots are noticeably smaller. I think it is important that
there still be a rural feel along this road and hope that future lot sizes along this road will be
larger. Where will the cut off be between smaller city sized lots and larger "country" sized
lots? Already, there has been a noticeable increase in traffic along 112th Avenue between
240th Street and 256th Street. Many people are using 112th Avenue as an alternate route to
avoid the traffic congestion and lights along Dewdney Trunk Road (these include prison
personnel going to and from the prison on 256th Street, locals who live further east on
Dewdney Trunk Road, and large gravel trucks who frequently use their jake brakes). The
noise level from the traffic has definitely increased and the road is really showing wear and
tear from this additional use. People are generally exceeding the speed limit and drivers
often cross over the line into the oncoming traffic. Some serious accidents are bound to
happen along 112th Avenue. It is very dangerous to walk, jog, or ride a bike along this road
because it is hilly and has many curves and blind spots. There is also an extremely narrow
shoulder along 112th Avenue and i feel people who use this road for these activities are
risking their lives. I personally am afraid to walk along the side of the roadway. Perhaps
some more signage regarding speed and use of truck brakes in a residential area would be
appropriate. A designated bike and pedestrian lane in the future would be a great asset to
this growing community.
7. It is difficult to select 3 priorities but continuing to work with senior levels of governments,
non-profits and developers to create more affordable housing is paramount to the health of
the community and essential for a good quality of life for all citizens. Access to affordable,
safe and appropriate housing is essential for the health and well being of all citizens.
Shelter and housing are basic human needs and a right for all citizens of Canada. Children's
brains are an environmental organ as such the quality of their experiences directly
influences their development. Access to safe and appropriate housing is necessary for
healthy childhood development.
8. We need a good, healthy, and sustainable environment to live in, raise our families in, and
retire in. Maple Ridge is already more affordable than the bulk of the Lower Mainland. Just
polish her up and make her the best place to live!
9. A. Potential Procedural / Internal Issues or Barriers affecting development, permit and
construction processes -may simply discourage some potential builders. a.1. Time delays
(quite substantial) - may reflect the existing organization of the process as well as be a
result of the following issues a.2. Staff training- improvements needed with respect to
familiarity with the Building Bylaw and Building Code a.3. Internal quality control and
arbitration of disputes between Applicants and District - it appears there is no cost effective
process in place now for verification of communications issued by the District and also for
resolution of disputes between the Applicants and the District a.4. Internal coordination-
applicants should not be burden with coordination between the District departments or
individual employees a.5. Communication with applicants- there may be no control or
limits to delays in responding to enquires regarding the status of the applications a.6.
Procedures and internal policies - may not be optimized for achieving low costs to the
Applicant and the District - may require the Owner to retain specialists to justify decreasing
or deletion of clear redundancies imposed by those (obsolete) policies - may allow for
subjective decisions not necessarily following the intent of the Building Bylaw and the
referenced BC Building Code B Bylaws, Policies, Procedures and Community Plans-
amendments or verification and coordination needed for Garden Suite projects (or other
simple projects) b.1. Legal costs aspect- registration of covenants required by the district
The district provides legal services for registering a covenant for the intended use of the
garden suite, however sewer sump installation covenant (or perhaps other covenants) has/
have to be dealt with (or registered) by the Applicants and separately retained (other)
lawyers at a significant costs to the BP applicants. Please note that bundling together of all
legal covenants and providing those registration services by the District Lawyer can
significantly reduce the costs to the Applicant and time delays as well. b.2. Building Bylaw
and Existing Policies- proposed amendments or clarifications could be issued in a form of an
"official policy" - BP applicants for small buildings (under Part 9 of the BC Building Code)
should have a clear choice between relying on the District Staff or relying on Registered
Professional retained for the project, specifically with respect to the design and field review
of the construction. Building Inspectors will be able to access construction sites from time
to time, as required by the Bylaw, however will not be involved or specifically required for
any inspections and approvals. This can reduce the costs of the District (however will
increase the costs of the Owner/ Applicant). The advantage for the applicants is having
more flexibility with respect to the inspection and work scheduling. Professional
assurances will be provided to the District (refer to article 22.2 of the Maple Ridge Building
Bylaw) - applications made with building designs certified by Registered Professionals and
with letters of assurance provided, should be expedited. District will decrease its potential
liabilities for any aspect of construction at any time the Owners are willing to retain
registered professionals. - policies used by the District should be approved by the Council
and clearly referenced by the Bylaw or simply legislated into the Building Bylaw. As a
minimum, clear references and verified links to the utilized policies should be provided in
all bulletins or check-lists issued for �arden suites. - nolicies and �uidelines for tvnical
building sites and simple (garden suite) buildings should be always made as prescriptive,
with no ambiguity and with no references to additional (possibly subjective) judgements or
to unspecified levels of performance - sewer sump sizing policy should be amended to only
reference the required BC Building Code performance criteria. District may certainly
recommend certain sizes, however should not impose unnecessary costs by requiring
installation of oversized equipment. b.3. Permit Fees - Permit fees should be significantly
reduced or even canceled if the design and field reviews are done by the independent
registered professionals providing letters of assurance for compliance with the code.
Involvement of the District will be very limited. b.4. Design and Construction aspects-
clarification could be issued in form of an "official policy" - existing building services
connections (from existing main buildings) should be clearly allowed to be used when there
is a sufficient capacity of those services to accommodate new connections or new loads-
including potable water, sewer, drain tile systems and discharge and storm water discharge
lines. - in case of "flat" properties or building sites (less than 5% average slope) rain water
shall be clearly allowed to be discharged as per BC Building Code Provisions and in
compliance with the Official Community Planing guidelines- i.e. away from building
structures and into garden areas and not into the existing storm drainage infrastructure-
please note that garden suites are usually located away from all existing services.
Mechanical pumping of rain water shall be avoided or even prohibited from the energy
consumption / energy wasting point of view. C Additional Incentives and Encouragements
for Investors / garden suite Builders- for consideration c.1. tax incentives taxes, fees
etc...for garden suites could be reduced to not more then 1/3 of the existing main buildings.
Garden suites, usually occupied by 2 persons will likely consume water and generate
sewage in that proportion (1/3) to the main buildings occupied by 4 top 6 person families.
There will be no additional lawn sprinklers or swimming pools. c.2. building design/
construction costs incentives - District could consider commissioning of several (say 4 or
5) typical designs (simple, easy to build) to be available for the potential Owners/ Builders
to choose from and to utilize. There would be some initial costs involved, say 10,000.00 to
20,000.00 per design, however those costs could be recovered in the long run with more
constructions, increasing the district revenues, local employment, and with the reduction of
the time required for project reviews at the Building Permit application stage. - one of the
above typical designs could provide a more challenging option in a form of a guide, allowing
to reuse exiting cargo steel containers, as structurally sound building blocks for a garden
suites (that type or recycling is getting some popularity) c.3. use of new technologies -
there are well known and proven (already in use in Canada) construction guides allowing to
reduce excavation depths thus reducing the construction costs and environmental impacts
of new building- the staff could be provided with additional information - use of pre-
fabricated buildings (like BRITCO- Agassiz) - Applicants may not be aware of some potential
costs savings with the use of those ready to install on site structures. Use of those structures
would decrease the amount of site inspections required.
10. The District needs to manage the secondary suites as they do have negative impact on
neighbourhoods and making medium to high density areas also have negative impact. From
previous experience, I left a municipality that removed all single family zoning and the
parking and traffic on side streets were awful which was caused by permitting the
secondary suites as well as density changes, caused us to move away. I hope the District
treads careful.
11. Extremely disappointing. The only way rental housing will increase is to have a reworking
of the Rental Act. Renters have all the nower and it is a monev losin� nronosition to build
rental housing as it is nearly impossible to ensure your investment is not destroyed by
people who think it is their right to have something for nothing.
12. Housing Mix and Innovation More attention needs to be paid to enabling people to get a
home of their own. Homes could be built more economically. They don't have to be so big.
Those roofs with many peaks and gables are difficult to maintain and how many bathrooms
does one family really need? It is said that these big houses are what people want but in
truth that is all that developers choose to build. After WWII there was a huge housing crisis
when the troops came home and started families. Many small homes were built and are still
lived in today. Many people built their own homes a little at a time as they could afford it
and why not? Required inspections were done. Some families did the basement first and
then lived in it while saving for the addition and completion. Financial Incentives means
money is taken from my pocket (the taxpayer) and put into the pockets of developers. It
sounds good but the developer stands to gain much more than the citizens. Property tax
exemptions, density bonusing and relaxation of parking requirements is short sighted and
only benefits developers. Likewise rental supplement and Community Amenity Bonus.
Adaptable Housing. This is very wise to include in the building stage but it should be
required for all new subdivision not just 10%-15%. You never know when you or a family
member will be requiring an adaptable home. It can happen in an instant. The adaptations
listed are all good. It could also include wiring for an elevator. I am puzzled by "continuous
countertop." In fact sometimes a portion of the countertop must be lowered, also the sinks
to accommodate a wheelchair. Don't stop at 10-15%. Just require it in all new homes.
Market and Non-Market Housing Rather than incentives such as reduction in parking
requirements (see above in page) how about disincentives to inappropriate development
that requires changes to the OCP. If developers were stopped from buying cheap land then
lobbying council to allow sprawling development at their behest, think how much money
would be saved on public hearings, staff time etc. if we stuck to the OCP not to mention
present developments such as Silver Valley and now Albion with total disrespect for the
environment and future generations. Strata developments are not affordable housing, and
should be discouraged. It's a way to make the most money for developers but the owners
are always at the mercy of the strata corporation. Secondary suites within a primary
residence should be encouraged, but the red tape. The policies and bylaws go overboard. If
the people involved are happy with the arrangement let them be. A frequent complaint is
the burden in house suites put on parking. This is the fault of the District for allowing
reduced parking and narrow roads as an incentive for developers. Perhaps there could be a
mechanism for the District to act if unsafe conditions is reported by renter. Seniors housing
Maple Ridge has more than its share of seniors housing, assisted living and long term care
facilities. The reason there are waiting lists is due to the regionalization of health care
which places people from all over the region. People should be placed closer to home and
family. I am concerned about the move to private for profit facilities in housing and care of
seniors. Their focus is on profit not adequate staff and care. Services that would assist
seniors to maintain and live in their own homes is preferable. Another problem for
longtime homeowning seniors is the skyrocketing property tax. Other issues "Shopping"
needs to be defined. Is it an actual need or is it a"fix" for shopaholics? People who have
moved here, away from family and all things familiar and are looking for something. I get all
I need from shopping in Maple Ridge. With the many references to the development
community, it is clear that they have been very involved with developing the HAP. It is
unfortunate so much stock is placed on local municipalities as many of them have the same
develot�ers. Possiblv more creative solutions exist elsewhere. The Albion Plan is an
example of how developers have control over the development of Maple Ridge. The Plan
was initiated when "Council received several applications" for development in Albion.
While it was rejected by written comment at two open houses, the District accepted it on
the bases of a perceived "positive general feeling." In exchange for increased density, the
developers pays $3100 per unit, peanuts compared to what the developers get for the
increased units. In addition to the twice yearly Builders form, the draft HAP would
"establish a local builders and developers advisory group to provide input and insight on
new policy and regulatory road blocks. If the feedback form is meant to qualify as
community involvement - I believe it falls short.
HAP Consultation-Community Outreach July 26, 2014
Strategy
1. Support the development of a mix of housing forms
2. Incentivize medium density development
3. Introduce an adaptable housing policy
4. Create new rental housing opportunities
5. Continue to monitor secondary suites policies and
bylaws
6. Expand the garden suites program
7. Maintain rental housing standards
8. Support the non-market housing sector
9. Minimize the loss of existing housing
10. Expand the density bonusing practice
11.Introduce a community amenity policy for affordable
housing
12. Establish a housing reserve fund
13.Use financial incentives to support housing goals
14. Continue to purchase and lease land
15. Continue to support local community groups
16. Continue to advocate to senior levels of government
17. Continue to educate and create awareness
18. Expand or enhance the roles of advisory groups to
assist with HAP implementation
Comments:
Percentage
�
34.6%
.96%
15.3%
19.5%
.08%
28.8%
25%
17.3%
15.4%
.04%
25%
.08%
.04%
.96%
38.5%
19.5%
21.1%
.02%
Total Responses
APPENDIX C
Count
—•�
18
5
8
10
4
15
13
9
8
2
13
4
2
5
20
10
11
1
52
• Do not remove land from the ALR for housing developments
• Ensure amenities and services like schools are in place before housing is developed
• Re-assess the land that is currently in the ALC for agricultural suitability
• Housing developments like Silver Valley are poorly planned and do not provide enough access in
and out
• More affordable housing is needed
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7027-2013
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,
enacts as follows:
1.
2
3
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7027-2013."
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 7 Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 11176
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1596 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RM-1(Townhouse Residential).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 24t" day of September, 2013.
READ a second time the 22nd day of July, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 16t" day of September, 2014.
READ a third time the day of
ADOPTED, the
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
, 20
,20
CORPORATE OFFICER
1001
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.
Ma p No.
From:
To:
7027-2013
1596
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
N
SCALE 1:2,000
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6920 - 2012
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedules "B" &"C" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, enacts as
follows:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6920 - 2012
2. Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 6 District Lots 241 and 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 24517
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 830, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding Conservation.
3. Schedule "C" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 6 District Lots 241 and 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 24517
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 885, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding Conservation.
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 6425 - 2006 is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 26t" day of August, 2014.
READ A SECOND TIME the 26t" day of August, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 16t" day of September, 2014.
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 2014.
ADOPTED, the day of , 2014.
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 1002.1
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6920-2012
Map No. 830
From: Urban Residential
To: Conservation
N
1:2,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
6920-2012
885
Purpose: To Add to Conservation on Schedule C
N
1:2,000
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6921 - 2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, enacts as
follows:
1.
2.
3.
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6921 - 2012."
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 6 District Lots 241 and 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 24517
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1568, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RM-1(Townhouse Residential).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are
hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 22nd day of May, 2012.
READ a second time the 26t" day of August, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 16t" day of September, 2014.
READ a third time the day of
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this
ADOPTED, the day of , 2014.
PRESIDING MEMBER
, 2014.
day of , 2014.
CORPORATE OFFICER
1002.2
72978
�S 2686
32
o , «��
N� �5
� 12203
a14
12199
13
12193
��2
M 12179
a1�
12169
10
12157
9
12145
12210 � 7
18
Q �2200 19 0
�
N 2O M
12194 ti
21 a
12182
22
12170
12158 23
EP 73291
12146 24
�
� O 7
� �
� , � N � � 12119
� r N M 6
26 �I I � � � 12111
� �� _ _
� � I W
:5 �� �� 3 4 rn 5
I � p 6
- - � �I o o f�n
OBJS �� N � N N a �
26
12122
2�
12114
2$ N
� 12098 �
29 a
� — —
_ � 12088
�
LMP 31287
J O CO
� �
� �
N N
335 336
P 546 9
24517
RW 18394
EP 46757
1206 AVE. � EP 72979 w L I
L J I � 7
N�
N N IQ \ � I f� ti 1ZO7
2 23 24 N I 12075 � w �
17 � � I N 8
14 13m \ � o �20�o NWS 2582 I a �2of
�rn I_
o ��`� °' II cn � 3� � 9
N tio �2 � � a P 73290 � �20�
Zp6�� � f� I Z I
11� � I �
� os�s � w � 2 F � 10
� 120�
�o �Os�10 I a I_
� rn6, � � 0 1
`° w N 11
gg I � �20:
�. � 12025 I �
q��'� � O � 12020 I� i
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6921-2012
Map No. 1568
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
To: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
21 ti
12196 �
14 �
12201 22 a
� 12186
ti �
� 12587 � 12174 69 �
M �
� 68 a
16 N
12163 WICKLUND AVE.
oti228 0 0�
N M N N � NZ N3 4 N N
a 47 LMP 151 �
�
P 45046 _ _ — — �\ 2 N
M PARK LMP 4152
°' PARK
�
c�2 — — � _ —
� � LMP 39094 � - - ' 5 �
� q
LMS 4067 LMP 4151
12108 — — — — — — — — — — — — -
� _-- LMS ------� -L�[1P
� �2oss 9 �111 � I
op 12080 . �
� I LMP 1
� EP 78607 0 � I-� _
�20�2 8 N LMS 753 � ��� i� EF
a � �, � 6
7
�2oso � � � P 86
g LMP 5263 I � �
izo�----�——--��- �-�R1�,2.
� — — — —
� RW 22050 M� � I
0 5 I NI `°
N 12044 M I�I i I N
I�
4 M j�� I ��
12034
a � -� — —� r — -
12024 3 0 � �LMP 5047i � EP 8_
rn , I __ � .
N
SCALE 1:2,000
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, 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" 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. Schedule "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. 886, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adjusting the Conservation boundary.
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 6871 - 2006 is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 25t" day of October, 2011.
READ A SECOND TIME the 25th day of October, 2011.
SECOND READING WAS RECINDED the 8t" day of November, 2011.
RE-READ A SECOND TIME the 8th day of November, 2011.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 15th day of November, 2011.
READ A THIRD TIME the 22nd day of November, 2011.
SECOND AND THIRD READINGS WERE RESCINDED the 26th day of August, 2014.
RE-READ A SECOND TIME the 26th day of August, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 16t" day of September, 2014.
RE-READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 20 .
ADOPTED, the day of , 20 .
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATEOFFICER 1003■1
„,��� -- � io�n � NI NI NI NJ io�is �j KemKem
324 a 3 2 m 2 3 LM 51537
� 10608 107 AV E. 0� 10705 49 � i
� pp 10699 30 5p m
`” 10606 325 2 0 � � ;° ioss� 51 0 �ti
m m m m
326 10695 21 N 22N 23N 24N 310693 �068a ^�� 48
327 2 329 � CP 1 894 32 �
tasoa 3 8 � 6 14 52 �0682
��tih � 330 33' PARK 1 �os�s �osao tosss 56 47�.
ry ti ry��ti �� 332 � 2 iosso 7 13 �osss �osao �os�3 10672 �
vti M�' M� � iosss 57 55 h 46
`�3� �tia �osq� � tiM�' 333 a BC 2536 ios�o ryM � 54 0� 10662
4 ry3� �ti`° F �7�b b� U 3 4 5 8 9 10 a o 53 H L P 51 �
22j 3 ry �, ry�,� oo � ,� ,� 11 iosso 58 z �� 0 45
4 3�2 �� ry � � ios2a M � °' �� 12 Q �? � N 44 �
� M M � � N C
O1 ry3' N N M M ^J� � O V V
3 % N N � J ��65� m N N N (d`1
���' 08 3Q9 �. �ro�"� � 106AVE. 239�9�RONP � 6O �n o M 106AVE.
ry �°' 3 N o ti iosao a 64 � o
ry v`'y '� ry"'�� ' os9 4� � M �� � 1 6 a N N 65 a� � �
�5 2 �y N N C co co C m 6 1 J 72 0 o p cp
ry Q M ZV N N ZJ N 10596 N ��63� � N N N N
ry 336� v 1a 17 15 62 gg ios2i Q 73 74
� �� ry� 3^ J M 24 �osas Rem 3 10595 �os2o �
, ry ��w 2 � �oess �osao 18 P 3825 �osio g7 � � 71
2 h°' ry � a 23 0� � 63 6,�^ °s�2
4c4 ry �O M U 10575 10574 � 9 0,� � ^� �o
249 O 2S� N 10565 � 6$ o 'o�, �'0 70
8 Q �os�s 22 �ossa 20 c� 0 69 °�
� 2S7 w 2F��Nq�F 10560 m
2S2 °Sss �' 3SS M 21 q
O N .�
2�OSss '0Ss8s6 M°� 3S4 `�`�So EP 16557
S3 4 Q 'osss �oss4 PARK
2S �OSs� 'OSso S� ��3S3 °S4s 338 LM P 51537
4
�0
2 �OS43 �OSS4 S8 � ��53 548
SSO 'OS 3S M� 3S2 � �OS42 339
2S6 S3s '6 9�y M io529
M �o �0 36p Q 351 � �os36 340
M 2 Jf% S2� s36 ��/ 10521 `� �OSZB 347 O 9
ios�y ios2s36� 350
456
� 258 362 34913 �o5j8 342
10511 10516
10509 343 10515
363 348 �o5j
259 �o5oz ° a BCP 8155
10503 36a �oso 34q �
05
�oag2 �05 s Rem. Pcl. A
26��o°9y s�v 2 365 347 0 345
T� ,�QAB
� � °,p g66 ^346
�L6 '�o�`� �s a�'L
`L a�9 T 1� �'6�
�6 .,o a6o
� �,�^ �,0 6q� � P 10921
`L�O '`O 63 o�c,o A Rem. Pcl. A 6
g ��`L ��o0.,oa � �0°�
�,� � 0�55 1o�,�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
„,��� -- � io�n � NI NI NI NJ io�is �j KemKem
324 � 3 m 2 3 LM 51537
� 10608 107 AV E. 0� 10705 49 1�
� pp 10699 30 5p m
`” 10606 325 2 0 � � ;° ioss� 51 0 �ti
m m m m
326 10695 21 N 22N 23N 24N 310693 �068a ^�� 48
327 2 329 � CP 1 894 32 �
tasoa 3 8 � 6 14 52 �0682
��tih � 330 33, PARK 1 �os�s �osao tosss 56 47�.
ry ti ry��ti �� 332 � 2 iosso 7 13 �osss �osao �os�3 10672 �
vti M�' M� � iosss 57 55 h 46
`�3� �tia �osq� � tiM�' 333 a BC 2536 ios�o ryM � 54 0� 10662
4 ry3� v�� F �7�b b� U 3 4 5 8 9 10 a o 53 H L P 51 �
22j 3 ry ,� ry�,� oo � ,� ,� 11 iosso 58 z �� 0 45
4 3�2 �� ry � � ios2a M � °' �� 12 Q �? � N 44 �
�J M M � � N
O1 ry3' N N M M ^J� � O V� C
3 % N N �L J �0650 m N N N (d`1
���' 08 3Q9 �. �ro�"� � 106AVE. 239�9�RONP � 6O �n o M 106AVE.
ry �°' 3 N o ti iosao a 64 � o
`� v�'y 'O ry"'�� '�sg 4 4� � M � ro m 1 6 0 `" �' 65 v� � �
�5 2 �y N N C co co C m 6 1 J 72 0 o p cp
ry Q M ZV N N ZJ N 10596 N ��63� � N N N N
ry 336� v 1a 17 15 62 gg ios2i Q 73 74
� �,� ry� 3^ J M 24 �osas Rem 3 10595 �os2o �
� ry ��w 2 � �oess �osao 18 P 3825 �osio g� � , 71
2 h°' ry � a 23 0� � 63 6,�^ °s�2
4c4 ry �O M U 10575 10574 � 9 0,� � ^� �o
249 O 2S� N 10565 � 6$ o 'o�, �'0 70
8 Q �os�s 22 �ossa 20 c� 0 69 °�
� 2S7 w 2F��Nq�F 10560 m
2S2 °Sss �' 3SS M 21 q
O N .�
2�OSss '0Ss8s6 M°� 3S4 `�`�So EP 16557
S3 4 Q 'osss �oss4 PARK
2S �OSs� 'OSso S� ��3S3 °S4s 338 LM P 51537
4
�0
2 �OS43 �OSS4 S8 � ��53 548
SSO 'OS 3S M� 3S2 � �OS42 339
2S6 S3s '6 9�y M io529
M �o �0 36p Q 351 � �os36 340
M 2 Jf% S2� s36 ��/ 10521 `� �OSZB 347 O 9
ios�y ios2s36� 350
456
� 258 362 34913 �o5j8 342
10511 10516
10509 343 10515
363 348 �o5j
259 �0502 ° a BCP 8155
10503 36a �oso 34q �
05
�oag2 �05 s Rem. Pcl. A
26��o°9y s�v 2 365 347 0 345
T� ,�QAB
� � °,p g66 ^346
�L6 '�o�`� �s a�'L
`L a�9 T 1� �'6�
�6 .,o a6o
� �,�^ �,0 6q� � P 10921
`L`O '`O 63 0�5o A Rem. Pcl. A 6
g ��`L ��o0.,oa � �0°�
�,� � 0�55 1o�,�ti so BCP 8155
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6871-2011
Map No. 886
Purpose: To Add To Conservation on Schedule C
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,
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, 2011.
READ A SECOND TIME the 25th day of October, 2011.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 15th day of November, 2011.
READ A THIRD TIME the 22nd day of November, 2011.
SECOND AND THIRD READINGS WERE RESCINDED the 26th day of August, 2014.
RE-READ A SECOND TIME the 26th day of August, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 16th day of September, 2014.
RE-READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 20 .
ADOPTED, the day of , 20 .
1003.2
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
����� -- � io�n � NI NI NI � a io�is (j KemKef71 �"�S
� 324 a 3 m 2 3 LM 51537
� 10608 107 AVE. 0� 10705 11
m 10699 50 � 49
� I32$ °'
N 2 m m m m �oss� 51 � �ti \�i
10606
326 10695 21 N 22N 23 N 24 N 310693 ��s83 �^°� r's
3� CP 1 894 32 48 �
1060427 28 ��293 � � 6 14 52 10682 �
��tih � � 3033, PARK �os�s �osao — tosss � �
56 47 �.
ti �ti � 33 � iosso 7 � v� iosao �p 10672 �
�, tiM �,`� 2 � 2 BCP 25369 � 13 �os63 a�, � s>3
v� "��' M^ � � iosss — 57 55 �'S '` 46
ry3 tia �os � ryM� �3 c� _ � 2536 � — — � � a �os�o � S3g/ Q 10662
�4 ry3 �ti`O q�F �y�b b� U 3 4 5 8 9 10 \� p J P51538 a o 54 53 � L P 51 �
2j43ry3�2 ��� ryry m� � ios2a M � � 11^ 12 ��� �osso 58 Q �ry ry 45� N qq �
� �
�J M M � � N
0
O� �O N3', N N N N ��� \ ��65� m N N N N
���' 8 3Q9 �. �ro�"� � 106 AVE. 239�9 60 �n � M 106 AVE.
ry �°' 3 � N o iosao a 64 ��
`\' �` O�y 'O `�'"'�� �O S 92 4�7 q� � N N C rro ro C � n � 6 m F)' I J N� 65 7 2 0 0 0 �
•M�j ry Q 6% ZV N N ZJ M 10596 N �0630 - N N N �
3�8 336 M �a � 15 62 ggios2i � 73 �q N
�, 8� � v � � 10595 P51538 � �'S 538
b� ,� �,� � r, J M 24 �osas Rem 3 ios2o _ _ �
�� ry 3 w� I a � 10585 10580 10610 �
!) ry a ry I� 2 18 � P 3825 63 / \ 67 ^ � 6 71
\ 24 �h � a 23 10574 � �� ! ��� 6^ �'2
c9 ry �O � m U 10575 M 2i C� �� �o
� 249 O 2S� N 10565 � 9� c�c+ A q 68 0 '06, �'0 70
$ ��I Q �os�s 22 �ossa 20 c� a s's sa��1 � 69 ° w
`��` 2S7 o V "�i9
��o 'os � 3 �osso 00 , _'
�N 2S2 ss SSM 2� A LMP 51539
�^ � � ��
� 2�OSss '0Ss8s6 M°� 3S4 `�so EP 16557
S3 4 Q 'osss �oss4 PARK
��� 2S4 �OSs� 'OSeo S� ��3S3 °S4s 338 LM P 51 b 37 _ ��
2 ��543 �OSS4 S8 O 'OS3 �054g '_ i
�/^�' 2 SS�os3s �os4ss9 y M 302 , �0sa2 339 / i- _ J
S6 3 "' Q 35 � szs � �0536 34p � ��-
v a �os2� �os36 60 � � M � f�
M 257 �/ 10521 N �osZB 34 � 0 9 �� //
ios�y ios2s36� 350
� 10513 3 r� 456 � �' �i �
,, 258 tos�� ios16362 349 ��5j8 42 RW 66539 i g/
363 3qg �0501 �0 343 10515 ——�� �� Q p,�$2
25g P� i s�o a ��'� BCP 8155
10502 M � / / /
10503 ��Sos 344 � M
365�� ��05 5 �� �� � Rem. Pcl. A
10Qg%� �
Zg010a9y s�9 Mp 32 3g5 347 0 345 / '' �/�/
�6,� o��� �o,�Q 1oq8 366 ^346 /� _ � J�
,� ti r —
_ �6�^0��9 sr �.�°` �60 � / M I
�\� 6,�^0���. �06 �64� � / a� P 10921
o� �, ,� �50 -o Rem. Pcl. A / � � g
'�g ���) �6� ^O�6 ,�p �69 0/ � ,
/�@ � � 0�55 1o�,�ti so BCP 8155 0 /�
/ /
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
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7088-2014
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Figure 2(Land Use Plan) and Figure 3D (Horse
Hamlet) of the Silver Valley Area Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, enacts as
follows:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7088-2014."
2. Amendment to Official Community Plan Schedule "A", Chapter 10.3, Part Vl, A- Silver Valley,
Figure 2- Land Use Plan, and Figure 3D - Horse Hamlet for that parcel or tract of land and
premises known and described as:
North 126 Feet Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772) Lot 15 Section 22 Township 12 New
Westminster District Plan 9364;
Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772) Lot 15 Except: North 126 Feet; Section 22 Township 12
New Westminster District Plan 9364;
Lot 30 Section 22 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 24120
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 883, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby re-designated to Low Density Urban; Low/Medium Density
Residential and Medium Density Residential.
3. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 22nd day of July, 2014.
READ A SECOND TIME the 22nd day of July, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 16t" day of September, 2014.
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 2014.
ADOPTED, the day of , 20
PRESIDING MEMBER
CORPORATE OFFICER
1004.1
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
Pu rpose:
Fro m:
7088-2014
883
To Amend Figure 2(Land Use Plan) and 3D (Horse Hamlet)
of the Silver Valley Area Plan
Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and
Low/Medium Density Residential
To: � Low Density Residential � Medium Density Residential
� Low/Medium Density Residential
— — Urban Area Boundary
N
1:2,500
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7053-2014
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge,
enacts as follows:
1.
2
3
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7053-2014."
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
North 126 Feet Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772) Lot 15 Section 22 Township 12
New Westminster District Plan 9364;
Parcel "A" (Reference Plan 13772) Lot 15 Except: North 126 Feet, Section 22
Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 9364;
Lot 30 Section 22 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 24120
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1606 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban-Medium Density Residential), and R-2 (Urban
Residential District).
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 8t" day of April, 2014.
READ a second time the 22nd day of July, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 16t" day of September, 2014.
READ a third time the day of
ADOPTED, the
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
,20
, 20
CORPORATE OFFICER
1004.2
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 7053-2014
Map No. 1606
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
To: � RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
� RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) � R-2 (Urban Residential District)
— — Urban Area Boundary
N
SCALE 1:2,500
MA�LE RI��E
$rilish �okumhra
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE:
and Members of Council FILE N0:
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING:
Final Reading
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013
24286 102 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
September 30, 2014
2013-013-RZ
COUNCIL
Bylaw 6983-2013 has been considered by Council and at Public Hearing and subsequently was
granted third reading. The applicant has requested that final reading be granted. The purpose of
the rezoning is to permit the subdivision into 18 single family lots not less than 213 m2.
This application received first reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013 on April 9, 2013.
Council granted second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013 on June 24, 2014. This
application was presented at Public Hearing on July 15, 2014, and Council granted third reading on
July 22, 2014.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013 be adopted.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Council considered this rezoning application at a Public Hearing held on July 15, 2014. On July 22,
2014 Council granted third reading to Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.
7090-2014 and Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013 with the stipulation that the
following conditions be addressed:
Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure;
Road dedication as required;
Park 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; and
A disclosure statement from a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any
evidence of underground fuel storage tanks.
1005
The following applies to the above:
1. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure was granted on July 29,
2014.
2. A survey plan showing the required road dedication has been registered at the Land Title
Office.
3. A survey plan showing the required park dedication has been registered at the Land Title
Office.
4. A geotechnical report has been registered as a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office.
5. A demolition permit has been applied for, and the building will be removed.
6. A disclosure statement from the Professional Engineer has been received and states that
there is no evidence of underground fuel storage tanks on the subject site.
CONCLUSION:
As the applicant has met Council's conditions, it is recommended that final reading be given to
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013.
"Original signed by Adam Rieu" for
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013
Appendix C - Subdivision Plan
'r�
8 9
N N
N N
1 2 3 4--5 6 ff 910 1 12 13
��°������'�����
PARK
$ CP 18974
�
7 � 29 30 31 m
N N N N N N
AV E
� � � �
N � N N N
N
� 9 28 27 26
O � 2� 2J 10131
a13 n1 24 10125
U 23 10121
m14m
15
�
LMP 35918
�
�
N
� � � � � � �
N
� � � � � �
0 5 4 3 2 1
7 8 9 10111�
ti � � � � �
N N N N N N
0148 '
0142 �
0136 �
0132 �
o� Zs 1
� �
N N
141�
PARK
BC P 18 974
oh`�' PARK 10110 Za
�ARK BCP 18974 10106 21
K�C3
10102 �—
�10099 � 10096 �
M10097 m 10092 N
��10095 N 10088 �
j M10093 10084 �
M10091 10080 �
;�10089 10076 �
� d90071 0070 I`
�it f Pitt � __ �
Mea ows ; �
District of
Langley
Scale: 1:1,500
�
22
APPENDIX A
4�1 ���� 4�f v 4� vq 5'� 52 1 2 3� 4 1 2 3
� � � 6) M f� � � � M f� � � h � M
O � � N N M M M� � LC) � � � CO
� � M M M � M C� C'7 � M C'7 M M M M
� N N � � � N � � � N � � � � � �
E1/2of2
P 17126
� 100 98 �p
�100 95 100 94 �
�I 00 91 100 90 �
�I 00 87 v~i 100 86 �
�100 83 N 100 82 �
�100 79 100 78 �
00100 75 00 74 �
LMP 34684 �
� � � � �
� P 2 85 M N N
� M �
24 � N 25 � �
� 00 CO O N
� � N M �y
c� c� c� M � N N ,�
�' g' � � � � a
CP Subject Property 490
2019 18 1413 10
� � Lf) � Lf) 6� M f� �
O �
N � � V � � CO
M M M m M M M M M
N N N N N N N N N
101 A AVE.
O C4 N N � M� � �� �
J M M M C'7 M M M M M M M
� � � � � � V � � � �
1��N ��6� 4��101112
BCP 13188
PARK
�10113
�10109
�10105
�100 97
�100 93
Cp1C 9
�100 85
�1c�. 8
��'I 00 77
�100 73
10120 �
101�
10112 �
�
�
M
�
19
36 35 3�
� � �
101
� � � � � � �
� M C� M M C� C� M
� � � V � � �
a 3 2 1 4 4� 47 4�
M M 3,
N i nn� �za�.�
00 80 �
00 76 �
I
� � 24286-102 Ave
� N
i N
��
� o �! CORPORATION OF
��� � TH E DI ST RI CT O F
�o
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�
� DATE: Feb 19, 2013 2013-013-RZ BY: JV
APPENDIX B
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6983-2013
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,
enacts as follows:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6983-2013."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
East Half Lot 2 Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District PIan17126
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No.1586 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 9th day of April, 2013.
READ a second time the 24t" day of June, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 15t" day of July, 2014.
READ a third time the 22nd day of July, 2014.
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this 29t" day of July, 2014.
ADOPTED, the day of ,20 .
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
27
�,6 � A
O � oJ N c0 cD N N O oJ cO oJ cO cO � � N cD O � oJ O N cD O V oJ
u� u� u� c0 c0 I� oJ O� O O � N M V u� u� cD cD I� I� I� oJ oJ oJ O� O� O�
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
� � � � � � � � � � V V V V � � � � � � � � � � � � V
9� 7 6 5 1�1� 1�1�14151617 18 1� �1�6 ry/ 1E1� �5 2ry2 ��� 26
LM P 36296
BCP3134 � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 �1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 01 213
� 3 I� I� u� M M O� u� u� u� O� M I� u� O� M I� u� O�
� c0 I� oJ O� O N N M� I u� u� u� cD cD I� I� I� oJ oJ O� O� O�
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
ry N N N N N N N N N N ������ N N N N N N N
�CP 1010 BCP 9310 LMP 35918
102 AV E
N
� N � oJ O N �
a PARK �- �- �- � � �
N BCP 30529 N N N N N N
PARK g 5 4 3 2 1
CP 18974 B 2 5$
21 B P 30 1 g E 1/2 of 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 � 2g3031 m 78 91 111
M � O� O N N � �i cD � I� I� � oJ oJ oJ
19526 r � � y a N N N N N N ������
� N N N N N � � � N N N N N N
N
101A AVE.
o � o � � � o�aa�� N
� N N N �G� a
36 O� � � � � N N N N ��42 " cv
52 N N N 1�' 1� 9 28 27 26 0136 � 7N 141
as�� 24 23 22 0 'r'2510131 o�s218
ioiao 0 12 `r' o�za19m
38 $N 2� 0 10133 M N24 10125
39� a�oi2s N�oiso � 13 U 23 toizi
340U 2� m 14 m PARK
� ioizo BCP 18974
241 1900 ioiis � ioiio 15 °'
�$ 18
082 ioios io�oo 0��,� PARK 10110 20 22 N
10093 ^� 10106 21 a
96 3 LMP 53685 16�V�ARK BCP 18974 m
86 10102
42 �10099 N 10096 � �,� OC
M10097 10092 N 0095 OC
N � °�10095 � 10088 � v � �10091 OC
0 41 PARK �hooss ��ooaa ��� iooa� � oc
�� �.,,,� z 40 _..n ��nna� 10080 � d^ �10083 N oC
221 � 2412� 2� 271 8 2913a 1132 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 30 �o2a
� u� rn M �� u� rn M �� u� � u� �� u� rn M �� mM1O2Q
M O O<< N N N M M�� u� u� u� N N N I� I� oJ
V M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 31�o2ai
N � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
io2,a,ave. BCP 7533
=1� (32�33
LMP 34684
BCP 17489
p O
P 2 V �
M
l oJ cD � N
N
J M M
� � �' � �
�
8 �
�1� 2 19 � 1f
� ` �
O N
M M M
� � V
BCP 97491
101A AVE.
� � G � M O M �
N N ZJ N N N N N
d d ��n o 4
1�0
101AAVE.
N
N
N N I I
7 8 9 ��
�
� 1C
i 1617 18 N �o
o � o � o � o � o � o � � � � � � � m m
� N N M M�� l[) (D M M M M M M M M M �
M M M M M M M M M:M M �
� � � � � � � � � � N N N � N N N NC N
N N N N N N N N N^1 N � g 0 M� 2363 G3 v�� �
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112 N
BCP 13188
PARK
����o
�p10113 10112 �
�oios
M10105
� �10097
M �p10093 F a a
N N
r,��ooas � 3 2
��ooae �
� �p10081 10080 �
�10077
�10073 �0076 �n
N N �� 1006 WO�BAVE.
N
� oJ N cD O � oJ cD O � oJ N cD O
9 A r r W W Q� O� Q� O � � � N N M
.P N � N N N N N N N M M M M M M M
� N p� � 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ln
PARK � N N No Np o6 �5 24 23 ZLI P 20 346$ 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9�
N N �(� LV L� L d
31 30 2 �
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6983-2013
Map No. 1586
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
To:
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
10072 co
10068 ^
8
— PARK N
�
�
M
P 6 4
36 3534333 3130 9 28 � A
M I� � O� M I� �[)
LCl LCl (D (D (D I� I� W W
M M M M M M M M M
� � � � � � N N N
i otd+xrz�.
ro
rn
M
37
N
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX C
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF
EAST HALF LOT 2 SEC 3 TP 12 NWD PLAN 17126
CINC AODRESS:
24286 102 Ave. , dlaple Rfdgq BC
P.l.D.010-224-645
102 AVENUE
90b8'S6'
o ROAD s,.ss,
� � aa�.sm� � �
90' OB' qe'
8.660 8.660 8.66� 8.66� B.660 8.653
N2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6
pW/ g�pp,�5g 255.4m� 254.9m� 254.4m� 253.9m� 253.4m2 252.&n�
� �a �� 1 2
o� �� P� �� o m PLAN BCP32285
SCALE I: 5�� q.66� B 660 8.6fi0 B.660 8.660 B.66J SRW PLAN BCP774H8
s o m so 3o LANE o 89• as• LANE sz• � LANE
ALL OISTANCES ARE lN NE7RES 3I1.Bm�
7he lntmded pfat sfze o/ fhk p/on /s S6LYnm in w/dfh ond �&016 8.�76 8.016 8.016 0.016 11.885 �
432mm !n hefght (C size) nhen p(otted al o scWe o( 1:500. t� � n
11 12 7 8 9 1 O 11 12 n" ��
PtAN Btl�23558 216.7m� 277.3m� 278.Om� 218.fim 219.3m� 326.4m� � m S I
LEGEND m uO1i `� umi v ,°n' ,°1n °uS m Q 2
e
OENOTES CqYlROL MONUMENrFCUND � o n o � � � � � � � � 4 �I
b
OENOTES LEAD PLUG fWNO
DEN07ES LEAD PLUC SET I
OENOIES SiANDARO /R0.Y POST FOUND
DEN07ES STANDARD IRqV POSi SEi 8.016 8.016 8.016 8.016 8.076 11.893
Wt DEN07ES 'M7NESS 90' 20' 01'
ha OEN07E5 HEC7ARE5 -
m2 OEN07E5 SWARE ME7RE5 �- �''�
101 A AVE. ROAD `-��',` 101 A AVE.
857.6m� FL4hf 17!Zti
IN7£GRA7ED SURVEY AREA Na. 36 MAPLE RIOGE 90' 20' ot'
NAD 83 (CSRS 2005) 8.660 8.660 B.660 8.660 8,680 8.679
Grld beanngs arc denve0 /ram observoNons befween .,
geadeHc cont�ol monvments 89HOOOfi ond 85H0687. °i
T1rk plan sho�s homm�tal g�aund-level distances unless 14 13 �
ate�i=� specified. 70 �omP�te gdd distances, mvlBply 13 14 15 16 17 18 A w
'. graund-levd distan[es by fhe owage canb'med (attor PCAN BCP13558 267.1m� 259.7m� 252.3m� 244.9m� 237.fim� 235.Om� �+ m Z
of 0.9996099, wh7ch hos bem denved /rom conbol W , m m n o
monument 94H0006 ane 95H06a7. Z 'a� e ,°�' e _uO1i o n m !� � o � m S J
� p� PN PN PN ON N QS �
n o'� o � � 4
8.699 8.699 0.00= -
a,•LANE OB' B9' 37' 12'� LANE
LANE B4' 31�,^� 9.970
42.249
PARK
ososna
PARK ( ^
PUN BCPiB974
.` „ 19
W am.ar��
Zma N
' "" � PARK
PUN BCP13188
90'S6'O6'
sz.00s p LANE
,p<i � 90'S6'O6'
'h 'L I8205 m W
k� p�% µ Z
15.500 "�
h Q
o� J
Q� 2O: a
p n ssa.�
� n p N �
12.181 15.�09 21.204 I
90' ' 10' , 47' �
SRW PLAN WP36J47 15.50 6 Q
Pe�imefv dimmsions are denved /som fIEiD SURVfY. 53 � PUN LAIPJ6396 .
- PLAN LAIP36346
Lot /ayuvt based on Ca(e Group Consu(tanls ke}plo� dated Jan 06, 2014. M
This Plan was prepored f fhe exNusiro use N
o/ our c/fait. 7 get Land Surveying Ltd. accep(s no respans�biiity _
o IfobOity /o� any danages fhat may be sv/fe�ed by o
thi�d party as o resvlt o/ reproduction, tronsmission or
ott�ronon to tnts dacument wlmout consent of Target tond surve�;ng �te. 7}{�S PLAN UES Wl7NIN THE GREA7ER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DtS7R1CT
DRAWING DATE: JUNE 2, 2014 I
TA�I"
AN� VlYINO
SURREY B. C.
604-583-6I61
MA�LE RI��E
$rilish �okumhra
T0:
FROM
City of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE:
and Members of Council FILE N0:
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING:
SUBJECT: Final Reading:
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012
23103 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
September 30, 2014
RZ/087/08
COUNCIL
Bylaws 7082-2014 and 6899-2012 have been considered by Council and at Public Hearing and
subsequently were granted Third Reading. The applicant has requested that Final Reading be
granted. The purpose of the rezoning is to permit a subdivision for 38 single family residential lots
and remainder land. This application does not include the central portion of the site, which is
intended for a future School use, and the northeast corner, which is intended for a future townhouse
development.
Council granted first reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 - 2012 on April 24, 2012. Council
granted first and second reading for Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014 on
May 27, 2014 and second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012 on May 27, 2014. This
application was presented at Public Hearing on June 17, 2014 and Council granted third reading on
June 24, 2014.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014 be adopted; and
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012 be adopted.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The purpose of the rezoning is to permit a subdivision for 38 single family residential lots and
remainder lands. This application does not include the central portion of the site, which is intended
for a future School use, and the northeast corner, which is intended for a future townhouse
development.
Council granted first reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 - 2012 on April 24, 2012. Council
granted first and second reading for Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014 on
May 27, 2014 and second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012 on May 27, 2014.
Council considered Bylaws 7082-2014 and 6899-2012 at a Public Hearing held on June 17, 2014.
On June 24, 2014 Council granted Third Reading to Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
1006
Bylaw No. 7082-2014 and Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012, with the stipulation
that the following conditions be addressed:
Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of
the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii. Amendment to Official Community Plan Schedule "A", Chapter 10.3, Part VI, A- Silver
Valley, Figure 2- Land Use Plan, Figure 3A - Blaney Hamlet, and Figure 4- Trails / Open
Space;
iii. Road dedication as required;
iv. Park dedication as required;
v. Notification to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Ministry of Environment
for in-stream works on the site;
vi. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office
which addresses the suitability of the site for the proposed development; and
vii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether
there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks.
The following applies to the above:
1. A Rezoning Servicing Agreement has been registered as a Restrictive Covenant and the
required security has been provided;
2. Amendments to Official Community Plan Schedule "A", Chapter 10.3, Part VI, A- Silver
Valley, Figure 2- Land Use Plan, Figure 3A - Blaney Hamlet, and Figure 4- Trails / Open
Space are included in Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014, and will
be amended with the final approval of this application;
3. It has been determined by the Engineering and Planning Departments that road
dedication is not required at the Rezoning stage as all roads adjacent to the property
meet the required minimum road widths. On-site roads will be dedicated with the
subdivision plan approval;
4. The Park dedication plan has been approved by the Approving Officer;
5. The applicant has provided the District with proof of application to the Ministry of Forests,
Lands and Natural Resource Operations for in-stream works in Cattell Brook. The
Environmental Consultant has confirmed that notification to the Department of Fisheries
and Oceans is not required;
6. The Geotechnical Report has been registered as a Restrictive Covenant; and
7. A disclosure statement has been provided by Don Bowins, the civil engineer for the
development, confirming that there is no evidence of underground fuel storage tanks on
the site.
'r�
CONCLUSION:
As the applicant has met Council's conditions, it is recommended that Final Reading be given to
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014 and Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
Prepared by: Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7082-2014
Appendix C- Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012
Appendix D - Subdivision Plan
3-
N
District of
Langley
23103 136 AVENUE
�
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�
Scale: 1:2,500 I ��FRASE R �--�-��—� �y DATE: Sep 17, 2014 FILE: RZ/087/08 BY: PC
I_1»�►I��/:�-3
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7082-2014
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Section 10.3. Part VI - Silver Valley Area Plan,
Figures 2, 3A and 4 of the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7082-2014
2. Figures 2 and 3A are hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known
and described as:
Lot 10 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 38408 except
Plan BCP48908 and EPP27588
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 879, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby redesignated as shown.
4. Figure 4 is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises know and
described as:
Lot 10 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 38408
except Plan BCP48908 and EPP27588
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 880, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding and removing Conservation and
Neighbourhood Park as shown.
5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 27t" day of May, 2014.
READ A SECOND TIME the 27t" day of May, 2014.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 17t" day of June, 2014.
READ A THIRD TIME the 24t" day of June, 2014
ADOPTED, the day of ,2014
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 1006■1
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No
Map No.
Pu rpose:
Fro m:
7082-2014
879
To Amend Figure 2(Land Use Plan) and 3A (Blaney Hamlet)
of the Silver Valley Area Plan
Eco Cluster, Low Density Urban, Low/Medium Density Residential,
Meduim Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, Neighbourhood Park
T0: � Low/Medium Density Residential
� Medium Density Residential
� Civic
� Conservation
� Neighbourhood Park
N
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No. 7082-2014
Map No. 880
Purpose: To Add and Remove Conservation and Neighbourhood Park
from Figure 4(Trails/Open Space) of the Silver Valley Area Plan as shown:
� To Add To Conservation � To Add To Neigbourhood Park
� To Remove From Conservation � To Remove From Neighbourhood Park
N
SCALE 1:3,000
APPENDIX C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 6899-2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012."
2. Part 4, GENERAL REGULATIONS, Section 406, REGULATIONS FOR THE AREA, SHAPE AND
DIMENSIONS OF LOTS THAT MAY BE CREATED BY SUBDIVISION, Subsection 7 is amended by
the deletion of (d) in its entirety and replacing it with the following:
(d) a portion of a lot is used or intended to be used for a public service, school or public park
use and the title to such portion is or is intended to be in the name of the Municipality,
or the School District, or the Greater Vancouver Regional District or a public or private
utility company, the minimum dimension and area requirements specified in Schedule
"D" shall not apply to such portion or to the remainder of the lot, provided that if the
remainder of the lot meets the requirements of Schedule "D" it shall not be further
subdivided except in accordance with Schedule "D";
3. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 10 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 38408 except
Plan BCP48908 and EPP27588
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1558 a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-1 (Residential District), R-2 (Urban
Residential District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), and P-1 (Park
and School).
4. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached thereto are
hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 24th day of April, 2012.
READ a second time the 27th day of May, 2014 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the 17th day of June, 2014.
READ a third time the 24th day of June, 2014 .
ADOPTED, the day of , 2014 .
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 1006■Z
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. 6899-2012
Map No. 1558
From: A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
T0: � R-1 (Residential District)
� R-2 (Urban Residential District)
� RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Den
� P-1 (Park and School)
Residential
N
SCALE 1:3,000
SKETCH PLAN SHOWING TH PROPOSED 40 OT SUBDINSON
c' � �B `�"
R.�,�4 ��� �96 '�9 0
A� ,a �,e N
` �"45 ' a.p q�,�,a 120,_ ��c��
9�F �3��' �1� � 1377H A �ENUE
a.w �.��, "" i e'1 �.�.�. F... 2 � 3a � -#q'u�
� 9 � ry p .w., 4 ��il d�
PARK �� it �`° 28 B �7 .�i � G t
.,.. IF ` p�.'io•
�ANE . :� 0 ��' �� � s2 �.�;,_ �g
8 w � ` �i � �6 33 � +` �
,�, u,o, a ^ �� �� � �, _ �
a � �� � �
7 B� Y5 3¢ f$ �
rcvr ea.wer � �
� � � n �4 35 Y
6� � 3 _. . � � � � �{
s,m o o ,23 n,36 i
�' S � 4 � � m � � 4 3� �
M �4� q� 5�... � � 3 �t u8-.
� vec � � R_' " ��
Q � 3 B s ..w � ._ „ „n ` "y
rn =� �
Nm �, .a„ � � ...,, � ' ; �0 19 a re » - �`�� �°
a
2 re 8 �s yx
� A� e �,� � z�� > a
� a oa. y '.� �,,.. . �.�oo �-
� � � - ---- �a,m
ri.w svsc �iw 136th A�EN!/E � `-"-u�i__n -``
, m� � „ r"� � �
�- '" ,,,, r - ,.� �� t �
136th A l/ENUE � n.,,� �o r PARr r3 `a ;° '�;r ,
�mn u m RS-16 C k ,� a .. e
� �~ n �2 �, .� � "J'4yv.
9 e )0 - �AYK � �.
�4 73 �•1 2 " �N o+' . N PARi 13
^'4 9
.ms �"� qD � •
13 12 11 10 9
��
�
PARK 5� „µ ,,,
��P
ti
L PARK
P�RK
APPENDIX D
�N3,Tn PARK BCS3895
�,o•
, , 137TH A �ENUE
.x,,, -� . . ,r.�,a �
17
PARK
.�AR. � "'.°e8- ��
�
`7// >ani pW-
J rrzw i'
�
i � ��
a �a o
N
_ n.ru N
,eawaa vu.v rr.c�
1367H A liE'NUE
2
,,,� 8 �.�� �
�
REM 6
�w �,��o
TP 12
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW N0. 7105-2014
A Bylaw to exempt from taxation, certain properties within
the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions of the Community Charter, S.B.C., 2003, Chapter 26, a
Municipal Council may exempt certain land and improvements from taxation, where, in the
opinion of the Municipal Council, the use of the land and improvements qualifies for
exemption;
AND WHEREAS, the Municipal Council deems it expedient to exempt certain land and
improvements;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge in
open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. This Bylaw shall be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Tax Exemption Bylaw No.
7105-2014".
2. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(i) of the Community Charter, the following
lands and improvements owned or held by an athletic or service club or association
and used principally as a public park or recreation ground or for public athletic or
recreational purposes be exempt from taxation:
(a) Owned by the Ruskin Community Hall
Roll No.: 94856-0000-8 28395 96t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$311,500 4,108 4,242 4,380
(b) Owned by the Girl Guides of Canada
Roll No.: 05322-0300-1 26521 Ferguson Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$612,600 8,079 8,342 8,613
(c) Owned by the Scout Properties (B.C./Yukon) Ltd.
Roll No.: 05299-0100-0 27660 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$1,169,000 15,417 15,918 16,436
1007
(d) Portion of Land and Improvements owned by the Corporation of the District of
Maple Ridge
Leased to: Ridge Meadows Senior Society
Roll No.: 52700-0001-0 12148 224th Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$3,592,000 47,089 48,620 50,200
(e) Owned by the Fraternal Order of Eagles, Maple Ridge Aerie #2831
Roll No.: 73878-0300-6 23461 132nd Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$564,100 7,440 7,681 7,931
3. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(i) of the Community Charter, the following
lands and improvements owned or held by an athletic or service club or association
and used principally as a public park or recreation ground or for public athletic or
recreational purposes be exempt from taxation; and in accordance with Section
225(2)(e) of the Community Charter, the following land and improvements that are
eligible golf course property, being land maintained as a golf course be exempt from
taxation:
(a) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: Maple Ridge Golf Course Ltd. (Public Golf Course)
Roll No.: 21238-1001-1 20818 Golf Lane
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$2,270,800 29,604 30,566 31,558
4. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(a) of the Community Charter, the following land
and improvements that are owned or held by a charitable, philanthropic, or other not for
profit corporation, and the council consider are used for the same purpose be exempt
from taxation:
(a) Owned by the Maple Ridge Search and Rescue Society
Roll No.: 84120-0005-0 23598 105t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$591,000 7,748 8,000 8,260
-2-
5. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(d) of the Community Charter, the interest in
land and improvements owned by a public or local authority that are being used by a
corporation or organization that would be eligible for exemption if the land and
improvements were owned by that corporation or organization, shall be exempt from
taxation:
(a) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Roll No.: 84292-0257-0 10235 Jackson Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$2,613,000 34,255 35,368 36,518
(b) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: Katie's Place
Roll No.: 84292-0100-0 10255 Jackson Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$187,900 2,463 2,543 2,626
(c) Owned by the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District
Leased to: Ridge Meadows Recycling Society
Roll No.: 84112-0001-0 10092 236t" Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$1,221,000 16,007 16,527 17,064
(d) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Arts Council
Roll No.: 31711-1000-0 11944 Haney Place
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$11,201,000 146,840 151,612 156,539
(E) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: Alouette Home Start Society
Roll No.: 42274-0000-4 11932 221 Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$388,000 1,783 1,841 1,901
-3-
6. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(f) of the Community Charter, in relation to
property that is exempt under section 220(1)(h) [buildings for public worship], the
following land and improvements, that have been deemed as necessary to the
building set apart for public worship, be exempt from taxation:
(a) Owned by Wildwood Fellowship Church
Roll No.: 05071-0100-5 10810 272nd Street
Exempt 2014 Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$246,600 3,252 3,358 3,467
(b) Owned by Pt. Hammond United Church
Roll No.: 10622-0100-0 11391 Dartford Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$125,300 1,653 1,706 1,762
(c) Owned by Christian & Missionary Alliance - Canadian Pacific District
Roll No.: 20804-0401-1 20399 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$381,400 5,030 5,194 5,362
(d) Owned by the St. Pauls Evangelical Lutheran Church of Haney B.C.
Roll No.: 20861-0100-4 12145 Laity Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$350,100 4,617 4,767 4,922
(e) Owned by the St. John the Divine Anglican Church
Roll No.: 20920-0100-1 21299 River Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$387,200 5,107 5,273 5,444
(f) Owned by Roman Catholic Archbishop of Vancouver Church
Roll No.: 21140-0400-1 20285 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$647,000 8,533 8,810 9,097
-4-
(g) Owned by the Christian Reformed Church of Maple Ridge B.C.
Roll No.: 21142-3300-3 20245 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$387,300 5,108 5,274 5,445
(h) Owned by the Burnett Fellowship Baptist Church
Roll No.: 21190-0001-0 20639 123rd Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$291,200 3,840 3,965 4,094
(i) Owned by the President of the Lethbridge Stake (Mormon Church)
Roll No.: 21255-0201-X 11750 207t" Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$380,700 5,021 5,184 5,352
Q) Owned by the Trustees of the Maple Ridge East Congregation of Jehovah's
Roll No.: 21335-2200-2 11770 West Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$406,200 5,357 5,531 5,711
(k) Owned by First Church Christ Scientist
Roll No.: 31678-0000-8 11916 222nd Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$200,600 2,646 2,732 2,820
(I) Owned by The Church of the Nazarene
Roll No.: 41990-0000-8 21467 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$422,053 5,566 5,747 5,934
-5-
(m) Owned by the High Way Church
Roll No.: 42162-0000-X 21746 Lougheed Highway
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$470,200 6,201 6,403 6,611
(n) Owned by the Trustees of the Congregation of the Haney Presbyterian Church
Roll No.: 42176-0000-8 11858 216t" Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$525,900 6,936 7,161 7,394
(o) Owned by the Trustees of St. Andrews Congregation of the United Church of
Canada
Roll No.: 42249-0100-6 22165 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$1,311,900 17,302 17,864 18,445
(p) Owned by M.R. Baptist Church
Roll No.: 42331-0100-1 22155 Lougheed Highway
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$3,661,700 48,292 49,861 51,482
(q) Owned by the Trustees of Webster's Corner United Church
Roll No.: 63029-0100-5 25102 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$232,600 3,068 3,167 3,270
(r) Owned by Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada
Roll No.: 63163-2300-2 11756 232nd Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$750,000 9,891 10,213 10,545
�
(s) Owned by Lord Bishop of New Westminster (St. John Evangelical)
Roll No.: 94720-0001-0 27123 River Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$432,300 5,701 5,887 6,078
(t) Owned by Ruskin Gospel Church
Roll No.: 94803-0100-3 28304 96t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$255,600 3,371 3,481 3,594
(u) Owned by Roman Catholic Archbishop of Vancouver
Roll No.: 52788-0000-8 22561 121St Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$273,700 3,610 3,727 3,848
(v) Owned by The B.C. Conference of the Mennonite Brethren Churches Inc.
Roll No.: 20762-0305-0 20450 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$2,143,000 28,263 29,181 30,130
(w) Owned by The Parish of St. George, Maple Ridge
Roll No.: 63157-2001-1 23500 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$336,300 4,435 4,579 4,728
(x) Owned by Generations Christian Fellowship and Colleen Findlay Foundation
Roll No.: 21034-0000-8 11601 Laity Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$855,000 11,276 11,643 12,021
-7-
(y) Owned by Apostles of Infinite Love, Canada
Roll No.: 94906-0000-3 27289 96t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$215,000 2,836 2,928 3,023
(z) Owned by Timberline Ranch
Roll No.: 52982-0000-X 22351 144t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$30,700 405 418 432
7. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(g) of the Community Charter, land or
improvements used or occupied by a religious organization, as tenant or licensee, for
the purpose of public worship or for the purposes of a hall that the council considers
is necessary to land or improvements so used or occupied, be exempt from taxation:
(a) Leased by Maple Ridge Vineyard Christian Fellowship
Roll No.: 31594-0000-1 22336 Dewdney Trunk Road
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$548,900 5,822 6,011 6,207
8. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(h) of the Community Charter, in relation to
property that is exempt under section 220(1)(I) �private schools], any area of land
surrounding the exempt building shall be exempt from taxation:
(a) Owned by Haney - Pitt Meadows Christian School Association
Roll No.: 20806-0302-0 12140 203rd Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$395,400 5,184 5,352 5,526
(b) Owned by Meadowridge School Society
Roll No.: 63414-0002-0 12224 240t" Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$940,000 12,323 12, 723 13,137
-8-
(c) Owned by Roman Catholic Archbishop of Vancouver
Roll No.: 52788-0000-8 22561 121St Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$258,000 3,382 3,492 3,606
9. That in accordance with Section 225(2)(b) of the Community Charter the following
Heritage lands and improvements shall be exempt from taxation:
(a) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: The Maple Ridge Historical Society (Haney House)
Roll No.: 31790-0000-4 11612 224t" Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$454,000 2,086 2,154 2,224
(b) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: The Maple Ridge Historical Society (Haney Brick Yard Office & Haney
Brick Yard House)
Roll No.: 31962-0502-3 22520 116t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$533,000 6,987 7,214 7,449
(c) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: The Maple Ridge Historical Society (St. Andrew's United Church)
Roll No.: 31428-0000-1 22279 116th Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$202,000 2,648 2,734 2,823
(d) Owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Leased to: Fraser Information Society (Old Japanese School House)
Roll No.: 31492-0000-3 11739 223rd Street
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$278,700 3,654 3,772 3,895
-9-
(e) Owned by Prince David Temple Society (Masonic Lodge)
Roll No.: 31429-0100-0 22272 116t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$377,500 4,979 5,140 5,307
10. That in accordance with Section 224(2)(c) of the Community Charter, "land or
improvements that the council considers would otherwise qualify for exemption under
section 220 �general statutory exemptions] were it not for a secondary use", the
council may, by the adoption of a by-law, determine the proportions of the land and
improvements that are to be exempt and taxable; and Section 224(2)(i) of the
Community Charter, land or improvements owned or held by an athletic or service
club or association and used principally as a public park or recreation ground or for
public athletic or recreational purposes, shall be exempt from taxation as by the
proportions set in accordance with Section 224(2)(c) of the Community Charter.
(a) Land and Improvements owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, Herein called Cam Neely Arena, shall be exempted from 90% of taxation
Roll No.: 84120-0002-0 23448 105t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$3,787,200 49,648 51,262 52,928
(b) Land and Improvements owned by the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, Herein called The Golden Ears Winter Club, shall be exempted from 95%
of taxation
Roll No.: 84120-0004-0 23588 105t" Avenue
2014 Exempt Estimated Estimated Estimated
Assessed Value 2015 2016 2017
Exemption Exemption Exemption
$2,841,260 37,248 38,458 39,708
Included within each of the exemptions 10(a) and 10(b) is a proportionate share
(based on the square footage areas of Cam Neely Arena, The Golden Ears Winter
Club, and the remainder of the building) of all entrances, lobbies, change rooms,
stairs, elevators, hallways, foyers and other common use areas of the lands and
improvements.
11. The exemptions from taxation as herein before noted applies for the year 2015.
-10-
12. The exemptions granted by this bylaw are without prejudice to any claim for
entitlement to exemption based on any other provisions of the Community Charter or
any other legislation.
READ a FIRST TIME the 9t" day of September, 2014.
READ a SECOND TIME the 9t" day of September, 2014.
READ a THIRD TIME the 9t" day of September, 2014.
RECONSIDERED AND ADOPTED the day of , 2014.
PRESIDING MEMBER
-11-
CORPORATE OFFICER
District of Maple Ridge
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
MINUTES
September 15, 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 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
Other Staff as Required
C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental
Services
1. DELEGATIONS/STAFF PRESENTATIONS
1.1 Linda Meyer, A.A.B.A.P.B.D.
- HandiDart Concerns
Ms. Meyer read a statement requesting an update on the requests included in
her previous presentations to Council and outlining her concerns with the
provision of HandiDart services to those with disabilities.
2. PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council
Agenda:
1101 2014-013-RZ, 23895 124 Avenue and 12507, 12469, 12555 and 12599
240 Street
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that first reading for
properties located at 23895 124 Avenue; 12507, 12469, 12555 and 12599
240 Street be denied.
1100
Committee of the Whole Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 2 of 5
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point
presentation providing the following information:
• Application Information
• OCP Context
• Neighbourhood Context
• Development Proposal
• OCP Policy Framework
• Proposed Site Plan
• Alternatives
• Recommendation
Wayne Bissky, Applicant Representative
Mr. Bissky stated that the application is unusual and is intended to meet
changing demands of the community for affordable housing. He provided
further information on the form and character of the development and asked
that Council allow the application to go to first reading of a bylaw.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of September 30,
2014.
1102 2014-061-RZ, 24205 Alouette Road
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that first reading for
the property located at 24205 Alouette Road be denied.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point
presentation providingthe following information:
• Application Information
• OCP Context
• Neighbourhood Context
• Site Characteristics
• Development Proposal
• OCP Policy Framework
• Environmental Context Map
• Proposed Development Sketch
• Recommendation
Committee of the Whole Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 3 of 5
Wayne Bissky. Applicant Representative
Mr. Bissky remarked on the similarity of this application to the previous
application and advised that the applicant is prepared to consider density
bonus opportunities. He commented on the affordability of this form of
development and asked for Council's support of the application.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of September 30,
2014.
1103 2014-053-DVP, 10476-10518 McEachern Street (east side lots only)
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that the Corporate
Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2014-053-DVP to increase maximum
building height for eight uphill lots on the east side of McEachern Street.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of September 30,
2014.
1104 Award of Contract ITT-EN14-54: Larch Avenue Road Extension
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 recommending that Contract ITT-
EN14-54, Larch Avenue Road Extension be awarded to Frazer Excavation Ltd.,
that a 5% contingency be approved, that the Financial Plan be amended to
advance funds from LTC 7840, and further that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to execute the contract.
The Municipal Engineer advised that work being carried out by the City relates
to water works and that such work is normally done by the City.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of September 30,
2014.
3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131 2014 Council Expenses
Staff report dated September 15, 2014 providing Council expenses for 2014
updated to the end of August 2014.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 4 of 5
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of September 30,
2014.
4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES - N i I
5. CORRESPONDENCE - N i I
6. OTHER ISSUES - N i I
7. ADJOURNMENT - 2:05 p.m.
8. COMMUNITY FORUM
Diane Murrell
Ms. Murrell expressed concerned that Items 1101 and 1102 did not contain
comments relating to downstream hydrology. She asked for reassurance that
should the applications go forward, that a hydrology study will be required and
that school and transportation issues will be addressed.
It was advised that these types of technical reports would be required if the
applications continue through the process.
Steve Hamilton
Mr. Hamilton is not opposed to development. He is opposed to the density
being proposed in Items 1101 and 1102 and expressed concern that a
precedent may be set pertaining to land use in the Alouette floodplain. He
spoke to severe flooding in these areas in the past. Mr. Hamilton felt that lots
which are "in-between" in size for affordability can be considered. He
commented the mobile home parks are now referred to as modular home
parks and that the lots proposed in the applications are the size of lots used
for such modular homes.
Rob Pine
Mr. Pine expressed concern that the developments proposed in Items 1101
and 1102 will negatively impact the rural environment and wildlife in the 239
Street area. He questioned the Council meeting process and felt it
disrespectful to move the Council meeting to a later date.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
September 15, 2014
Page 5 of 5
Acting Mayor Ashlie clarified that the date of the Council meeting was
rescheduled for September 30 when the Council calendar was adopted. She
advised on the process to allow for public input.
Bill Archibald
Mr. Archibald requested that the horse community be given an opportunity to
provide input on the proposed applications as they impact existing horse
trails.
Steve Hamilton
Mr. Hamilton reiterated concern pertaining to the proposed density of the
applications. He asked that the existing suburban residential designation be
reviewed.
C. Ashlie, Acting Mayor
Presiding Member of the Committee
� �a��� ��n�E
6rit ak G�4umhu
T0:
FROM:
City of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 12, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 2014-013-RZ
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
23895 124 Avenue
12507, 12469, 12555, and 12599 240 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to allow for a 166 unit strata development consisting of modular homes. The proposed
plot size averages 237 m2 (2500 ft 2) per lot. The subject properties are designated Estate
Suburban Residential, and are located outside of the District's Urban Area Boundary, but are within
the Region's Urban Containment Boundary and the Fraser Sewerage Area. The prescribed zones in
this designation are RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and RG-2 (Suburban Residential
Strata), as outlined in Appendix C of the Official Community Plan (OCP). The housing form associated
with this designation is low density single detached or strata housing units with minimum lot areas of
0.4 ha (1 acre), and an average density of 2.5 units per net hectare.
The housing form proposed by this application is modular single storey detached residential units
that could be wheelchair accessible. This application would contribute to the diversity of Maple
Ridge housing stock and therefore the housing form it proposes is supportable. However, this
application proposes residential densities that are not appropriate outside of the Urban Area
Boundary. The application as proposed is for 166 units with a density in the range of 41.5 units per
net hectare, which is similar to the R3 small lot densities found in the Albion growth area (i.e. Country
Lane). The subject site is outside of the Urban Area Boundary, and is considered unavailable for
urban development. On this basis it is recommended that this application be denied.
This report will review this application in light of previous Council decisions about extending the
Urban Area Boundary, and the 2004 Council decision to reaffirm Thornhill for future urban
development as part of the review of the OCP. A number of alternatives are outlined for Council
consideration including developing the subject properties in compliance with the OCP at densities of
2.5 units per net hectare, or working with staff to increase the density at a level not exceeding 12
units per net hectare based on a density bonus framework to accomplish a range of housing tenure
diversity, affordability, and special needs housing. A third alternative is to direct staff to undertake a
policy review of the Estate Suburban Residential land use designation, with a comprehensive
servicing capacity and traffic assessment in relation to growth management and the OCP policy
framework. It should be noted that this third option is likely not achievable until 2016.
1101
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That first reading for properties located at 23895 124 Avenue; 12507, 12469, 12555, and 12599
240 Street be denied.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc.
Owners: Jacqueline Vanier
Daniel and Christine Olson
Karen Campbell
0790573 BC Ltd.
Legal Descriptions: Lot: 2, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan: NWP3017
Lot: 2, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan: NWP10558
Lot: 3, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan: NWP10558
Lot: A, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan: NWP9912
Lot: A, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan: NWP9912
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning:
Existing:
Proposed:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Estate Suburban Residential
Urban Residential, Conservation
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Yet to be determined
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Estate Suburban Residential
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Agricultural and Estate Suburban Residential
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Estate Suburban Residential
Single Family Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Agricultural and Suburban Residential
Single Family Residential (Rural)
Single Family Residential (Intensive Urban Strata)
-2-
Site Area: 13.8 ha (34 acres)
Access: 240 Street (both south and north, via Fern Crescent), 239
Street
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
The five subject properties are located to the south of the Silver Valley Horse Hamlet in the vicinity of
240t" Street and 124th Avenue. The South Alouette River bisects two of the five properties, with the
majority of the lands located south of the river. Portions of the properties are located above an
aquifer and are also located in the localized floodplain of the South Alouette River. A number of
watercourses are located on or adjacent to the subject properties in addition to the South Alouette
River including two branches of Latimer Creek, Latimer Channel and two indefinite watercourses.
Four of the five subject properties are currently accessed via 240 Street, constructed to a gravel
road standard on the south side of the river. The fifth property is currently accessed via 124t"
Avenue.
c) Project Description:
The development proposal is for a total of five properties totalling approximately 13.8 ha (34 acres)
of land in the northwest corner of 124t" Avenue and 240t" Street. The applicant proposes to rezone
the subject properties to enable a strata development of 166 residential strata lots approximately
237 m2 (2500 ft 2) in size, each of which would contain a modular rancher home that is constructed
elsewhere and placed on the property. Based on preliminary discussions with the applicant, the
modular home product is proposed to resemble a regular single storey home, the only differentiation
being the methods and location of construction.
The development spans a significant distance, and proposes three main accesses. One access is
from 240 Street on the south side of the South Alouette River, and a second access is from 239
Street. These two entrances will service the 134 lots proposed on the south side of the river. The
third access is located on the existing unopened 240 Street road allowance located on the north
side of the river via Fern Crescent. This entrance will provide access to 32 lots proposed on the
north side of the river. Other elements of the proposal include park dedication for conservation
purposes of Latimer Creek, Latimer Channel, and South Alouette River; a nature interpretive centre,
as well as several parking and common areas.
d) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The development site is currently designated Estate Suburban Residential. For the proposed
development to proceed, an OCP amendment would be required to amend the Urban Area Boundary
in order to re-designate the site to Urban Residential to allow the density as proposed by the
applicant. Portions of the site will also need to be designated Conservation. Multiple sections of the
Official Community Plan have relevance to this application. They are as follows:
• Chapter 3, Neighbourhoods and Housing, which discusses compatible development,
expansion into the Urban Reserve, and density bonusing for specific housing options;
• Chapter 5, Natural Features, which discusses floodplain development;
• Chapter 6, Employment, which discusses development adjacent to agricultural land;
-3-
Chapter 8, Development Permit Area Guidelines, which creates special requirements for
certain forms of development and for the protection of natural features and ecologically
significant land; and
Appendix C, which aligns specific zones with land use designations.
Land Use Designation and Neighbourhood Context:
The development site is currently designated Estate Suburban Residential. Section 3.13 of the
Official Community Plan states the following regarding the Estate Suburban Residential land use
designation:
The Estate Suburban Residential designation permits single detached or duplex housing in
areas outside the Urban Area Boundary.
The zones prescribed by this designation are RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and RG-2
(Suburban Residential Strata). The permitted densities average 0.4 hectares (1 acre) per dwelling
unit. The Estate Suburban Residential designation indicates that the subject properties are outside
of the District's Urban Area Boundary, but could be serviced with sanitary sewer without requiring
approval from the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District as they are within the Fraser
Sewer Area.
Aspects of this proposal are supportable as it would meet a specific housing need. However, the
proposed 166 units would amount to over 40 units per net hectare, which represents a significant
increase in density.
The supportable density land use designation of the Estate Suburban Residential is 2.5 units per net
hectare, or 0.4 hectare (1 acre) lots, which would amount to a total of 10 units on the subject site.
The following OCP policy guides development in the Estate Suburban Residential land use
designation:
Policy 3-14 Urban level residential densities will not be supported in areas designated Estate
Suburban Residential.
Densitv Bonusin�:
The Official Community Plan contains provisions that could be used to support an increased number
of units than that prescribed by the zone and land use designation. Through these provisions, an
applicant would receive greater development potential (generally more residential units) in exchange
for providing a specific community benefit. These benefits could include:
1. Ecological, which could pertain to the protection of features such as significant stands of
trees or parkland above what would normally be required
2. Affordable, rental, and special needs housing provisions contained within the development
p ro posa I .
3. Community Amenity, which would allow a financial contribution for a specific community
amenity. Currently, this provision is only allowed in the Albion area.
A density bonus approach for tree protection purposes is currently under consideration by Council for
another application within this neighbourhood, at 23627 and 23598 Dogwood Avenue (2014-054-
RZ). The proposed densities of this nearby application are equivalent to the RS1-c Zone, or 1200 mz
(13,000 ft2) lots.
'�
The potential of this application to meet specific housing needs could be considered in a density
bonus formula. Policy 3- 30 of the Official Community Plan would support such an initiative, as
follows:
Maple Ridge will consider density bonus as a means of encouraging the provision of
affordable, rental and special needs housing, and amenities.
It is noted that the applicant has emphasized that this higher density housing form would be an
accessible and affordable form of home ownership. The estimated market value per unit would be
under $300,000.00 and these units have potential to be wheelchair accessible1.
This consideration would require further investigation and a commitment to specific measures such
as: accessible units, rental secured in perpetuity through a Section 905 Housing Agreement; and/or
non market houing units; and one level rancher styled units. All these suggestions are supported
through current OCP policies and are reaffirmed in the draft Housing Action Plan.
If a density bonus was applied to this proposal that was consistent with the Dogwood Avenue
application, with similar densities, the total number of units would be approximately 48 over this 4
hectare development site. Further discussion about density bonusing is included further in this
report.
Based on the land use context of the Horse Hamlet, Official Community Plan policies do not support
the development of lands north of the Alouette River as part of this development proposal. The
portions of the subject properties on the north side of the river are geographically separated from the
land on the south side of the river, and are best considered in relationship to the large RS-3 (One
Family Rural Residential) lots already established along the south side of Fern Crescent. In
consideration of this context, the development of this area should remain in accordance with the
Estate Suburban Residential land use designation. It should also be noted that the dedication of
this area could be used as a density bonus provision that would allow for increased density in the
larger developable southern portion of the site.
This application proposes urban levels of density, with a proposed lot size of 237 m2, in an area of
Maple Ridge that has not been designated for urban development, and whose neighbourhood
context is a mix of large lot suburban and agricultural parcels. Properties along 239 Street and in
the Academy Park neighbourhood have been developed in accordance with the Estate Suburban
Residential designation, characterized by 0.4 hectare (1 acre) lots and high improvement values,
indicating that these adjacent properties are not likely for infill and re-development in the
foreseeable future. As development of these lands has occurred in accordance with the stated
direction of the community, subsequent developments should be sensitive to this context
Additionally, large agricultural lots are located south and west of the subject properties; and an
established neighbourhood with a variety of historic lot size is located north of the development site
adjacent to the Silver Valley Horse Hamlet.
This development cannot proceed as proposed without an OCP amendment to re-designate the
subject properties to Urban Residential and Conservation, as well as include it within the District's
Urban Area Boundary. As the development proposal cannot be supported based on Policies 3-2 and
3-14, the Planning Department does not support an Official Community Plan amendment to include
the subject properties within the District's Urban Area Boundary, or to amend the land use
designation to Urban Residential.
' It should be noted at this time that the proposed development and its affardability are entirely market driven.
-5-
Urban Area Boundary Adjustment
There are several key OCP policies that do not align with expanding the Urban Area Boundary to
include the subject properties and develop them to an urban density as proposed by the applicant.
These policies are outlined and discussed below, and in subsequent sections of this report.
Policy 3- 22 Maple Ridge will avoid non-contiguous expansion of the Urban Area Boundary.
The subject properties are bounded by Agricultural and Estate Suburban Residential designated
land. Expansion of the Urban Area Boundary to include these properties is therefore not
supportable. Additionally:
Policy 2- 6 Maple Ridge supports and maintains the Urban Area Boundary recognizing the role that
it has on limiting urban expansion, preserving community character, reducing land
speculation within the Agricultural Land Reserve and protecting the agricultural land
base, and in providing for the efficient delivery of services. Adjustments to the Urban
Area Boundary:
a) will only be supported if the District has an adopted Agricultural Plan;
b) will be considered in cooperation with the Agricultural Land Commission and
Metro Vancouver; and
c) will only be conducted during a Comprehensive Official Community Plan review,
or Council directed Comprehensive Urban Area Boundary review, and
applications considered outside of either review are considered premature.
Policy 2-6 outlines the importance of maintaining the Urban Area Boundary as a way to preserve
community character and protect agricultural lands. The policy also outlines the circumstances
required in considering an adjustment to the Urban Area Boundary. The Urban Area Boundary was
considered by Council in 2009-2011 as a component of the Regional Growth Strategy review, and no
changes were directed at that time.
Thornhill Urban Reserve:
In addition to the above noted Urban Area Boundary policies of the OCP, an Urban Area Boundary
adjustment and OCP amendment to Urban Residential is also not supportable due to the decision to
allocate the Thornhill area as a future Urban Reserve growth area. Prior to the adoption of the
Official Community Plan in 2006, there was significant dialogue about retaining the Thornhill area as
an Urban Reserve. In 2004, consultant services were retained to evaluate where to accommodate
population growth in the community. Growth options included expanding northward (on lands that
included the subject properties) or retaining Thornhill for future growth. After consideration of the
consultant's report and public input, Council directed that Thornhill be retained for future growth in
the Official Community Plan.
On December 13, 2004, Council passed the following resolution:
That Option 2(Status Quo - Thornhill) be indicated as Council's preferred option during the
public consultation phase of the review of the Official Community Plan.
'�
The 2006 Official Community Plan was adopted with the retention of Thornhill as the Urban Reserve,
defined as a land use designation which identifies lands identified by the District for long term future
urban level services and housing, subject to compliance with Section 1.3.5 of the OCP. In addition,
specific triggers were established indicating when development could proceed. Policy 3-24 states
the following:
Policy 3- 24 Maple Ridge will retain the Thornhill area as a long term Urban Reserve area. Urban
development will not be supported in the Thornhill Urban Reserve Area until the
population threshold exceeds 100,000 people for the District and the residential
capacity within the existing urban area is approaching build-out.
As there are significant implications for future growth patterns in Thornhill, the urban density
proposed for the subject properties is not supportable.
A�ricultural I nterface:
The subject properties are adjacent to land located in the Agricultural Land Reserve to the west and
south of the site. The following OCP policies apply to development adjacent to agricultural land:
Policy 6-12 Maple Ridge will protect the productivity of its agricultural land by:
b) requiring agricultural impact assessments (AIAs) and Groundwater Impact
Assessment of non-farm development and infrastructure projects and identifying
measures to off-set impacts on agricultural capability;
c) preserving larger farm units and areas by using appropriate buffers such as
roads, topographic features, watercourses, ditching, fencing, or gradually reduced
residential densities on properties adjacent to agricultural land;
As a requirement of development on the subject properties, an Agricultural Impact Assessment as
outlined in item b) above would be required. An agricultural buffer would also be used to reduce the
impact on the existing agricultural properties.
Zoning Bvlaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject properties located at 23895 124 Avenue,
12507, 12469, 12555 and 12599 240 Street from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to enable a
strata development of 166 lots, each of which would contain a modular single storey home that is
constructed elsewhere and placed on the property. Appropriate Zoning Bylaw amendments will need
to be created, and are dependent upon direction by Council.
Development Permit:
The proposed development would be situated on portions of the site that are entirely within the
floodplain of the south Alouette River. A Natural Features Development Permit would be required,
and the services of a qualified professional would be required to determine site specific flood
construction levels. Bringing in sufficient fill to raise this high density development sufficiently could
have potential impacts on adjacent environmentally sensitive lands and could alter river flows on
high flow periods. On this basis, it should be noted that the proposed single storey accessible
housing form could prove challenging at this location.
-7-
e) Intergovernmentallmplications:
The subject properties are designated General Urban in the Regional Growth Strategy and are
located within the Urban Containment Boundary. The General Urban designation indicates that the
subject properties can be serviced with sanitary sewer without requiring approval from the Greater
Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, as they are within the Fraser Sewer Area.
Consequently, this regional designation gives Council some flexibility to direct land uses on Estate
Suburban Residential designated lands, as no regional approvals are required in order for this
application to proceed as proposed. Although the subject properties are not considered available for
urban levels of development under OCP policies, Council may consider using density bonusing to
achieve specific housing benefits as outlined in Policy 3-30.
f) Interdepartmental Comments:
Engineering Department:
To service the proposed development the level of engineering services currently provided will require
upgrading including significant transportation, water, sanitary and drainage work. To address the
increased demand placed upon the municipal systems the developer would initially be required to
evaluate the water network and downstream sanitary sewer for any capacity upgrades. In addition
the property is serviced by a"deadend" watermain and a secondary water connection (looped
system) will need to be provided, this may require directional drilling under the Alouette River and a
pressure reducing station. The sanitary system would also need to be extended from Abernethy Way
including the construction of a pump station and a 750m forcemain. Access is currently provided by
a gravel road and would require upgrading to a rural standard from the intersection of 141 Ave. The
upgrades identified form a preliminary review of the development, additional unknown factors may
be identified when the engineering referral is circulated. Consideration to a future 240 Street bridge
crossing and associated fill and/or structural footprint may need to be assessed with this
application.
Further Engineering review would be required upon receipt of Council direction as it relates to the
potential development of this site and lands in this vicinity.
g) Alternatives:
The development concept is supportable in its form and character, and because it provides for an
alternative housing form, a range of unit sizes, and responds to a known community need. However,
the proposal cannot be supported under the Official Community Plan based on the urban level
density being proposed. Three alternatives to the recommendation are outlined below for Council's
consideration.
Alternative 1: Su�port A�plication as Proposed
The first alternative is to support the application as proposed for 166 units. If Alternative 1 is
preferred, Council will need to direct staff
to bring forward a zone amending bylaw for first reading, and to identify the additional information
the applicant is required to provide in accordance with Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-
1999. It is important to recognize that there significant implications to this approach, which is not
recommended.
'�
Alternative 2: Short Term Deferral: Density Bonus Framework Using Densities Similar to RS-1c Zone
The second alternative is to develop the subject properties to a higher density than currently
supported in the OCP using a density bonus framework for affordable, rental, or special needs
housing, and /or for ecological diversity and the retention of forested lands. This approach is similar
to the nearby Dogwood Avenue application that proposes increased residential densities in exchange
for tree protection. Resulting densities would be consistent with the RS-1c Zone.
If this alternative is preferred, Council will need to direct staff to work with the applicant to bring
forward a zone amending bylaw for first reading, and to identify the additional information the
applicant is required to provide in accordance with Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999.
Alternative 3: Long Term Deferral: Estate Suburban Residential Designation Review
Should Council wish to explore supporting urban densities above the RS-1c Zone, or other potential
alternatives for developing the subject properties not outlined in this report, a third alternative is to
conduct a policy review of the Estate Suburban Residential designation. This alternative would
involve Council directing staff to prepare a policy review of the entire Estate Suburban Residential
land use designation, affecting approximately 207 hectares (512 acres) of Estate Suburban
Residential designated land. A similar review was recently completed for the Albion Area Plan. It is
noted at this time that the Planning Department does not have the capacity to undertake this review
until the Albion Flats and Hammond Area Plans are completed.
If this alternative is preferred, Council will need to direct staff to conduct this study, noting the
subject application will be deferred until the policy review is completed.
CONCLUSION:
The housing form proposed by this application is single storey ground oriented detached residential
units that could be wheelchair accessible, which would contribute to the diversity of Maple Ridge
housing stock. The housing form it proposes is supportable and aligns with the goals of the Housing
Action Plan. However, this application proposes urban densities, with 166 units and an average
density of 41.5 units per net hectare, compared to the 10 units currently permitted under the Estate
Suburban designation.
This report has reviewed the subject application in light of applicable OCP policies that speak to
Urban Area Boundary adjustments, neighbourhood compatibility, and the Estate Suburban
Residential land use designation. Previous Council decisions about extending the Urban Area
Boundary, and the 2004 Council decision to reaffirm Thornhill for future urban development as part
of the review of the OCP have also been summarized. In summary, it is recommended that the
rezoning application as proposed by the applicant be denied, as the proposal does not comply with
the following OCP Policies:
• Policy 3-14, which does not permit urban densities in the Estate Suburban Residential
designation;
• Policy 2-6, which stipulates the circumstances of when an Urban Area Boundary can be
considered;
• Policy 3-22, which does not allow non-contiguous expansion of the Urban Area Boundary;
• Policy 3-24, which allocates Thornhill as an Urban Reserve for future urban growth.
'�
The development proposal is not in compliance with the OCP, and would require an amendment to
designate the subject properties Urban Residential and Conservation, as well as include the subject
properties within the Urban Area Boundary. As outlined in this report, these required amendments
do not align with the OCP, and, therefore, it is recommended that this application be denied.
"Original signed by Diana Hall"
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MA, MCIP
Planner
"Original signed bv Christine Carter"
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Ouinn"
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- Proposed Site Plan
-10-
N
District of
Langley
23895 124 AVEN U E& 12469, 12507,
12555 & 12599 240 STREET
MAPLE RIDGE
British Columbia
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Scale: 1:3,500 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Feb 19, 2014 FILE: 2014-013-RZ BY: PC
APPENDIX B
� ��'� � � j�; '�,�I�' �b u+� ������
( t3� �r•3��s � ,��
,t-- - . . ----- � --�.- � �—� z 3a' `Tt-} ��" L� +M�.-+r� �s
� � S� � a
f �' r • . � . �; � a- '�8.,r�y�A� �cawWl�n. ��
� 1
1 � � �i � �' 3� t
I 2 � r � �q,�
f ,� �i �� ��:,��' � �
` / . \��. ' � • a 4 a V� a c � � � I a�v N �a . � l '� hO'W!��- �i1���% { �� � �'U
�' • a �� '* ' � � V�]�w ��
4 � � . . � �p � � � � . � .� s • '��� r � . .�. _ ___.�
'�`� ' �-- • -�;,/� • r�M + e f� rS � � �. _!'� . ,` � �i� � � � — � �
- IZ��� . zr �� �` , � / . .
� . , � � � �f I . � �1
..,. ����'��� � �•i � + [ �' .
�.. }� ' , ' � �. a �n � t ' �- ��� �I' �f
� ` � � � �-' t? ? L � � ' + �-.+
-7 Y� �• � / L-
j � � ,; `' /f i•,: S � w, °� •�� �(y � � 1 °,l� ,- '���. . ,�.�
. . ~�'c��`= � �� ' � ' �
� .. � � r A ��� � 4 �" �? � � �`.7v ��—��_ ��.
� �'^ , �' �L^ . � � � a� r � d �_ 5 • � a - � � -0 N � � �
l t ... s �f _� ��~$ = �� �� �� , G7 �^n �
`1 �. �'- " op_ 3�p� �
1 _ p U
�i � '_ -i Alar� tJ, , 4y �� cSg V �(�• • ''� � � '� • �' W�+ 23
��! Y
� y � � � Ub ^ ��l t� ;�, , t �
} � � J� � �oc� w � ,� [�- �� a � 5{7�� I
7
I rI '� e� � .�y �.sa �' �.� � w 30�7�' ��� �itil[ 5�
� `� � �j �' H W ro - • �0. .� t` nl y ,a r .Ir �y � , � ,
.�.�. . � �� . . _-- �- �-� - . o _ U
,_ _ `ti�_ , � � ��� . .��._ ..._. - ? f� ` ��S°�d'4 � �1,��N �� -
- �,; .�.. .�. � �--- r
� � � �.,.� � , ..�'���. . -.� -- �� - � - r.
�' � � � �`� �� , � ���r.�f Lvf � 1
� � �' � . . 3 . _ �a �r x . � �,�
k �� ..- � � � S� d � � �
' � � ���i� C Z�SSa � . r`�i �1�� ,
__ . . _-�--.. � � �e �.. �. � c�� �
� . �'�'► -�. ��.
-�N�--� i� �
,,. , ,, �V f � ���z
�: E, ��E11 NIIR�:HITE�.�
�� � ��:; K,'
ARClIIiECf�IRF, ' 11N9AN �]ESIC;N ` M.wN�ry[; I-4iCR!(]q pE51LH I
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
First Reading
24205 Alouette Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
MEETING DATE: September 15, 2014
FILE N0: 2014-061-RZ
MEETING: C of W
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to allow for 41 lots. The proposed development includes 24 RS-1c size lots with a
minimum area of 1200m2 (0.30 acre); and 17 RS-1 size lots with a minimum area of 668m2 (0.17
acres), attached as Appendix B.
The subject property is designated Estate Suburban Residential, and is located outside of the
District's Urban Area Boundary, but is within the Region's Urban Containment Boundary and the
Fraser Sewerage Area. The prescribed zones in this designation are RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential) and RG-2 (Suburban Residential Strata), as outlined in Appendix C of the Official
Community Plan. The housing form associated with this designation is low density single detached
with a minimum lot area of 0.4 ha (1 acre) and or strata housing units an maximum density of 2.5
units per net hectare.
This report will review this application in light of previous Council decisions about extending the
Urban Area Boundary, and the Council decision to reaffirm Thornhill for future urban development as
part of the Official Community Plan.
Official Community Plan policies do not support amendments to include the subject property within
the District's Urban Area Boundary, or to amend the land use designation to Urban Residential.
Therefore, it is recommended that this application be denied.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That first reading for the property located at 24205 Alouette Road be denied.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Conte�:
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description:
Bissky Architecture and Urban Design Inc.
Debbie L. Raymond
That portion of NW 1/4 Section 22, Township 12, lying east of the
east bank of the South Alouette River and east of Parcel "C" (Ex
Plan 5712) and also lying north of SRWPIan 3041, NWD
1102
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning:
Existing:
Proposed:
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use:
Zone:
Designation
South: Use:
Zone:
Designation
East: Use:
Zone:
Designation
West: Use
Zone:
Designation
Estate Suburban Residential
Urban Residential, Conservation
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-1c (One Family Urban (Low Density) Residential), and
RS-1(One Family Urban Residential)
128 Avenue (unmaintained gravel lane), and
Rural Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Estate Suburban Residential
Vacant municipal land, and Rural and Suburban Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Estate Suburban Residential
Rural Residential
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential), under application (2013-
115-RZ) for 7 Suburban RS-2 zoned lots)
Suburban Residential
Alouette River, and common property for Single Family Strata
Residential
RG-2 (Suburban Residential Strata)
Estate Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Rural Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Urban density Single Family Residential
Site Area: 8.348 ha (20.6 acres), developable portion is estimated to
be 4 ha (10 acres)
Access: 128 Avenue
Servicing Requirement: Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
The development site is located southeast of the Alouette River, south of the 128 Avenue road right-
of-way to the west of Alouette Road. The land slopes down from the steep embankment on the
municipal lands south of the site, sloping towards the Alouette River on the north and west with a
steep embankment down to the river. Current development of the site includes a house, barn,
several out buildings and horse paddocks. Watercourses, swales, a pond, and steep slopes have
been identified on the site, as well as forested areas some of which are significant sized trees. An
equestrian trail and small watercourse are located within the 128 Avenue road right-of-way, and
recent construction activity for the sanitary sewer main extension on 128 Avenue included
improvements to them. The property is located outside of the District's Urban Area Boundary (UAB),
but is within the Regional Urban Containment Boundary and the Fraser Sewerage Area.
-2-
c) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the 8.4 ha (20.6 acre) property to allow a subdivision of 41 single
family urban lots. The proposed development includes 24 RS-1c size lots with a minimum area of
1200m2 (0.30 acre); and 17 RS-1 size lots with a minimum area of 668m2 (0.17 acres). The net
developable portion of the site is estimated at 4 hectares (10 acres).
An environmental assessment of the site has not been completed by a Qualified Environmental
Professional to establish the developable area. An initial environmental context map was prepared
by the Environmental Section (attached as Appendix C) to identify a preliminary approximation of the
developable area. Additional information is required to accurately determine density. The unknown
quantity of roads needed to access the future lot complicates this issue further. However, based on
density currently permitted on the OCP (i.e: 2.5 units per net hectare for RS-2 development), the
estimated potential lot yield of the site would be 9 to 10 lots.
The applicant's proposal for 41 lots on a 4 ha (10 acres) site is equivalent to a density of 10 units
per net hectare or 24.7 units per acre. This unit count is significant (4 times higher) than the
permitted density in the Estate Suburban Residential land use designation. If approved, this
proposal would have important implications to the entire Estate Suburban Residential designation
and the residential policy structure of the OCP.
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official
Community Plan (OCP) and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will
need to be made once full application packages have been received. A more detailed analysis and a
further report will be required prior to Second Reading. Such assessment may impact proposed lot
boundaries and yields, OCP designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for
further development permits.
d) Planning Analysis:
i. Official CommunitXPlan:
The development site is currently designated Estate Suburban Residential. For the proposed
development an OCP amendment would be required to re-designate the site to Urban Residential to
allow the density as proposed by the applicant and Conservation for protection of the watercourse
and riparian areas.
Multiple sections of the Official Community Plan have relevance to this application. These are as
follows:
• Chapter 3, Neighbourhoods and Housing, which discusses compatible development, and
expansion into the Urban Reserve;
• Chapter 5, Natural Features, which discusses protection of watercourses, riparian areas,
wetlands, environmentally sensitive areas, and forest areas;
• Chapter 8, Development Permit Area Guidelines, which creates special requirements for
certain forms of development and for the protection of natural features and ecologically
significant land; and
• Appendix C, which aligns specific zones with land use designations.
The planning implications of this development proposal in the context of the above mentioned
sections are significant and are outlined below.
-3-
Land Use Designation:
The development site is
Official Community Plan
designation:
currently designated Estate Suburban Residential. Section 3.13 of the
states the following regarding the Estate Suburban Residential land use
The Estate Suburban Residential designation permits single detached or duplex housing in
areas outside the Urban Area Boundary.
The prescribed zones in this designation are RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and RG-2
(Suburban Residential Strata), as outlined in Appendix C of the Official Community Plan. The
permitted densities average 0.4 hectares (1 acre) per dwelling unit. The Estate Suburban
Residential designation indicates that the subject property is outside of the District's Urban Area
Boundary, but could be serviced with sanitary sewer without requiring approval from the Greater
Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District as it is within the Fraser Sewer Area.
Policy 3-14 of the OCP policies below guide development in the Estate Suburban Residential land
use designation:
Urban level residential densities will not be supported in areas designated Estate
Suburban Residential.
Policy 3-15 Maple Ridge will support single detached and two-family residential housing in Estate
Suburban Residential areas. The Estate Suburban Residential land use designation is
characterised generally by 0.4 hectare lots.
This application proposes urban levels of density in an area of Maple Ridge that has not been
designated for urban development, and whose neighbourhood context is a mix of large lot rural
properties. This development cannot be supported as proposed without an OCP amendment to re-
designate the subject properties to Urban Residential and Conservation, as well as include it within
the District's Urban Area Boundary. As outlined above, the development proposal does not comply
with the OCP and cannot be supported based on Policies 3-14 and 3-15. The policies of the Official
Community Plan do not support an amendment to include the subject properties within the District's
Urban Area Boundary, or to amend the land use designation to Urban Residential.
Densitv Bonusin�:
The Official Community Plan contains provisions that could be used to support an increased number
of units than that prescribed by the zone and land use designation. Through these provisions, an
applicant would receive greater development potential (generally more residential units) in exchange
for providing a specific community benefit. These benefits could include:
1. Ecological, which could pertain to the protection of features such as significant stands of
trees or parkland above what would normally be required
2. Affordable, rental, and special needs housing provisions contained within the development
p ro posa I .
3. Community Amenity, which would allow a financial contribution for a specific community
amenity. Currently, this provision is only allowed in the Albion area.
The subject application has not proposed any specific community benefit and at this time is not
eligible for consideration of a density bonus.
However, a density bonus approach for tree protection purposes is currently under consideration by
Council for another application within this neighbourhood, at 23627 and 23598 Dogwood Avenue
'�
(2014-054-RZ). The proposed densities of this nearby application are equivalent to the RS1-c Zone,
or 1200 m2 (13,000 ft2) lots.
If a density bonus was applied to this proposal that was consistent with the Dogwood Avenue
application, with similar densities, the total number of units would be approximately 48 over this 4
hectare (10 acre) development site. Further discussion about density bonusing is included further
in this report.
This development cannot proceed as proposed without an OCP amendment to re-designate the
subject property to Urban Residential and Conservation, as well as include it within the District's
Urban Area Boundary. The development proposal is inconsistent with Policies 3-2 and 3-14, and
therefore, required amendments to include the subject properties within the District's Urban Area
Boundary, or to amend the land use designation to Urban Residential are not supportable.
Urban Area Boundary Adjustment
There are several key OCP policies that do not align with expanding the Urban Area Boundary to
include the subject property and develop it to an urban density as proposed by the applicant. These
policies are outlined and discussed below, and in subsequent sections of this report.
Policy 3- 22 Maple Ridge will avoid non-contiguous expansion of the Urban Area Boundary.
The subject property is adjacent to lands that have been developed in accordance with the Estate
Suburban Residential designation. Expansion of the Urban Area Boundary to include this property is
therefore not supportable. Additionally, Policy 2-6 states the following:
Maple Ridge supports and maintains the Urban Area Boundary recognizing the role that
it has on limiting urban expansion, preserving community character, reducing land
speculation within the Agricultural Land Reserve and protecting the agricultural land
base, and in providing for the efficient delivery of services. Adjustments to the Urban
Area Boundary:
a) will only be supported if the District has an adopted Agricultural Plan;
b) will be considered in cooperation with the Agricultural Land Commission and
Metro Vancouver; and
c) will only be conducted during a Comprehensive Official Community Plan review,
or Council directed Comprehensive Urban Area Boundary review, and
applications considered outside of either review are considered premature.
Policy 2-6 outlines the importance of maintaining the Urban Area Boundary as a way to preserve
community character and protect agricultural lands. The policy also outlines the circumstances
required in considering an adjustment to the Urban Area Boundary. The Urban Area Boundary was
considered by Council in 2009-2011 as a component of the Regional Growth Strategy review, and no
changes were directed at that time.
Thornhill Urban Reserve:
In addition to the above noted Urban Area Boundary policies of the OCP, an Urban Area Boundary
adjustment and OCP amendment to Urban Residential is also not supportable due to the decision to
allocate the Thornhill area as a future Urban Reserve growth area. Prior to the adoption of the
Official Community Plan in 2006, there was significant dialogue about retaining the Thornhill area as
an Urban Reserve. In 2004, consultant services were retained to evaluate where to accommodate
population growth in the community. Growth options included expanding northward (on lands that
included the subject properties) or retaining Thornhill for future growth. After consideration of the
-5-
consultant's report and public input, Council directed that Thornhill be retained for future growth in
the Official Community Plan.
On December 13, 2004, Council passed the following resolution:
That Option 2(Status Quo - Thornhill) be indicated as Council's preferred option during the
public consultation phase of the review of the Official Community Plan.
The 2006 Official Community Plan was adopted with the retention of Thornhill as the Urban Reserve,
defined as a land use designation which identifies lands identified by the District for long term future
urban level services and housing, subject to compliance with Section 1.3.5 of the OCP. In addition,
specific triggers were established indicating when development could proceed. Policy 3-24 states
the following:
Policy 3- 24 Maple Ridge will retain the Thornhill area as a long term Urban Reserve area. Urban
development will not be supported in the Thornhill Urban Reserve Area until the
population threshold exceeds 100,000 people for the District and the residential
capacity within the existing urban area is approaching build-out.
As there are significant implications for future growth patterns in Thornhill, the urban density
proposed for the subject property is not supportable.
ii. Zoning Bvlaw:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property located at 24205 Alouette Road from RS-3 (One
Family Rural Residential) to allow a subdivision of 41 single family urban lots. The proposed
development includes 24 RS-1c size lots with a minimum area of 1200m2 (12,917 ft2); and 17 RS-1
size lots with a minimum area of 668m2 (7190 ft2, attached as Appendix B.
e) Intergovernmentallmplications:
Metro Vancouver's Regional Growth Strategy establishes regional land use designations and sets an
Urban Containment Boundary. The subject properties are designated General Urban in the Regional
Growth Strategy and are located within the Urban Containment Boundary. The General Urban
designation indicates that the subject properties can be serviced with sanitary sewer without
requiring approval from the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, as they are within
the Fraser Sewer Area.
Consequently, this regional designation gives Council some flexibility to direct land uses on Estate
Suburban Residential designated lands, as no regional approvals are required. Although the subject
properties are not considered available for urban levels of development under OCP policies, Council
may consider using density bonusing to achieve specific community benefits as outlined in Policy 6-
62. However, the applicant has not proposed on the subject property a sufficient level of affordable,
special needs or rental housing provisions, or conservation, park or tree preservation to justify
density bonusing considerations for this property.
'�
f) Interdepartmentallmplications:
i. Engineering Department
To service the proposed development, the level of engineering services currently provided will
require upgrading, including significant transportation, water and drainage work. To address the
increased demand placed upon the municipal systems the developer would initially be required to
evaluate the water network and downstream sanitary sewer for any capacity upgrades. In addition,
the property cannot be serviced by a"dead-end" watermain, therefore, a secondary water
connection (looped system) will need to be provided. This may require directional drilling under the
Alouette River and installation of a pressure reducing station.
Access to the property is currently provided by an unmaintained gravel road accessed from Alouette
Road and will require upgrading to an urban standard from the intersection of 128 Avenue and
Alouette Road. The upgrades identified above form a preliminary review of the development, and
additional unknown factors may be identified when a referral to the Engineering department is
circulated.
ii. Environmental Considerations
The known watercourses on the property include the Alouette River and 2 tributaries. In addition, a
recent visit to the development site noted additional watercourses that have not been identified on
the District's Streamside Setback Assessment Map. Setbacks to steep slopes on or adjacent to the
site are required. A geotechnical assessment will be required, including a plan showing the
geotechnical setback lines from the slopes. The proposed subdivision layout does not appear to
take the existing watercourse situation on the subject property into adequate consideration.
There are a number of significant trees on the site, especially within the watercourse setback area,
have been tagged by a surveyor or forester. A qualified professional will need to prepare an arborist
report and tree survey with recommendations for tree retention where possible, possible tree
replacement, and a hazard assessment.
Approval of a Watercourse Protection and Natural Features Development Permit is required prior to
any disturbance on the site, particularly the removal of any trees within 50 metres of any
watercourse. An Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Assessment will be required.
Assessment of natural hazards, including floodplain and geotechnical, will also be required.
g) Alternatives:
The OCP policies do not support an OCP amendment to include the subject property within the
District's Urban Area Boundary, or to amend the land use designation to Urban Residential. Three
alternatives to the staff report are outlined below for Council's consideration.
Alternative 1: Support A�plication as Proposed
The first alternative is to support the application as proposed for 41 units. If Alternative 1 is
preferred, Council will need to direct staff to bring forward a zone amending bylaw for first reading,
and to identify the additional information the applicant is required to provide in accordance with
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. It is important to recognize that there significant
implications to this approach, which is not recommended.
-7-
Alternative 2: Short Term Deferral: Density Bonus Framework Using Densities Similar to RS-1c Zone
The second alternative is to develop the subject property to a higher density than currently supported
in the OCP using a density bonus framework for:
• affordable, rental, or special needs housing, or
• ecological diversity and the retention of forested lands.
This approach is similar to the nearby Dogwood Avenue application that proposes increased
residential densities in exchange for tree protection. Resulting densities would be consistent with
the RS-1c Zone.
If this alternative is preferred, Council will need to direct staff to work with the applicant to bring
forward a zone amending bylaw for first reading, and to identify the additional information the
applicant is required to provide in accordance with Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999.
Alternative 3: Long Term Deferral: Estate Suburban Residential Designation Review
Should Council wish to explore supporting urban densities above the RS-1c Zone, or other potential
alternatives for developing the subject property not outlined in this report, a third alternative is to
conduct a policy review of the Estate Suburban Residential designation. This alternative would
involve Council directing staff to prepare a policy review of the entire Estate Suburban Residential
land use designation, affecting approximately 207 hectares (512 acres) of Estate Suburban
Residential designated land. A similar review was recently completed for the Albion Area Plan. It is
noted at this time that the Planning Department does not have the capacity to undertake this review
until the Albion Flats and Hammond Area Plans are completed.
If this alternative is preferred, Council will need to direct staff to conduct this study, noting the
subject application will be deferred until the policy review is completed.
CONCLUSION:
This report has reviewed the subject application in light of applicable OCP policies that speak to
Urban Area Boundary adjustments and the Estate Suburban Residential land use designation.
Previous Council decisions about extending the Urban Area Boundary, and the 2004 Council decision
to reaffirm Thornhill for future urban development as part of the review of the OCP have also been
summarized. In summary, the proposed 41 lots represent a significant density increase on lands that
are designated Estate Suburban Residential. Therefore, it is recommended that the rezoning
application as proposed by the applicant be denied, as the proposal does not comply with the
following OCP Policies:
• Policy 3-14, which does not permit urban densities in the Estate Suburban Residential
designation;
• Policy 2-6, which stipulates the circumstances of when an Urban Area Boundary
expansion can be considered;
• Policy 3-22, which does not allow non-contiguous expansion of the Urban Area Boundary;
• Policy 3-24, which allocates Thornhill as an Urban Reserve for future urban growth.
'�
Official Community Plan policies do not support amendments to include the subject property within
the District's Urban Area Boundary, or to amend the land use designation to Urban Residential.
Therefore, an OCP amendment to such is not supportable under the OCP policies, and it is
recommended that this application be denied on this basis.
"Original signed by Diana Hall" for
Prepared by: Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- Proposed Development Sketch
Appendix C- Environmental Context Map - setbacks
'�
N
District of
Langley
0 24205 ALOUETTE ROAD
.�
�
�
o �t CORPORATION OF
�� THE DISTRICT OF
� - � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Scale: 1:2,500 � `� ��, _�`�- L--� 1--�° �'� DATE: Aug 29, 2014 FILE: 2014-061-RZ BY: PC
� 'I RS-1 24.74 I
�S-1c 24ni " RS-1 18m
/� �C 50 m R�o� 33.33m x37.11 m xL7 m I �
� , I �J
u
!.1 ���,�� ��
. �c ���� `�'�- ��
f � S ��, �
rr.,
t' �� . 1� , Q ` f'" ! ,�i� ��i(l ;('`:1
. . �:. � � ` 9 , �� � �� .
1 �1 lO �� � _ � D . Ii r �+I t
� °' ' ` . �'� l.
� ' ` � o � � ' �o o� � / . '�t�' v,,;
� � . : . . ,' e\ � � � � ' ` +� . �._-s
. ia � '�, , � ;-->� �i� � � .. `� . P J= _ -
. ' ��( �' �. �� �
� �� �� � � � � _.
� ` � ; . .,. � .� - ��,� ,
'.� o D : ����� ` ` � 3�� -�" l �
� / � ' � � � ���;���� r
�� . � , � �� � � �
� �
\' :',o �� � 1a�: �,�` � ,� ,�" �
.Q,., f _� ,..
'0' . •�. ••�.'. �d2�, �f � _ �, _ ,� �.�
•� ' , � ma'. '� a i/�`" l. ' ;'-:�:l� d 4: ��: �`y � ,''�6,
� , �• [�Q r��.� N1 � '3�.
: !: ��.: , � ��.�`'�/ ,r' � �
'� _'�.�.' .. _ �t}. � '� -
'f r � .;f � j '� � � ��,
-, '� : • , �r , �
. ,� . '� n - ` � J+ �� .
� .� d� __� 2'� � • •�.� �.r6--�� �
-� a r� �
� - J� • a;�, � .24205 Alou�ette� �
-0 '�' . ?' ��' � '�`�
�� . � �_ � �;Road� -
• • 5. � t ��
�,�� ' . , a �� , .I r �� q, � -
�'lt • �
�� , '.�,. _ � , � � t � s
�� : .� _�7 , �, �� ��,, �:
b ' � �� �=.`, ��4� � �... ���� „'���'�;��
J ,��
;� �o
��
APPENDIX B
�m
m
��,r-���
� �)�� �� , ' "i ,�',s
° i. s �
' � :i�` � (� � � f . � .. � ` � � �9
� � � ° °�`
. �f.� � �` 1 � � 1 --�� 1 � ' ,;; .�✓ �,'" . } •" �
. ��'r .1 '� i..f�� .� , , �
� � e �'' � •�. ..o . ��' � �. , �. � \ �
�? o .r ; ��, ,�t�.� �' . o:.t:�.. :e. � � V �r ,.s \
� ^ �, . . , . � , . , �y 'F"�f �
, • . e
� ^ �
- -, � .-�.r.,. � . . . � �.,.- -" l
w�..�� o �� • �
d
� I
� � . "�y `J a��r �� _� �#y.-• �� �
. ;f�' �# � _ _ '
r �L # �•�•
� t � �„�, �. �,� ..�r�` - �
_ ' "" �� �j- l �t� �����'� . � - �} 3e
_ �� .� , . . tz�
. _ ...�``• .. � . �� � .4 �� I� ,
^� . � � :� Alouette R floodplain�
" � a�proxim�#e `�oundar f,
�
� ` � • - - � � . � ���,_ ._ .
_#`` - . ,.� *�.
� � .
:� - . t .
, . .�. .. ..;�� ' -
� �� ���;.:�
k — . �
� ��
, � �.�..t � � _ �,�.
��' -�' ' ;n �,..
��5#.. r :✓n .
.��:� .
�;j `f bF' '�� � � '�
� � � � � . � � � �
^" . ' , � ' `� r�� ° . 15m set��ck from
i � �, . �,.' ' , r,,
}'r� . ��,. .� tri�utaries top of �ank
� , �# '� °�'� - � ' -' to be field 5rerified
,
� � � �� '. �y� � � '-;.; , �.. s .
� ..� �� , } . �.;� � --
� y .,� � � � , .
... �+� � . -� r ' � . :�. � �
i
� �
i' � f #,� �. �y ������� � - ,
�' �� . . ,. ,�. ��� � .�F° '�w}.
/ �_ �.,�-5.� �4g� �� � �� _ . � • ��.
F �r � !�' ' � F + 4 . F * .�
.- -� - � ��'� ' 1 � 2 4� ic
� �' � �+:j' "�� :{'
�� � * � � . � l.�
3 } � � ' ' �'5 k .'- Li � y ? _ { .
, 4 . �µ�, .�y .�/(' ' '�L��
. _ .2�-or��� aa�4, ��.
ry �� 4
nr i4 ��l : �+�
� �� � � � �.�{ � . * � y � . �.c' : �� . ��'
� '
■ . ` �'``�
� `="� �ommunity green�va}r +.
���-.
- . trail on Parks Master Plan �� �
'� . ;. �. ' � �;� u� � - . .� ::. �-� lo cation to �e determine d
. � , � ' � � F � � �� * ,.� �r1}�'� `K
{� {� .�� I F � '`�: F4� �� �� ' .yr�� r�
� ��� 'J �Y�_ � • � �� r L. _ �.Pn#" .
� ;"' ; � . � ' : � � �--, . � . v„� . r } _ �
� � �•7 � . -
• . .� .� �=�� TI7a Corp��rati��n ��f tha District ��f 1,lapla Ri���v�
'..��' � . �_�.• :��� makes no guarantee regarding the accuracx
� .�
� �'� or present status of the information shown on
F'' .� ' - a" � this map.
{ =��,
� r
- � " '
Leg en d
' ��OIJ�tt� �O�C� �C1C� '� �� �lf�,
Trai I s SI o�e
�c� sTxru � Percent �It� �O�It�Xt Nl��] �
' �PIREC• 0•�-'4
=r.i�Tir�;, 0-F._�= � ��RP�RATI�N �F
__ .} 0� -�� � �=� THE DI�TF�I�T �F
� ' ���} fVIAPLE RID�E
t
�` I�tlarca �_ � fsla��t� F�f: e�:, tk' �r. o= E�v. 77" ;
=_.i � � � �a ] _ }.i � n• _ � r
� 3P5 ��kUartraliraa
�C81e= 1:3.000 �,.�R DkTE: Se��, �01� FILE: Untitled BY: R�
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
District of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 15, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 2014-053-DVP
Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW
Development Variance Permit
10476 - 10518 McEachern Street (east side lots only)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Development Variance Permit application 2014-053-VP has been received requesting an increase to
the maximum building height from 9.75 metres to 11.0 metres for eight uphill lots on the east side
of McEachern Street. This requested variance is to the same height as Variance Permit 2013-070-
DVP for Lots 28 to 53, 73 to 95 and 114 to 126 of the same development, which Council approved
on October 8, 2013. It is recommended this Development Variance Permit 2014-053-DVP be
approved.
Council considered rezoning application 2012-040-RZ and granted final reading on October 10,
2013. Council considered and approved two earlier variance permit applications for this
development. 2013-027-DVP was approved on June 25, 2013 to allow an increase to the height of
portions of the retaining walls and to reduce the road servicing requirements within the 104 Avenue
and 248 Street right-of-ways where the pedestrian walkways will be constructed. 2013-070-DVP
was approved on October 8, 2013 to allow an increase to the maximum building height on Lots 28 to
53, 73 to 95 and 114 to 126 to 11.0 metres; to allow the driveway for Lot 1 to be located less than
7.5 metres from the intersection; and to allow the existing overhead wiring on Jackson Road to
remain. Council considered and approved the Intensive Residential Development Permit 2013-027-
DP for 126 R-3 lots on October 8, 2013.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2014-053-DVP respecting the properties
located at 10476 to 10518 McEachern Street (east side lots only).
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description:
OCP:
Existing:
Zoning:
Existing:
Morningstar Homes Ltd.
Morningstar Homes Ltd
Lots 106 to 113, Section 10, Township 12, NWD Plan
EPP32314
Medium Density Residential
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
1103
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use of Property:
Access:
Servicing:
Lot Size:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation
b) Requested Variance:
Single Family
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Residential Medium Density
Single Family
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Residential Medium Density
Single Family
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Residential Medium Density
Single Family
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Residential Medium Density
Under construction for single family residential
McEachern Street
Urban Standard
352m2 to 521m2
1. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Section 601C(F)(1): to vary the maximum
building height of the R-3 zoned Lots 106-113 from 9.75 metres to 11.0 metres.
c) Project Description:
These eight (8) lots are part the large 128 lot "Robertson Heights" subdivision that was approved
earlier this year on the site of the former Allard gravel pit. These lots are in the upper east portion of
the development on the east side of McEachern Street. Intensive Residential Development Permit
2013-027-DP has been approved which ensures there is a variety of building designs and colour
schemes within the comprehensive design plan for the site.
d) Planning Analysis:
The Zoning Bylaw establishes general minimum and maximum regulations for single family
development. A Development Variance Permit allows Council some flexibility in the approval
process.
The requested variance to increase the maximum building height to 11.0 metres is consistent with
building heights allowed by variance for recent developments in the District. The applicant designed
the buildings to fit the contours of the site and to meet the proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment for
height in anticipation that the amendment would be adopted prior to approval of this development.
The buildings are an up-hill design with three storeys facing the street and 2 storeys in the rear. A
portion of the upper gable on the front elevation and a small portion of the peak of the roof will
2-
exceed the maximum height permitted in the R-3 zone. The amount of variance required for each of
these lots will vary due to the slope of the site, but none of the buildings will exceed 11.0 metres.
CONCLUSIONS:
The proposed variance to increase the maximum building height on the uphill lots to 11.0 metres is
supported because the height variance is consistent with common building practices and with
building heights permitted by variances for new development. The same building height variance to
11.0 metres was approved by Council on October 8, 2013 with application 2013-070-DVP for Lots
28 to 53, 73 to 95 and 114 to 126 of this same Robertson Heights development.
It is therefore recommended that this application be favourably considered and the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal Development Variance Permit 2014-053-DVP.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
Prepared by: Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed bv J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B- Building Elevation plans
3-
Cit f Pitt , ._ f�J
Mea ows '
--- 6 �r
�
-
�- r
,
�
� � r
�%�� _
�� µ � '� �~ -
� f District of �
Langley __
�`"\
Scale: 1:1,500
FRASER R.��
10476-10518 McEachern St
�
0
.�
�
�
o * CORPORATION OF
" — THE DISTRICT OF
0
- � MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Sep 3, 2014 2014-053-VP BY: JV
a
0
0
a
4
�
�t
4
0
',�' ELEV,�TIDN
APPENDIX B
A1L 0161E1lSIONS TO BE CHECKED
6Y CONTRACTOR BEFORE START OF
— — — — — — — — CON5TRUCTION & ANY
�ISCREPMCIES REPORTED.
THESE DRA141NG5 WNFORlA TO
THE L4TEST EDR10N OF THE 2012
BRITISH COLUTABN BUIIDING CODE
---------,---__--
r _ _ — II I II _ _ — — — — —
� _ _ — — _ — — — R��P
i- — — --__
RE,�R ELEV�TION
}•WJ_ AREA - �43.'I3 SGi.FT. e 1.201� L D. Y'J.LL NZrA - 1T7.51 SQ.Ff. c� 3.46N LD.
MfJQMUM U.P.O. -'I.004i 0�2 E6.06 Y�i.FT. MIAXU�fIfM U.P.O. - 13.609i OR 2428 SC..FT.
-- PR�PO�FD VP.O. - 5.64% OR 5325 SG.FT. FROP05FD U.P.O. - 2�5°5 OR 4.00 SQ.Ff.
'_'_""—a_
L�� I �LL.YI:I Ivlv
YV+LL AREA - 1133.� SQ.FT. e 1.30;�1 L.D.
MAXIMUM U.P.o. - �.0095 oR 1930 SQ.Ff.
FRDPOSED U.P.O. - 5.644'o OR 64.00 SCd.FT.
NOTES
GRADE LP�ES AND U.P.O.
GALGUL+'.TIONS 540/al REFLEGT
GERERf�L LONDff10�5 hND DO
— hOT REFRuEl1T N-�Y AGiVAL LOT.
_ _ /,GNAI. GRhDiNG TO CONFORM
TO �IS7RIGT OF MhFLE RIDGE
RcGVIREFfENTS hND MEcT
/.PPROVFD ENGMEFR,\6
DR.V4!N65.
— — �n i
- - lr-
t_' ",�
�� ``- �'``E
�i• � ..-_. €`: �
kza '- ss;%
- - E_=� � ��I -` �-E
i � -Y ��'Y k
`-,� ti:
� !
�l`
�='�'y! -
- — — ���IHI�071e31f��
OEFIIIIN4 SIN4LE FAlJILT HOI.IES
946 BRUNEffE AVENUE
COQUITlA1.1, 6.C. V3K 1C9
HE4D OFFlCE: (604) 521-0039
FAX: (604) 521-0078
1';;:1l.11Sf<RNCVES.CO!d \j
�IYG FAc2 _ j� O B'�" K T S O f V
7-IEIG]-ITS
f DESIGNED BY:
- — — � FF�ODY SALE
DRAVM BY: CHECKE� 6Y:
F = DtO S.C.
�ATE: SCALE:
JU\'E 32013 V4' = I'-O'
" � SHEEf TRLE:
C m
Q
o m UPHILL
0
�; ELEVATIONS
- LOT:
�������
nooREss:
MAPI.E RIPGF
lAODEL:
FDOP 1zOB�fzTSON liii>
oaawiNc:
—
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
4
�
m
Q
O
�o
�
n' _ _ —
� _ — _ _
- a
Q
° — — —
m
p _ _ _
v
Q
m
a
Q
a
� ./�i��. ���� ��
.���m1. � ��
— ��1�����1��
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_ _ I
...■I I...,II ....�' ....�i
I—I —I � �I
�� —� �� �I
',4' ELE�/,�TION
aL DIlAENSIONS TO BE CHECKEO
BY CONTRACTOR BEFORE STMT OF
CONSTRUCTION & ANY
�ISCREPANCIES REPORTE�.
THESE DRAYlINGS CONFORlA TO
THE L4TEST EDIi101� OF THE 2012
BRITISH WLUTABIA 6UILDING CO�E
waE. �sv+: oni r
NOTES
_ _ GRI.Dc LJNES AND UP.O.
GALGVLhT10�5 SHOYAI REFLEGT
GERERSL GONDfilONS AND DO
�Oi REFRES�IT ANY AGiUAL IDT.
AGiVAL GR/.DING TO GONFGRFi
TO DiSIRIGT OF MAFLE RfD6E
REQUIREM-rNTS AND MEEf
AFPROVED EI.GMEErZMG
DW.V�NGS.
___—T_—_
_ — _ � I
i �
I �
I �
I �
I
I �
I �
I �
� �
, � _
�� ��
� ��
�
�
� - - - - ' -
- - - - , �
❑ ❑
1�E�i� �LE�/�TION
RDDP
4'1,LL ARE,4 - 443.�3 SQ.Ff. B 1.�OM LD.
MAXIMUH U.P.O. - 1.0 0 96 012 6 6.06 �Q.Ff.
FROPO�E� U.P.O. - 5.6490 OR 53.35 Sa.FT.
_-=,,,_- =—=II=='d
— — — �� `_. „r.���,1
� 4r_- E. .. r
-- — [�� ilj
� l.� � �'`� �` `-. d
� — ' ?ae5
ll (�I -`-
;�l � g �:�'1
_� if� ��..
O
� �; n i ' �{`. n
k-� m ' 4jr�'�
��
f m --
ll t
°� �
LEFT EL.E�/,�TION
YL4LL ,S FJ. - 1133.93 SC3.FT. E 1.20N LO.
MAXIMUM U.P.O. -'1.0055 OR'1438 SQ.Ff.
FROFP'�FD U.P.O. - 5.64°5 OR 64.00 �l3.Ff.
_FDD�
MORNINGSTAR
EFIIIINa SINOLE FAIdILY HONES
946 BRUNETTE AVENUE
COOURWA, B.C. V3K iC9
HEAO OFFlCE: (604) 521-0038
FAX: (60S) 521-0078
Y;:.11.�_� SlAS HOV.ES.cO V
ROBEKTSON
HEIG]-ITS
F DaD S.G.
DATE: � SCALE:
JUVE 32013 I/4' = 1'-
� `� SHEEf i1TLE:
� m
Q
m UPHILL
ELEVATIONS
106�113
JRE55:
MAPLE RIPGP
JEL'
JACKSON liii)
• �•' � ••'
MAPLE RIDGE
Britlsh Columhia
T0: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 15, 2014
and Members of Council FILE N0: 11-5255-40-167
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Award of Contract ITT-EN14-54: Larch Avenue Road Extension
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Larch Avenue Road Extension Project is in the City's approved Capital Program as part of the
Silver Valley Pedestrian and Road Improvement project. The project objective is to complete a critical
transportation linkage between the Forest Hamlet, River Village and the adjacent neighbourhoods as
identified in the Silver Valley Area Plan. The project scope includes road construction, boulevard and
pedestrian upgrades, drainage works and a section of watermain replacement.
This contract was tendered on August 13, 2014 and closed on September 3, 2014. The lowest
compliant tender price was submitted by Frazer Excavation Ltd. for $243,735.33 excluding taxes.
This does not include watermain work to be undertaken by City crews including two water service
connections and the tie-in to the City watermain. This work is estimated at $15,000 for a total
project value of $258,735.33
The construction of the project is anticipated to commence in October 2014 and is anticipated to be
completed in approximately 6 weeks.
Council approval to award the contract is required for the work to proceed.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Contract ITT-EN14-54, Larch Avenue Road Extension, be awarded to Frazer Excavation Ltd. in
the amount of $243,735.33 excluding taxes; and
THAT a contingency of 5% or $12,936.77 be approved to address potential variations in field
conditions; and
THAT the Financial Plan be amended to advance $48,272.10 from LTC 7840; and further
THAT the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
1104
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Larch Avenue from 235 Street to approximately 85m east is currently an asphalt road
constructed to a minimal service level to provide local access to several driveways. In 2012 a
development application constructed the portion of Larch Avenue west of 236 Street to the
full urban standards as far as the easterly limit of this project. At the time, the City
considered completing the road connection through to 235 Street under the Development
Cost Charge program however additional road dedication was required which then
necessitated property acquisition. Since then, the City has acquired the land and is now in a
position to complete this critical transportation corridor.
The proposed capital project to complete the Larch Avenue corridor includes construction of
two travel lanes, boulevard upgrades and parking along the right of way the City acquired,
temporary boulevard treatments fronting future development lands and the replacement of a
section of watermain. The project will provide a continuous pedestrian and vehicle corridor
between 235 Street and 236 Street.
Tender Evaluation
The contract for the Larch Avenue Road Extension was tendered on August 13, 2014 and
closed on September 3, 2014. Eleven tenders were received ranging from $243,735.33 to
$339,148.00 excludingtaxes.
The following eight compliant tenders were received are listed in order from lowest to highest
price:
Frazer Excavation Ltd
Sandpiper Contracting LLP
Mainland Civil Works Inc.
Lafarge Canada Ltd / Columbia Bitulithic
Key-West Asphalt Ltd.
King Hoe Excavating Ltd.
Winvan Paving Ltd.
Jack Cewe Ltd.
Tender Price
(excluding taxes)
$243,735.33
$272,187.00
$272,777.77
$274,925.00
$279,650.00
$287,079.40
$301,316.30
$339,148.00
Staff has reviewed the tenders and the lowest compliant bid was $243,735.33 from Frazer
Excavation Ltd. Frazer Excavation Ltd. has completed a number of projects for the City and is
suitably qualified for the works.
b) Desired Outcome:
The construction of Larch Avenue will provide a critical transportation link between 235
Street to 236 Street which provide alternate road access to the Rock Ridge area. This
connection will also provide improved facilities for pedestrians.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The Larch Avenue Road Extension Project supports the following key strategies identified
in the City's Strategic Plan:
• Maintain and enhance a multi-modal transportation system within Maple
Ridge to provide citizens with safe, efficient alternatives for the movement of
individuals and goods
• Promote alternative modes (pedestrian, bike, public transit) of travel to
reduce reliance on the automobile
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Residents of the Silver Valley area have expressed their desire for alternate access and
egress points to their community. The extension of Larch Avenue will provide a much
needed and called for alternate route for vehicles into the eastern area of Silver Valley.
The estimated construction duration is approximately 6 weeks, starting in October 2014.
It is anticipated that the the work zone will be restricted to local traffic only which impacts
three residents only but the road should remain open at all times.
e) Interdepartmentallmplications:
The Operations and Planning Departments have provided input to the design.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The tender price for the project is $243,735.33, in addition $15,000 of watermain work
is to be completed by City crews. The City watermain works brings the total project
construction value to $258,735.33. An additional 5% contingency to address extra
design and construction costs associated with potential variations in field conditions
brings the total project cost to $271,672.10.
The project funding is provided through Capital Projects LTC 8468 and LTC 7840. LTC
8468 is a DCC project for the improvement of pedestrian and road network in Silver
Valley and is being used to fund $223,400 of the project. LTC 7840 is a DCC project
identified to provide collector standard improvements on Larch; approximately 45m of
collector improvements are included in this project and requires that $48,272.10 be
advanced in the Capital Plan. Funding for LTC 7840 is a combination of DCC and Water
Utility Fund.
Based upon the above funding there is sufficient funds to award the contract and cover
contingencies.
CONCLUSIONS:
The tender price of $243,735.33 excluding taxes by Frazer Excavation Ltd. for the Larch
Avenue Road Extension is the lowest tendered price. It is recommended that Council
approve the award of the contract to Frazer Excavation Ltd. It is further recommended that
Council approve a total budget of $271,672.10 to allow for City water works and a project
contingency.
"Original signed by Rachel 011enberger"
Prepared by: Rachel 011enberger. AScT
Engineering Technologist
"Original signed by David Pollock"
Reviewed by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
"Original signed by Trevor Thompson"
Financial Trevor Thompson, CGA
Review by: Manager of Financial Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
General Manager: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
{ ��';i�-�,� � �
cnoss ao '• ✓. �` �
T 'K JY4'k { �"�
F 8 ,� _ �-
� � � x
,ss,.. �c
� p � fl �
� � � � �
�
`� a�, f�a}
� �
5}5'a �y }��_ i
� i
� 'r ��d.
I �� �
�. ��4
r. �
y �� �S ��xr
•?,
�.
{i �� i1:
7 I�� � �
� � � _ �:
's
u4RCu+CYE
�
� 13217 �
r
�
`�" I
i7:_'
.i,w
�
�dAPL� Rlf}CE �
f Pi _ �{
hlea ws
�'
�
�
� * � ' � �' —
� �'F{ J�S� _" 7" �-
� L3f1 �iE}' �
� k
Sc31e: ":"c.B�C , �-.r�
.._J � '� �
� � -,. f} FR F�RN,�,
� 1 "s:{<
i_:.r
�'�a�'� 1=:�;c ':i�'�
� 1 "s:f: �
,�,. _ 115i i•
_� J I }�i} — }
� i':i.
•��rr�— ::et
i,4_ — � i }7:+ �_r �� •a: -
� }�}� �
n�• � i in� 1_x' :i '
i7w
vxt ' ]5a5 v:=r
17"�T5 %o ;'•'x :
1'3SN � 15 f'*3_1 � _*�f�
�y �
{ 5j} i37ar "
� {n' �Jl#
ISY30 `-�74 1377= .
'}Sin �}7�'� ":ii
n
'v,� � �'7�. --:e
17�71iU
I I'I� I
�' _' _"
� _ I': �1 ' �'I}R 1.23'.y -.'-I
.��_ _ :���� i�if '
' S= i r.] _. .
-� i7:c:
I:N� + _ n"$ �ti-= III! �
I } — I
-siw �r1��4°,
- � ��� �3� ` �'
�i :zr� ''h a�
7
�.+ ��. h� �k
� � � � ,�,4
� � • : ., �
' i�ri
� - '
PROJECT LOCATION
�:_:G
#
. r>-
'1`li
F
. �—_
_. 3.. 5
�k-6-�LD .l'a
Larch Avenue Road Extension
�, ; Avra rd of IT T-EN 14-�4
�� t
'+ � � 0 �" x7 ro 1U] m
� 0 9] -d6 �r: 304 t
µ �
C' T'e ���'Wnlar �'tl�t61s7iy vrn.xie �iyx �,3�:
� ro a�m ke r_aarG �a IYe a¢va �' tr o-r_:ert:bW:
o'tl�t nhr-a7or :-�xr x r�: ^�m.
_ f
— - � aepartne�t:Engineeri�g aa4e:�ep 11,2_�1
MAPLE RIDGE
British Columbla
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City of Maple Ridge
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
2014 Council Expenses
MEETING DATE: 15-September-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 August. 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". The budget for Council includes the provision noted in
Policy 3.07 as well as a separate budget for cell phone and iPad usage.
"Original signed by Catherine Nolan"
Prepared by: Catherine Nolan, CPA, CGA
Manager of Accounting
"Original signed by Paul Gill"
Approved by: Paul Gill, CPA, CGA
GM, Corporate and Financial Services
"Original signed byJim Rule"
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
1 of 1 1131
Ashlie, Cheryl
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Bell, Corisa
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
iPad charges
iPad charges
RM South Asian Cultural Society-Annual Gala
iPad charges
Pitt Meadows Centenial Gala
iPad charges
MR Community Foundation - Citizen of the Year
Urban Development Institute - Seminar
iPad charges
iPad charges
UBCM Conference - Whistler
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
Cell phone charges
2014 Council Expenses
30.00
30.00
95.00
100.00
100.00
295.00
5.35
18.19
18.19
18.19
5.35
5.35
5.35
75.97
93.09
93.09
71.69
71.69
93.09
71.69
75.97
53.50
Schedule 1
400.97
623.81 623.81
Daykin, Ernie
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
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
iPad & cell phone charges
BCRPA Membership
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
LMLGA Conference - Whistler
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
Cell phone charges
UBCM Conference - Whistler
iPad charges
iPad charges
iPad charges
iPad charges
MR Community Foundation - Citizen of the Year
Urban Development Institute - Seminar
iPad charges
iPad charges
iPad charges
UBCM Conference - Whistler
iPad charges
iPad charges
RM South Asian Cultural5ociety-Annual Gala
iPad charges
Pitt Meadows Centenial Gala
Business Excellence Awards
iPad charges
MR Community Foundation - Citizen of the Year
Urban Development Institute - Seminar
FCM Conference - Niagra Falls
iPad charges
iPad charges
Urban Development Institute - Seminar
10 Trends for Smarter Communities
iPad charges
UBCM Conference - Whistler
60.00
1,023.25
54.37
98.50
78.83
77.03
77.30
77.57
73.90
98.97
59.74
1,077.62 - - 60.00 - 641.84 1,779.46
5.35
5.35
5.35
5.35
100.00
30.00
- 5.35
18.19
5.35
30.00
30.00
392.50
60.00
37.07
54.38
100.00 -
95.00
100.00
75.00
100.00
50.29 180.29
39.59
18.19
18.19
18.19
18.19
18.19
18.19
573.95 370.00 - - - 148.73 1,092.68
Masse, Bob
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Morden, Michael
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
iPad & cell phone charges
BC Economic Development Assoc - Ministers Dinner
iPad & cell phone charges
iPad & cell phone charges
Chamber of Commerce general meeting
Business Excellence Awards
iPad & cell phone charges
Cell phone charges
Urban Development Institute - Seminar
iPad charges
iPad charges
RM South Asian Cultural5ociety-Annual Gala
Chamber of Commerce general meeting
iPad charges
Pitt Meadows Centenial Gala
Business Excellence Awards
MR Community Foundation - Citizen of the Year
iPad charges
Urban Development Institute - Seminar
LMLGA Conference - Whistler
iPad charges
iPad charges
iPad charges
UBCM Conference - Whistler
125.00
32.95
75.00
60.00
185.00 107.95 - -
95.00
32.95
100.00
75.00
100.00
30.00
806.94
54.37
55.64
89.88
89.85
89.88
50.29
375.54 668.49
39.59
39.59
39.59
39.59
39.59
39.59
68.04
891.31 402.95 - - - 305.58 1,599.84
2,787.88 1,275.90 - 60.00 - 2,221.76 6,345.54