HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-09-09 Workshop Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge
1.ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
2.MINUTES – August 26, 2013
3.PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
3.1
4.UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
4.1 Housing Action Plan Update
Staff report dated September 9, 2013 providing an update on the status of the
Housing Action Plan.
For information only
No motion required
COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
September 9, 2013
9:00 a.m.
Blaney Room, 1st Floor, Municipal Hall
The purpose of the Council Workshop is to review and discuss policies and
other items of interest to Council. Although resolutions may be passed at
this meeting, the intent is to make a consensus decision to send an item to
Council for debate and vote or refer the item back to staff for more
information or clarification.
REMINDERS
September 9, 2013
Closed Council following Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting 1:00 p.m.
September 10, 2013
Council Meeting 7:00 p.m.
Council Workshop
September 9, 2013
Page 2 of 4
4.2 Notification of Three Proposed Amendments to the Metro Vancouver Regional
Growth Strategy Land Use Designation Map – Township of Langley
Staff report dated September 9, 2013 recommending that the Greater Vancouver
Regional District be advised that the District of Maple Ridge has no comments on
the request from the Township of Langley for three amendments to the Regional
Growth Strategy Land Use Designation Map.
4.3 Maple Ridge Commercial and Industrial Strategy Consultation Summary Report
Staff report dated September 9, 2013 recommending that the report be received
for information and that staff be directed to work with G.P. Rollo & Associates Ltd.
to finalize the draft strategy.
4.4 Packaging and Printed Paper Recycling in British Columbia – Extended Producer
Responsibility Program
Staff report dated September 9, 2013 recommending that the District of Maple
Ridge indicate to Multi-Material British Columbia (“MMBC”) its willingness to
accept a financial incentive offer for curbside collection for packaging and printed
paper recycles on the condition of suitable contract terms agreeable to both
parties and that a letter be sent to the Honourable Mary Polak, Minister of
Environment expressing concern around the MMBC offer and timeline.
5.CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence has been received and requires a response. Staff is
seeking direction from Council on each item. Options that Council may consider include:
a)Acknowledge receipt of correspondence and advise that no further action will be
taken.
b)Direct staff to prepare a report and recommendation regarding the subject matter.
c)Forward the correspondence to a regular Council meeting for further discussion.
d)Other.
Once direction is given the appropriate response will be sent.
5.1
Recommendation:
6.BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
Council Workshop
September 9, 2013
Page 3 of 4
7.MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
8.ADJOURNMENT
Checked by: ___________
Date: _________________
Council Workshop
September 9, 2013
Page 4 of 4
Rules for Holding a Closed Meeting
A part of a council meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to one
or more of the following:
(a) personal information about an identifiable individual who holds or is being considered for a position as
an officer, employee or agent of the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality;
(b) personal information about an identifiable individual who is being considered for a municipal award or
honour, or who has offered to provide a gift to the municipality on condition of anonymity;
(c) labour relations or employee negotiations;
(d) the security of property of the municipality;
(e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the council considers that
disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality;
(f) law enforcement, if the council considers that disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the
conduct of an investigation under or enforcement of an enactment;
(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality;
(h) an administrative tribunal hearing or potential administrative tribunal hearing affecting the municipality,
other than a hearing to be conducted by the council or a delegate of council
(i) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for
that purpose;
(j) information that is prohibited or information that if it were presented in a document would be prohibited
from disclosure under section 21 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act;
(k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a municipal service that are at
their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council, could reasonably be expected to harm the
interests of the municipality if they were held in public;
(l) discussions with municipal officers and employees respecting municipal objectives, measures and
progress reports for the purposes of preparing an annual report under section 98 [annual municipal
report]
(m) a matter that, under another enactment, is such that the public may be excluded from the meeting;
(n) the consideration of whether a council meeting should be closed under a provision of this subsection of
subsection (2)
(o) the consideration of whether the authority under section 91 (other persons attending closed meetings)
should be exercised in relation to a council meeting.
(p) information relating to local government participation in provincial negotiations with First Nations, where
an agreement provides that the information is to be kept confidential.
District of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
August 26, 2013
The Minutes of the Municipal Council Workshop held on August 26, 2013 at
9:00 a.m. in the Blaney Room 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 C. Carter, Acting General Manager Public Works and
Councillor B. Masse Development Services
Councillor M. Morden C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services
A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Other Staff as Required
J. Bastaja, Director of Corporate Support
C. Nolan, Manager of Accounting
S. Rutledge, Manager of Revenue and Collections
F. Armstrong, Manager of Corporate Communications
Note: These Minutes are posted on the Municipal Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
1.ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was adopted as circulated.
2.MINUTES
R/2013-344
Minutes It was moved and seconded
July 22, 2013
That the minutes of the Council Workshop Meeting of July 22,
2013 be adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
2.0
Council Workshop Minutes
August 26, 2013
Page 2 of 5
3.PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL – Nil
4.UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
4.1 Update on the Agricultural Land Commission Decisions to Exclude Land from
the Agricultural Land Reserve for 23451 and 23623 105 Avenue
Staff report dated August 26, 2013 providing an overview of the Agricultural
Land Commission decisions and implications for advancing the Block
Exclusion applications for properties located south of 105 Avenue in the
Albion Flats.
The Acting General Manager of Public Works and Development reviewed the
report.
R/2013-345 4.1.1
ALC Land Exclusion It was moved and seconded
Application
Meeting with Minister
of Agriculture
That a meeting with the Minister of Agricultural be arranged as
soon as possible to discuss an Agricultural Land Commission
decision particularly on properties at 23451 and 23623 105
Avenue.
CARRIED
R/2013-346 4.1.2
ALC Land Exclusion It was moved and seconded
Application Report
Received
That the staff report dated August 26, 2013 titled “Update on
the Agricultural Land Commission Decisions to Exclude Land
from the Agricultural Land Reserve for 23451 and 23623
105 Avenue” be received for information.
CARRIED
4.2 Laserfiche Discovery Document – Review and Next Steps
Discussion of Item 1133 on the August 26, 2013 Committee of the Whole
Agenda
The Manager of Legislative Services reviewed the report.
Council Workshop Minutes
August 26, 2013
Page 3 of 5
The Director of Corporate Support provided further details on the records
management system being considered.
4.3 Financial Update
Staff report dated August 26, 2013 providing a financial update to the end of
June 2013.
The Manager of Accounting reviewed the report.
4.4 Property Tax Collection Period
The Manager of Revenue and Collections gave a PowerPoint presentation
providing an update on the 2013 Property Tax Collection Year. She outlined
the items for which the District collects taxes and provided specifics on the
PAWS program. She provided information on the Provincial deferral program
available to residents.
4.5 2013 Business Class Property Taxation
Staff report dated August 26, 2013 providing information on tax rates
assessed to Business Class 6 properties in 2013.
The General Manager of Corporate and Financial Services reviewed the report.
He highlighted changes in how information is obtained from BC Assessment.
R/2013-347
2013 Business It was moved and seconded
Class Property
Taxation
Received
That the staff report dated August 26, 2013 titled “2013
Business Class Property Taxation” be received for information.
CARRIED
4.6 September Public Hearing
Consideration of change of date from September 24, 2013 to September 16,
17 or 23, 2013
Mayor Daykin reviewed the current Public Hearing calendar and outlined the
items being brought forward for the September 24, 2013 Public Hearing.
Council Workshop Minutes
August 26, 2013
Page 4 of 5
The Acting General Manager of Public Works and Development outlined the
reasons for the request to reschedule the September 24, 2013 Public
Hearing.
R/2013-348
Rescheduling of It was moved and seconded
Public Hearing to
September 17, 2013
That the Public Hearing scheduled for September 24, 2013
be rescheduled to September 17, 2013.
CARRIED
Councillor Bell - OPPOSED
5.CORRESPONDENCE
5.1 Municipal Insurance Association of British Columbia (MIABC) - Voting Delegate
E-mail dated August 12, 2013 from Marisa Newton, MIABC requesting
appointment of a voting delegation and two alternates for the 26th Annual
General Meeting.
R/2013-349
MIA Voting Delegate
Appointment It was moved and seconded
That Councillor Ashlie be appointed as the voting delegate for
the Municipal Insurance Association of British Columbia’s
Annual General Meeting and that Councillor Bell be appointed
as the first alternate and Councillor Hogarth be appointed as
the second alternate.
CARRIED
6.BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL – Nil
Council Workshop Minutes
August 26, 2013
Page 5 of 5
7. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT - Nil
8. ADJOURNMENT – 11:39 a.m.
_______________________________
E. Daykin, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
1
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 9, 2013
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Housing Action Plan Update
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this report is to provide an update to Council on the status of the Housing Action
Plan. Council endorsed a process proposed in the report dated June 18, 2012. A Request for
Proposal (RFP) for the Housing Action Plan was completed over the summer. The consulting firm
CitySpaces Consulting Ltd. has been selected as the preferred candidate and is in the process of
being notified and a contract awarded.
RECOMMENDATION:
For information only, no resolution required.
DISCUSSION:
Regional Implications
In July, 2011, Metro Vancouver adopted the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) following acceptance by
all member municipalities. Maple Ridge Council accepted the RGS on March 22, 2011. The RGS
demonstrates that affordable housing with a range of housing options is an essential part of a
complete community and requires that each municipality prepare and implement a Housing Action
Plan. The full report is attached as Appendix A. A flowchart of the Housing Action Plan included with
the original report has been updated to reflect the revised timeline and is attached as Appendix B.
Housing Action Plan Process
The process for a Housing Action plan was outlined in a staff report to Council dated June 18, 2012.
Council authorized staff to proceed with the Housing Action Plan based on this process. A Request
for Proposal was developed in the spring of 2013 and issued July 10, 2013. The deadline for
submission was August 2, 2013.
Evaluation
Parks and Leisure Services and Planning Department staff developed evaluation criteria that were
forwarded to the Purchasing Department prior to the RFP submission deadline. Out of the five firms
that were invited to submit a response, two proponents responded to the request for this specialized
planning work. Evaluation of the submissions was conducted in mid-August, with proposals
evaluated against criteria including: clarity of proposal, experience, team composition, methodology,
references and the potential to advance the social, economic and environmental goal of the District
of Maple Ridge. The lead proponent, CitySpaces Consulting Ltd, was selected by the highest score of
the set evaluation criteria. CitySpaces is also familiar with the OCP policies and Zoning regulations of
the District having been the selected consultants for the Amenity Zoning Study and the Zoning Bylaw
Review.
4.1
2
Summary of Housing Action Plan Activities
The Housing Action Plan will begin this month (September, 2013) and is scheduled for completion in
July, 2014. Scheduled activities for the Housing Action Plan process are:
Council Updates forwarded through SPAC (approximately every two months until project
completion)
Research and analysis of the current housing context (September-November 2013)
Consultation program design and scheduled events (October 2013 – March 2014)
Housing Toolbox and Strategic Directions documents (March to May 2014)
Draft Housing Action Plan (May 2014)
SPAC Review (May 2014)
Open Review (May-June 2014)
Finalized Housing Action Plan (July 2014)
Over the next few weeks staff will meet with members of CitySpaces Consulting Ltd. to finalize the
work plan and schedule.
CONCLUSION:
The lead proponent has received a notification of award from Purchasing as of August 30, 2013.
Work on the Housing Action Plan will begin early September, 2013.
‘Original signed by Siobhan Murphy’
___________________________________________
Prepared by: Siobhan Murphy, MA, MCIP, RPP
Planning Technician
‘Original signed by Sue Wheeler’
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Sue Wheeler
Director Community Services
‘Original signed by Chuck Goddard’
_______________________________________________
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
Attachments: Appendix A – Council Report June 18, 2012
Appendix B – Housing Action Plan Flowchart
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: CDPR-0640-30
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Housing Action Plan Process
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this report to is obtain Council’s authorization to proceed with the proposed process
for the preparation of a Housing Action Plan (HAP) for the District of Maple Ridge. The HAP will
articulate a vision, guiding principles, goals and objectives, and a plan for municipal actions and
strategies with the goal of achieving an adequate supply of housing to meet the full range of incomes
and needs in our community.
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff be authorized to proceed with the preparation of a Housing Action Plan, in accordance with
the process outlined in this staff report dated 2012-06-18.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The proposed HAP was approved as a part of the 2012 Business Plan under the title Affordable
Housing Strategy. This title has been modified to be called the “Housing Action Plan” to align
with the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS).
In July, 2011, Metro Vancouver adopted the RGS with the support of member municipalities.
Maple Ridge Council accepted the RGS on March 22, 2011. The RGS demonstrates that
affordable housing with a range of housing options is an essential part of a complete community.
It outlines a series of municipal actions including the development of Official Community Plans,
Regional Context Statements, and Housing Action Plans as actions to assist municipalities in
increasing the supply and diversity of affordable housing at key points along the housing
continuum.
The RGS provides ten year estimates of future housing demands across the region. The 10-year
estimate for Maple Ridge is for 6,600 new housing units; with 4,300 being ownership units and
2,300 being rental units. Of the rental units, it is estimated that 1,700 will need to be affordable
in order to accommodate low and moderate-income households. Of the 1,700, it is estimated
that there is a need for 800 non-market social housing units and 900 affordable market rental
units.
Scope
The District of Maple Ridge’s HAP will identify actions currently underway and will recommend
strategies to address current and future housing needs, with a particular focus on the needs of
low and moderate income households for whom home ownership is not an option. The HAP will:
assess local housing market conditions, by tenure, including assessing housing supply,
demand and affordability;
identify housing priorities, based on the assessment of local housing market conditions, and
consideration of changing household demographics, characteristics and needs;
identify implementation measures within the jurisdiction and financial capabilities of
municipalities;
identify strategies to encourage the supply of new rental housing and limit the loss of existing
rental housing stock;
identify opportunities to participate in programs with other levels of government to secure
additional affordable housing units to meet housing needs across the continuum of housing.
Through a community and stakeholder engagement process, the HAP will focus on the housing
continuum from home ownership through to non-market housing to identify key
recommendations to address the supply of:
Non-market housing for low income households and for groups that require supportive or
special needs housing;
Market rental housing for low and moderate income households, and
Affordable home ownership.
Non-Market Housing:
Through the Social Planning function, the District of Maple Ridge has been working with
community partners to facilitate solutions to the issues related to inadequate housing options.
Work has included:
Being informed and understanding the issues;
Acting as an advocate to other levels of government, funders, and community stakeholders;
Supporting the implementation of solutions through actions that are within the municipality’s
mandate.
Over the last several years, the District has been proactive in serving as a catalyst for action to
address homelessness. Examples include:
Participation on the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness;
Support for the development 2004 Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Ending Homelessness Action
Plan, as well as the update to this Action Plan that is currently underway;
Support, and in some instances in-kind contribution, for numerous community initiatives
including: the Iron Horse Youth Safe House, the Alouette Home Start Community Outreach
team; the Family Inn; Alouette Heights Supportive Housing; and the Route 29 Youth Housing
support program.
The HAP will explore strategies to build on the Municipality’s current activities and identify
options and opportunities to help increase the supply of non-market housing for low-income
households and supportive housing for seniors, youth and people with disabilities.
Market Rental Housing:
The development of a HAP will provide an opportunity for Maple Ridge to undertake an analysis
of its current market rental housing stock, examine the municipal policies and regulations that
impact the supply of rental housing, and identify priority issues and recommended actions for
tracking and increasing the supply of rental housing.
Home Ownership:
The preparation of the HAP will include an analysis of the municipality’s land use policies and
regulations and investigate how to support and encourage the continued supply of ownership
housing in a variety of forms, and explore opportunities for affordable home ownership.
Proposed Process
The attached HAP flow chart outlines the proposed process for this project. The proposal is that
the Social Planning Advisory Committee will act as the Steering Committee for the HAP, guiding
the process and making recommendation on decision items to Council. The Parks & Leisure
Services department staff that support SPAC will be the key staff liaisons to the project and the
Planning Department will provide technical support.
The flow chart indicates that background work to prepare for the HAP is already underway. The
chart indicates that the work to prepare for the HAP began with the participation in the RGS. It
is anticipated that this work will coincide with the hiring of a consulting firm which will then begin
the process of conducting research related to the HAP. The background studies and policy
papers being prepared by staff include:
Housing and Market Conditions Update - the Official Community Plan includes a section on
population and housing trends, including the population profile of the community at the time
(2005) and housing distribution (2001) and projections. The 2011 Federal Census provides
an opportunity to update this information to ensure it provides relevant information for the
other studies being completed as part of the Housing Action Plan.
Secondary Suites Review - this work includes a review of the Zoning Bylaw regulations and
general issues related to Secondary Suites and Temporary Residential Uses (TRU’s), to
investigate options and ideas to solve the issues and to recommend a set of policy and/or
bylaw amendments for Council’s consideration.
Ending Homelessness Action Plan – work to update the 2004 Action Plan is in the SPAC
2012 Business Plan. The work will be conducted with the Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Katzie
Community Network Housing Planning Table. The Action Plan will provide an analysis of
current resources and services and will identify current priorities within the format of an
action plan. This plan will guide the work of the Housing Planning Table and partners over
the next five years. The issues and priorities that are identified in this plan will provide
background information to inform the HAP.
Seniors & Special Needs Housing Assessment - the Official Community Plan also includes
planning principles, objectives and policies respecting seniors and special needs housing.
The HAP process provides an opportunity to ensure that the current policies continue to
provide direction for seniors and special needs housing in the District.
These background studies and policy papers, together with additional research, will provide
valuable information and context for the HAP public consultation process. The proposed timeline
is for the consultation process to begin mid January, 2013. The public consultation process will
be designed to engage a diverse mix of stakeholders and community members in dialogue
designed to identify the key housing issues and explore options and opportunities to address the
issues.
The HAP will include a vision, goals and objectives, and actions and strategies. The proposed
final HAP will be assessed to ensure alignment with the RGS and to determine implications for
municipal policy or bylaw amendments. The final proposed HAP, along with an outline of
municipal policy implications, will be presented to SPAC for endorsement and a recommendation
to Council. This process is expected to be completed by the summer of 2013. Once endorsed,
the HAP will contribute to the development of the Regional Context Statement.
b) Desired Outcomes:
Housing is essential in creating healthy, sustainable communities and affordability plays an
important role in supporting a competitive local economy and in promoting the economic and
social well-being of families and individuals.
The proposed HAP will focus on developing recommendations designed to address the
critical needs in the community: the shortfall in the supply of affordable rental housing, the
shortfall in the supply of social housing, the homelessness and the increasing numbers of at-
risk of homelessness, and the shortfall in modest-cost housing appropriate for first-time
home-buyers.
c) Strategic Alignment:
This initiative aligns with Council’s strategic direction of creating a safe and livable community.
This initiative recognizes that the provision of adequate housing is essential to the overall health
of the community. There are three core arguments that suggest that the health and
sustainability of the municipality depends on the provision of adequate housing:
1. Housing, Health and Quality of Life: there is a correlation between housing, health and
quality of life:
2. Links to Economic Well-being: housing affordability is important in terms of supporting a
competitive local economy:
3. Public costs: Homelessness has a social and health cost to both the individual and to the
community:
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
It is estimated that for one-third of the region’s households, finding and remaining in affordable
housing to rent or own is a problem. Individuals unable to find housing that is suitable in size
and good repair without spending 30% or more of their household income on shelter are
considered to be in “core housing need”. The 2006 census estimated that 17% of households in
Metro Vancouver were in core housing need. It is critical to the well being of individuals and
family, and to the health of the overall community, that there is an adequate supply of affordable
housing options to meet the full range of incomes and needs in our community.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Parks and Leisure Services, under the guidance of the Social Planning Advisory Committee will
provide staff support to the development of the HAP with the technical support of the Planning
Department.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
It is anticipated that the recommendations developed for the HAP will have implications for
future business plans for both the Parks and Leisure Services and the Planning Department
business plans.
The endorsement of the HAP itself would not have any financial implications; however there is
the potential that specific recommendations may include a financial commitment. Such
recommendations would be considered by Council individually through the annual business
planning approval process.
g) Policy Implications:
The RGS requirement for municipalities to develop a HAP and to ensure the alignment of the
Official Community Plan with the RGS are implications for Municipal policies.
The RGS requires that within two years of its adoption, each municipality prepare an updated
Official Community Plan and Regional Context Statement. The Regional Context Statement sets
out the relationship between the RGS and the municipality’s OCP, and identifies how local
actions will contribute to achieving Regional Growth Strategy goals. Municipalities are required
to submit their Regional Context Statements to the Metro Vancouver Board for acceptance.
Should a municipality not complete components such as the HAP within the two year time
frame, it is acceptable to indicate in the Regional Context Statement that this work is underway.
CONCLUSIONS:
The development of a Housing Action Plan is an important step in advancing the municipality’s
sustainability objectives. The HAP will focus on meeting critical housing needs in the community
recognizing that housing is essential in creating healthy, sustainable communities and affordability
plays an important role in supporting a competitive local economy and in promoting the economic
and social well-being of families and individuals.
The Housing Action Plan will inform the development of the Regional Context Statement to be
submitted to Metro Vancouver outlining the relationship between the Regional Growth Strategy and
the municipality’s OCP, and identifying how local actions will contribute to achieving Regional Growth
Strategy goals.
The District of Maple Ridge Social Planning Advisory Committee has endorsed the proposed Housing
Action Plan process and is recommending that Council endorse the process and authorize staff to
proceed.
“Original signed by Sue Wheeler”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Sue Wheeler
Community Services Director
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Kelly Swift
General Manager: Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence by: Christine Carter, Director of Planning
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
:sw
Attachment: Housing Action Plan Process
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 9, 2013
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Council Workshop
SUBJECT: Notification from Metro Vancouver regarding the Township of Langley’s Proposed
Regional Growth Strategy Amendments
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On August 6, 2013, the District of Maple Ridge received notification that Metro Vancouver has
received a request from the Township of Langley requesting three amendments to the Regional
Growth Strategy (RGS) Land Use Designation Map (Appendix A attached). The amendments are as
follows:
1.Type 2 Amendment (Hendricks) to extend the Urban Containment Boundary and amend the land
use designation map from Agricultural to General urban;
2.Type 2 Amendment (North Murrayville) to extend the Urban Containment Boundary and amend
the land use designation map from Agricultural to General Urban;
3.Type 3 Amendment (200 Street and Highway #1) to amend the land use designation map from
Mixed Employment to General urban.
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed amendments and to provide
Council with an opportunity to submit written comments to Metro Vancouver. The District of Maple
Ridge has been invited to provide written comments on the requested amendments, noting that
comments are due by Friday September 20, 2013. Following the comment period, the Metro
Vancouver Board will consider initial readings of the Bylaw. If comments are not provided, the
Region will determine that the District had no concerns with the proposed amendments.
Analysis of the three proposed amendments concludes that they will have no direct impact on the
District of Maple Ridge. Therefore, the recommendation is to inform Metro Vancouver that Maple
Ridge has no comments regarding the Township of Langley’s pro posed Regional Growth Strategy
amendments. However, based on a review of the requested amendments, it is noted that one of the
three proposed Regional Growth Strategy amendments is not supported by the Agricultural Land
Commission and it is also contrary to the adopted Regional Growth Strategy. An alternative set of
recommendations are provided in this report for Council’s consideration.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.That the Greater Vancouver Regional District be advised that the District of Maple Ridge has
no comments respecting the proposed Regional Growth Strategy amendments for items 1
(Hendricks), 2 (North Murrayville), and 3 (200 Street and Highway #1).
4.2
2
DISCUSSION
a)Background Context
The Township of Langley has requested the following three amendments to the Regional Growth
Strategy:
1.Type 2 Amendment (Hendricks) to extend the Urban Containment Boundary and amend the land
use designation map from Agricultural to General urban;
2.Type 2 Amendment (North Murrayville) to extend the Urban Containment Boundary and amend
the land use designation map from Agricultural to General Urban;
3.Type 3 Amendment (200 Street and Highway #1) to amend the land use designation map from
Mixed Employment to General urban.
A Type 2 Amendment to the RGS requires approval of the amendment bylaw by a two-thirds weighted
vote of the Metro Vancouver Board and a regional public hearing. A Type 3 amendment requires
approval by 50%+1 weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Board.
Pursuant with the Legislation, all member municipalities have 30 days to provide commentary to the
Region, which translates into a September 20, 2013 deadline. In the absence of a written
submission to the Region, the municipality will be deemed to have no concerns or objections to the
amendments.
A brief summary for the three proposed amendments is as follows:
1.Hendricks (Type 2 Amendment) – to allow for 21 single-family residential lots. The Agricultural
Land Commission has indicated to the Township of Langley that they support the proposed
Regional Land Use Designation change as an acceptable non-farm use that benefits agriculture
(outlined in a letter to the Township of Langley on June 7, 2013);
2.North Murrayville (Type 2 Amendment) – to make a more consistent land use pattern along the
north side of 52nd Avenue. The proposed amendment is not supported by the Agricultural Land
Commission; and
3.200 Street and Highway #1 (Type 3 Amendment) – to re-designate approximately 23 hectares of
land from Mixed Employment to General Urban to permit residential use.
Process
The process for considering the Township of Langley’s proposed RGS amendments are outlined in
the Metro Vancouver Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee report dated June 25, 2013 as
follows:
July 5, 2013 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
July 19, 2013 Report to Regional Planning Advisory Committee for consideration
July 26, 2013 Metro Vancouver Board initiates RGS amendment process and refers
it to affected local governments and agencies for comment.
October 4, 2013 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
3
October 25, 2013 Metro Vancouver Board receive Metro Vancouver staff report,
potentially give initial readings to the RGS Amendment Bylaw and set
a date for a public hearing.
Early to Mid-November Public Hearing on proposed RGS Amendments
Late November Board consideration of 3rd reading and refer back to the Township of
Langley for approval.
b)Desired Outcomes
The proposed amendments for Hendricks (Type 2 amendment) and 200 Street and Highway #1
(Type 3 amendment) do not negatively impact the District of Maple Ridge’s land use designations or
application of the Regional Growth Strategy. As such it would seem appropriate to advise Metro
Vancouver that the District of Maple Ridge has no comments on these proposed RGS amendments.
The proposed amendment for North Murrayville (Type 2 amendment) is not supported by the
Agricultural Land Commission and is contrary to the policies contained in the Regional Growth
Strategy for the promotion of agricultural viability and protection of agricultural land in the region.
The proposed amendment for North Murrayville also does not negatively impact the District of Maple
Ridge. Therefore, the recommendation is that Maple Ridge has no comments on the proposed RGS
amendments.
d)Citizen/Customer Implications
The proposed amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy do not appear to directly impact
residents of this community. Should Maple Ridge residents have any objections or concerns, they
may contact Metro Vancouver directly to discuss them.
e)Alternatives
The District of Maple Ridge has incorporated numerous policies in our Official Community Plan that
support farming and the protection of agricultural land and the Agricultural Land Reserve in the
municipality and has worked hard to maintain an effective relationship with the Agricultural Land
Commission. The proposed North Murrayville RGS amendment by the Township of Langley is
contrary to the policies contained in Strategy 2.3 of the RGS. Given that the proposed amendment is
not supported by the Agricultural Land Commission, this amendment proposal is not following due
process. Metro Vancouver made it clear during the Regional Growth Strategy process that they
would not consider amendments to remove lands identified for Agriculture in the RGS if the lands
were not approved for removal from the Agricultural Land Reserve by the Agricultural Land
Commission.
4
Council may wish to consider an alternative set of recommendations addressing the contrary
approach being taken with respect to the proposed Type 2 amendment for North Murrayville, as
follows:
1.That the Greater Vancouver Regional District be advised that the District of Maple Ridge has
no comments respecting the proposed Regional Growth Strategy amendments for items 1
(Hendricks) and 3 (200 Street and Highway #1); and
2.That the Greater Vancouver Regional District be advised that in respect of the proposed
Regional Growth Strategy amendment for item 2 (North Murrayville) the District of Maple
Ridge supports the policies contained within the Regional Growth Strategy that promote
agricultural viability throughout the Region and that Item 2 (North Murrayville) not be
considered until the Township of Langley has first obtained support from the Agricultural
Land Commission.
CONCLUSION:
The Metro Vancouver Board has forwarded the three proposed amendments to the Regional Growth
Strategy for comment to member municipalities from the July 26, 2013 meeting. Member
municipalities have 30 days (September 20, 2013) to respond.
As discussed in this report, the North Murrayville (Type 2 amendment) is not supported by the
Agricultural Land Commission and runs contrary to the adopted Regional Growth Strategy. However,
because the proposed North Murrayville amendment does not appear to directly impact Maple Ridge
residents, it is recommended that Council advise the Metro Vancouver Board that it has no
comments on the proposed amendments for the Hendricks (Type 2 amendment), North Murrayville
(Type 2 amendment), and 200 Street and Highway #1 (Type 3 amendment).
“Original signed by Lisa Zosiak” for
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Jim Charlebois, MURP, MCIP RPP
Manager of Community Planning
“Original signed by Charles R. Goddard” for_________
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
Appendix A – Notification letter from Metro Vancouver and attachments received August 6, 2013
APPENDIXA
rnetr®vancouver ''._: ,,!,
4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4G8 604-432-6200 www,metrovancouver.org
Board and Information Services, Corporate Services
Tel. 604432-6250 Fax 604451-6686
JUL 2 9 42013 Rgk'7�3190M9D
File: CR-04-01-RD
Mac 0VW0
Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council Ethel ._ _
District of Maple Ridge - --
11995 Haney Place Action.
Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A6 �--
Dear Mayor Daykin and Members of Council:
Re: Notification of Three Proposed Amendments to the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth
Strategy Land Use Designation Map - Township of Langley
This letter provides notification to affected local governments and_other agencies, in accordance with
section 857.1(2) of the Local Government Act, and sections 6.4.2, 6.4.4 and 6.4.5 of the Regional
Growth Strategy. Metro Vancouver' received a Council resolution from the Township of Langley
requesting three amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designation Map:
1. Type 2 Amendment (Hendricks) to extend the Urban Containment Boundary and amend the
land use designation map from Agricultural to General Urban,
2. Type 2 Amendment (North Murrayville) to extend the Urban Containment Boundary and
amend the land use designation map from Agricultural to General Urban.
3. Type 3 Amendment (200 Street and Highway #1) to amend the land use designation map from
Mixed Employment to General Urban.
Please refer to the attached reports for a description of the requested amendments.
A Type 2 amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy requires an amendment bylaw passed by an
affirmative two-thirds weighted vote ofthe Metro Vancouver Board and a regional public hearing. A
Type 3 amendment requires an amendment bylaw passed by an affirmative 50%+1 weighted vote of
the Board.
On July 26, 2013, the Metro Vancouver Board initiated the Regional Growth Strategy amendment
process for the three requested amendments. Regional Growth Strategy Section 6.4.2 Notification and
Request for Comments, states that for all proposed amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy the
Metro Vancouver Board will:
a) provide written notice of the proposed amendment to all affected local governments;
1 Greater Vancouver Regional District
Notification of Three Proposed Amendments to the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designation Map —
Township of Langley
Paee 2 of 2
b) provide a minimum of 30 days for affected local governments, and the appropriate agencies, to
respond to the proposed amendments
c) post notification of the proposed amendment on the Metro Vancouver website, for a minimum
of 30 days;
d) if the proposed amendment is to change a site from Industrial or Mixed Employment to
General Urban land use designation, provide written notice and a minimum of 30 days for Port
Metro Vancouver, the Vancouver International Airport Authority, the Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure and/or the Agricultural Land Commission, as appropriate, to
respond to the proposed amendment.
You are invited to provide written comments on the requested amendments to the Regional Growth
Strategy. Please provide comments in the form of a Council/Board resolution, as applicable, and
submit to paulette.vetleson@metrovancouver.org by Friday, September20, 2013. , Following the
comment period, the Metro Vancouver Board will consider initial readings of a Regional Growth
Strategy Bylaw amendment for each of the requested amendments.
If you have any questions with respect to the proposed amendment, please contact Terry Hoff, Senior
Regional Planner, at 604436-6703 or terry.hoff@metrovancouver.org. More information and a copy of
the Regional Growth Strategy can be found on our website at www.metrovancouver.org.
Sincerely,
Paulette Vetleson
Director/Corporate Officer, Board and Information Services
PV/HM/th
Attachments:
1. Report to the Metro Vancouver Board meeting on JUIy 26, 2013, titled `Township of Langley Request to
Amend the Regional Growth Strategy', dated June 21, 2013.
2, Report to the Metro Vancouver Regional Planning Advisory Committee meeting on July 19, 2013, titled
`Township of Langley Request to Amend Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designations', dated July 5,
2013.
7629478
metrovancouver Section E 13
SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G8 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouverorg
Greater Vancouver Regional District Greater Vancouver Water District Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
Heather McNellI Regional Planning Division Manager
Planning, Policy and Environment
June 25, 2013
Meeting Date: July 5, 2013
Township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth Strategy
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board:
a) initiate Regional Growth Strategy amendment procedures for three amendments requested
by the Township of Langley; and
b) direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed amendments to all affected local
governments and appropriate agencies.
PURPOSE
To provide the Board with the opportunity to initiate Regional Growth Strategy procedures for
three proposed amendments submitted by the Township of Langley.
BACKGROUND
Section 6.4.1 of the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) establishes that the process to initiate
amendments to the RGS is by resolution of the Metro Vancouver Board. On June 17, 2013
Township of Langley Council passed a resolution, "That Council submit a request to the Board of the
Greater Vancouver Regional District for amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy land use
designations as set out in Schedule A of Bylaw No. 5000". The Township of Langley Council
resolution is included as Attachment 1 to this report, and a map showing the location of the three
proposed amendments is included as Attachment 2.
DISCUSSION
The Proposed Amendments
The Township of Langley Council resolution refers to three proposed Regional Growth Strategy Land
Use Designation amendments.
North Murrayville
The first of the three (Attachment 2) is a proposal to re -designate RGS Agricultural to RGS General
Urban and move the Urban Containment Boundary with an aim to making a more consistent land
use pattern along the north side of 52 Avenue. This is a Type 2 RGS amendment, requiring a public
hearing and adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a two-thirds weighted Metro Vancouver
Board vote. The parcel is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The proposed amendment is not
supported by the Agricultural Land Commission (as indicated in a June 7, 2013 letter to the
Township of Langley). RGS Section 2.3.4 states that Metro Vancouver's role is to "work with the
Agricultural Land Commission to protect the region's agricultural land base and not amend the
Agricultural or Rural land use designation of a site if it is still part of the Agricultural Land Reserve,
except to change it to an Agricultural land use designation".
Greater Vancouver Regional District - 276
Township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth Strategy
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: July 5, 2013
Page 2 of 3
Hendricks
The second proposed amendment (Attachment 2) is to re -designate approximately 4 hectares of
land from RCS Agricultural to RGS General Urban, and to extend the Urban Containment Boundary,
to allow for 21 single family residential lots. This is a Type 2 RGS amendment, requiring a public
hearing and adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a two-thirds weighted Metro Vancouver
Board vote. This application is also located within the Agricultural Land Reserve, however, the land
use and proposed RGS amendment is supported by the Agricultural Land Commission as an
acceptable non -farm use that benefits agriculture (as stated in a June 7, 2013 letter to the
Township).
Highway #1/200th Street
The third proposed amendment (Attachment 2) would re -designate approximately 23 hectares of
land from RGS Mixed Employment to RGS General Urban for residential use. This is a Type 3
amendment, requiring adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a 50%+1 weighted vote of the
Metro Vancouver Board.
Considerine the Reauest
Once an RGS amendment process is initiated by the Board, staff will initiate a notification period
(minimum 30 days) and prepare the necessary reports. "Regional Growth Strategy Procedures
Bylaw No 1148, 2011" requires that Metro Vancouver first prepare a draft report for the Regional
Planning Advisory Committee (RPAC) (planning directors from each member municipality). The
report will include a description of RGS provisions applicable to each amendment, and is anticipated
for the July 19, 2013 meeting of RPAC. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee then must, within
four weeks, provide their comments as a resolution to Metro Vancouver staff. *The Regional
Planning Advisory Committee comments will then be considered by Metro Vancouver staff in
preparing a report and recommendations to the Board.
A staff report providing a detailed analysis and recommendations to the Board regarding each of
the proposed amendments is anticipated for the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and
Board in October 2013. It will be accompanied by any comments received from the Regional
Planning Advisory Committee and affected local governments and agencies. Recommendations will
include:
whether to proceed or not to proceed with bylaw introduction for each of the proposed
amenAments; and
• for each of those amendments recommended to proceed, a draft RGS amendment bylaw, a
recommendation that the Board give 15 and 2"d Readings to the amendment bylaw and
direct staff to set a date for Public Hearing.
RGS Amendment Process
Table 1 outlines the process
requirements of the RGS for
envisioned forthis proposed amendment and is based on the
minor amendments and the RGS Implementation Guideline #2 —
Amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy,
Greater Vancouver Regional District - 277
Township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth Strategy
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: July 5, 2013
Page 3 of 3
Table 1: Timeline of RGS Amendment Process
Date
Meeting
July 5, 2013
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
July 19, 2013
Report to Regional Planning Advisory Committee for
consideration
July 26, 2013
Metro Vancouver Board initiates RGS amendment process and
refers it to affected local governments and agencies for
comment.
October 4, 2013
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
October 25, 2013
Metro Vancouver Board receive Metro Vancouver staff report,
potentially give initial readings to the RGS Amendment bylaw
and set a date for a public hearing.
Early to Mid -November
Public Hearing on proposed RGS Amendment Bylaw.
Late November
Board consideration of 3r reading and refer back to the
Township of Langley for approval.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Board:
a) initiate Regional Growth Strategy amendment procedures for three amendments requested
by the Township of Langley; arid
b) direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed amendments to all affected local
governments and appropriate agencies.
2. That the Board provide further guidance on initiating the Regional Growth Strategy amendment
procedures for any or all of the three amendments requested by the Township of Langley.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
If the RGS. amendment process is initiated there may be costs associated with the holding of a
public hearing, relating primarily to advertising in a regional newspaper.
SUMMARY /CONCLUSION
The Township of Langley has submitted proposed amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy for
Board consideration. The Board has the authority to initiate the proposed amendment as per RGS
6.4 and "Regional Growth Strategy Procedures Bylaw 1148, 2011". Staff recommends Alternative 1
to initiate the RGS amendment process to facilitate a fair process and fulsome regional dialogue on
the proposed amendments and to notify affected local governments.
Attachments:
1. Township of Langley Council resolution (Doc, #7563567).
2. Location of proposed RGS Land Use Designation Amendments (Doc. #7563865).
7558014
Greater Vancouver Regional District - 278
Township of
Langley
June 24, 2013
Metro Vancouver
4330 Kingsway
Burnaby, BC V511 4G8
Attachment 1
File No. 0400-60I 6410-01
Attention: Chair Greg Moore, Board of Directors
Dear Chair Moore:
Re: Official Community Plan, Bylaws No. 5000, 5010, 5011, and 5012
At the June 17, 2013 Regular Evening Council meeting, Township of Langley Council passed
the following motion:
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment (2013 Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5000';
That Council consider that "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842
Amendment (2013 Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5000" is consistent with the
Township of Langley Financial Plan;
That Council consider that "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842
Amendment {2013 Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5000 is consistent with the
Metro Vancouver Integrated Liquid Waste Resource Management Plan and Integrated Solid
Waste and Resource Management Plan;
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment (Willowbrook Community Plan) Bylaw 1991 No. 3008 Amendment
(Updated Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5010
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment (Updated Official Community Plan) Bylaw20i3 No. 5011 ";
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment (Rural Plan) Bylaw 1993 No. 3250 Amendment (Updated Official
Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5012
20338- 65 Avenue � La�I��t�rR��iJ,�s�������lbn�ai���rict��7�1 � 604.534.3211 � tol.ca
Metro Vancouver — Board of Directors
Page 2... -
That Council authorize staff to schedule the required public hearing for Bylaw Nos. 5000,
5010, 5011 and 5012; and further
That Council submit a request to the Board of fhe Greater Vancouver Regional Dlstrict for
amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy land use designations as set out in
Schedule A of Bylaw No. 5000.
CARRIED
A copy of Report �3-75 is attached for reference purposes. You will note that Council has
requested amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy land use designations as set out in
Schedule A to the Official Community Plan Bylaw.
Yours truly,
Paul Crawford
Managet, Long Range Planning
Enclosure: Report 13-75
copy: T. Hoff, Metro Vancouver, Senior Regional Planner
P. Vetleson, Corporate Secretary, Metro Vancouver
Mayor and Council
R. Seifi, General Manager, Engineering and Community Development
7563567
Greater Vancouver Regional District - 280
I �metrovancouver 5e2
AW SMVIC5S AND SOLUTiON3 FOR A UVABLE REr io�; 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G6 604-432-62oD www.metrovanwo 4yer:org
GreatOV1ncouvarRQ91onaiDistrict. • GreatatVancouverVlatarpist4ct ► QreztrryancaqvprSoww4aear(dDrainogeDistrict + Metro Var}crxWarHousingCorpoxrbon
To:
From:
Date:
Regional Planning Advisory Committee
Terry Hoff, Senior Regional Planner, Policy, Planning and Environment Department
July 5, 2013
Meeting Date: July 19, 2013
Subject: Township of Langley Request to Amend Regional Growth Strategy Land Use
Designations
RECOMMENDATION
That the Regional Planning Advisory Committee provide comments on the proposed Regional
Growth Strategy amendments requested by the Township of Langley.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to provide the opportunity for the Regional Planning Advisory
Committee (RPAC) to comment on requested Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) land use designation
amendments submitted by the Township of Langley.
DISCUSSION
On June 17, 2013 the Township.of Langley Council passed a motion "That Council submit a request
to the Board of the Greater Vancouver Regional District for amendments to the Regional Growth
Strategy land use designations as set out in Schedule A of Bylaw No. 5000". Reference to Bylaw No.
5000 is the Township's proposed new Official Community Plan, and Schedule A is the new Regional
Context Statement contained within the new OCP. This bylaw received 1St and 2nd readings on June
17, 2013. Schedule A (draft RCS) identifies three "significant changes to the Regional Land Use
Designations" that "will require amendment to the RGS in conformity with Metro Vancouver RGS
Amendment procedures". In a letter dated June 24, 2013 to Metro Vancouver Board Chair Moore,
the Township notified Metro Vancouver of the requested amendments.
Following a RGS amendment request by resolution of a member municipal Council, RGS Section
6.4.1 states that the process to initiate the amendment is by resolution of the Metro Vancouver
Board. Metro staff submitted a RGS Amendment report to the July 5, 2013 meeting of Metro
Vancouver's Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee, with the following recommendations:
That the Board:
a) initiate Regional Growth Strategy amendment procedures for three amendments requested
by the Township of Langley; and
b) direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed amendments to all affected local
governments and appropriate agencies.
The Metro Vancouver report titled "Township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth
Strategy" is included as Attachment 1. The purpose of this report is only to identify the
amendments being requested by the Township, and to request the Board initiate RGS amendment
procedures. A very brief summary of each requested amendment is provided in that report, but the
report does not include an analysis of RGS implications or recommendations regarding the support
RPAC - 99 -
Township of Langley Request to Amend Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designations
Regional Planning Advisory Committee Meeting Date: July 19, 2013
Page 2 of 3
or non-support of the requested amendments. The Metro Vancouver Board will consider initiating
the requested amendments at the July 26, 2013 Board meeting. Below is an excerpt from the
Metro staff report providing a brief summary and overview map of the requested amendments (See
Map in Attachment 1).
North Murrayville
The request to redesignate approximately 8 hectares from RGS Agricultural to RGS General Urban
and move the Urban Containment Boundary with an aim to making a more consistent urban land
use pattern along the north side of 52 Avenue. This is a Type 2 RGS amendment, requiring a public
hearing and adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a two-thirds weighted Metro Vancouver
Board vote. The parcel is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The proposed amendment is not
supported by the Agricultural Land Commission (as indicated In a June 7, 2013 letter to the
Township of Langley). RGS Section 2.3.4 states that Metro Vancouver's role is to "work with the
Agricultural Land Commission to protect the region's agricultural land base and not amend the
Agricultural or Rural land use designation of a site if it is still part of the Agricultural Land Reserve,
except to change it to an Agricultural land use designation".
Hendricks
The request is to redesignate approximately 4 hectares of land from RCS Agricultural to RGS
General Urban, and to extend the Urban Containment Boundary, to allow for 21 single family
residential lots. This is a Type 2 RGS amendment, requiring a public hearing and adoption of a by-
law to amend the RGS by a two-thirds weighted Metro Vancouver Board vote. This application is
also located within the Agricultural Land Reserve; however, the land use and proposed RGS
amendment is supported by the Agricultural Land Commission as an acceptable non -farm use that
benefits agriculture (as stated in a June 7, 2013 letter from the ALC to the Township).
Highwav#1/200th Street
The third proposed amendment would redesignate approximately 23 hectares of land from RGS
Mixed Employment to RGS General Urban to accommodate residential development. This is a Type
3 amendment requiring a 50%+1 weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Board.
Township of Langley Description of Proposed RGS Amendments
The Township's RGS amendment request refers to OCP amendment Bylaw No, 5000, Schedule A
(draft Regional Context Statement). Within the draft RCS is a brief rationale and map for each of
the three requested RGS amendments. The relevant excerpt from the draft RCS is included as
Attachment 2, with #4 Highway 1 / 200 Street, #11 North Murrayville and #13 Hendricks. Note that
other locations seen on the excerpt table and maps refer to 17 additional RGS land designation
amendments the Township is proposing within the RCS as 'generally consistent' under RGS Section
6.2.6.
RGS Amendments Procedures Bylaw —RPAC Comment
While RGS amendment procedures are established in the RGS, the Regional Growth Strategy
Procedures Bylaw No 1148, 2011 established additional procedures for Regional Growth Strategy
amendment requests. The Procedures Bylaw requires that, within four weeks of receiving the
amendment request, Metro Vancouver staff refer the requested amendments to the Regional
Planning Advisory Committee for comment. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee then must,
within four weeks of receiving the Metro Vancouver staff report, provide comments to Metro
RPAC -100 -
Township of Langley Request to Amend Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designations
Regional Planning Advisory Committee Meeting Date: July 19, 2013
Paae 3 of 3
Vancouver in the form of a resolution. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee comments will
then be considered by Metro Vancouver staff in preparing recommendations to the Regional
Planning and Agriculture Committee and Metro Vancouver Board on the proposed amendment.
The Regional Planning Advisory Committee's resolution /comments will be attached to the Metro
Vancouver Board report. '
It is anticipated that Metro staff will submit a report and recommendations on RGS amendment
bylaw introduction to the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and the Board in October. A
Public Hearing is anticipated for mid November, with a Board decision anticipated in late
November.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Regional Planning Advisory Committee provide comments on the proposed Regional
Growth Strategy amendments as requested. by the Township of Langley.
2. That the Regional Planning Advisory Committee receive for information the report dated July 5,
2013 and titled Township of Langley Request to Amend Regional Growth Strategy Land Use
Designations.
SUMMARY /CONCLUSION
The Regional Planning Advisory Committee is requested to provide comments on the Regional
Growth Strategy amendments as submitted by the Township of Langley. Any comments provided
will be considered in a Metro Vancouver staff report and recommendations to the Regional
Planning and Agriculture Committee and the Metro Vancouver Board.
Attachments and References:
1. Metro Vancouver staff report to the July 5, 2013 meeting of the Regional Planning and
Agriculture Committee (Doc. #7580711)
2. Excerpt from Township of Langley OCP Amendment Bylaw No. 5000 — Schedule A Regional
Context Statement (Doc. #7581291).
7574862
RPAC -101 -
5.2 Attachment 1
64"4* i11etrovancouve "
SFRVIC5S AND SOLUTIONt FOR h l.1VAI31[;,6 REGION 43 O KIngsway, Burrt4by, 6.C; Cali4da VSH 4G8 604w02-f200 www.mi�trovancogver.org
.teeter V<trlcouv�r Rcginnal Dist�icG • Grctatar Vartr�quverYY�,trr District ► Cir�dteYYunc4uV�1' SQweray� ancJ DraRtac�� pistnct tylatr� Vanrxsuvor Hntrsinc7 i~nrparatP�ah
To:
From
Date:
Subject:
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
Heather McNell, Regional Planning Division Manager
Planning, Policy and Environment
June 25, 2013
Meeting Date: July 5, 2013
Township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth Strategy
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board:
a) initiate Regional Growth Strategy amendment procedures for three amendments requested
by the Township of Langley; and
b) direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed amendments to all affected local
governments and appropriate agencies.
PURPOSE
To provide the Board with the opportunity to initiate Regional Growth Strategy procedures for
three proposed amendments submitted by the Township of Langley.
BACKGROUND
Section 6.4.1 of the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) establishes that the process to initiate
amendments to the RGS is by resolution of the Metro Vancouver Board, On June 17, 2013
Township of Langley Council passed a resolution, "That Council submit a request to the Board of the
Greater Vancouver Regional District for amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy land use
designations as set out in Schedule A of Bylaw No. 5000". The Township of Langley Council
resolution is included as Attachment 1 to this report, and a map showing the location of the three
proposed amendments is included as Attachment 2.
DISCUSSION .
The Proposed Amendments _
The Township of Langley Council resolution refers to three proposed Regional Growth Strategy Land
Use Designation amendments.
North Murrayville
The fiirst of the three (Attachment 2) is a proposal to re -designate RGS Agricultural to RGS General
CJrban and move the Urban Containment Boundary with an aim to making a more consistent land
use pattern along the north side of 52 Avenue. This is a Type 2 RGS amendment, requiring a public
hearing and adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a two-thirds weighted Metro Vancouver
Board vote. The parcel is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The proposed amendment is not
supported by the Agricultural Land Commission (as indicated in a June 7, 2013 letter to the
Township of Langley). RGS Section 2.3.4 states that Metro Vancouver's role is to "work with the
Agricultural Land Commission to protect the region's agricultural land base and not amend the
Agricultural or Rural land use designation of a site if it is still part of the Agricultural Land Reserve,
except to change it to an Agricultural land use designation".
Township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth Strategy
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: July 5, 2013
Page 2 of 3
Hendricks
The second proposed amendment (Attachment 2) is to re -designate approximately 4 hectares of
land from RCS Agricultural to RGS General Urban, and to extend the Urban Containment Boundary,
to allow for 21 single family residential lots. This is a Type 2 RGS amendment, requiring a public
hearing and adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a two-thirds weighted Metro Vancouver
Board vote. This application is also located within the Agricultural Land Reserve, however, the land
use and proposed RGS amendment is supported by the Agricultural Land Commission as an
acceptable non -farm use that benefits agriculture (as stated in a June 7, 2013 letter to the
Township).
Highway #1/200th Street
The third proposed amendment (Attachment 2) would re -designate approximately 23 hectares of
land from RGS Mixed Employment to RGS General Urban for residential use. This is a Type 3
amendment, requiring adoption of a by-law to amend the RGS by a 50%+1 weighted vote of the
Metro Vancouver Board.
Considering the•Reguest
Once an RGS amendment process is initiated by the Board, staff will initiate a notification period
(minimum 30 days) and prepare the necessary reports. "Regional Growth Strategy Procedures
Bylaw No 1148, 2011" requires that Metro Vancouver first prepare a draft report for the Regional
Planning Advisory Committee (RPAC) (planning directors from each member municipality). The
report will include a description of RGS provisions applicable to each amendment, and is anticipated
for the July 19, 2013 meeting of RPAC. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee then must, within
four weeks, provide their comments as a resolution to Metro Vancouver staff. The Regional
Planning Advisory Committee comments will then be considered by Metro Vancouver staff in
preparing a report and recommendations to the Board.
A staff report providing a detailed analysis and recommendations to the Board regarding each of
the proposed amendments is anticipated for the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and
Board in October 2013. It will be accompanied by any comments received from the Regional
Planning Advisory Committee and affected local governments and agencies. Recommendations will
include:
• whether to proceed or not to proceed with bylaw introduction for each of the proposed
amendments; and
for each of those amendments recommended to proceed, a draft RGS amendment bylaw, a
recommendation that the Board give 1st and 2"d Readings to the amendment bylaw and
direct staff to set a date for Public Hearing.
RGS Amendment Process
Table 1 outlines the process envisioned for this proposed amendment and • is based on the
requirements of the RGS for minor amendments and the RGS Implementation Guideline #2 —
Amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy.
township of Langley Request to Amend the Regional Growth Strategy
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: July S. 2013
Page 3 of 3
Table 1: Timeline of RGS Amendment Process
Date
Meeting
July 5, 2013
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
July 19, 2013
Report to Regional Planning Advisory Committee for
consideration
July 26, 2013
Metro Vancouver Board initiates RGS amendment process and
refers it to affected local governments and agencies for
comment.
October 4, 2013
Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee
October 25, 2013
Metro Vancouver Board receive Metro Vancouver staff report,
potentially give initial readings to the RGS Amendment bylaw
and set a date for a public hearing.
Early to Mid -November
Public Hearing on proposed RGS Amendment Bylaw,
Late November
Board consideration of 3r reading and refer back to the
Township of Langley for approval.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Board:
a) initiate Regional Growth Strategy amendment procedures for three amendments requested
by the Township of Langley; and
b) direct staff to provide written notice of the proposed amendments to all affected local
governments and appropriate agencies.
2. That the Board provide further guidance on initiating the Regional Growth Strategy amendment
procedures for any or all of the three amendments requested by the Township of Langley.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
If the RGS amendment process is initiated there may be costs associated with the holding of a
public hearing, relating primarily to advertising in a regional newspaper.
SUMMARY/ CONCLUSION
The Township of Langley has submitted proposed amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy for
Board consideration. The Board has the authority to initiate the proposed amendment as per RGS
6.4 and "Regional Growth Strategy Procedures Bylaw 1148, 2011 Staff recommends Alternative 1
to initiate the RGS amendment process to facilitate a fair process and fulsome regional dialogue on
the proposed amendments and to notify affected local governments.
Attachments:
1. Township of Langley Council resolution (Doc. # 7563567).
2. Location of proposed RGS Land Use Designation Amendments (Doc. # 7563865),
7558014
Township of
Langley
Est 1573
June 24, 2013
Metro Vancouver
4330 Kingsway
Burnaby, BC V5H 4G8
Attention: Chair Greg Moore, Board of Directors
Dear Chair Moore:
File No. 0400-60; 6410-Oi
Re: Offlciaf Community Plan, Bylaws No. 5000, 5010, 5011, anti 5012
At the June 17, 2013 Regular Evening Councii meeting, Township of Langley Council passed
the following motion:
That Council give firsf and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment 12013 Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5000;
That Council consider that "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842
Amendment (2013 Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5000" is consistent with fhe
Township of Langley Financial Plan;
That Council consider that "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No, 1842
Amendment (20 i3 Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 50Q0" is consistent with fhe
Metro Vancouver Integrated Liquid Waste Resource Management Plan and Integrated Solid
Waste and Resource Management Plan;
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842Amendment (Willowbrook Community Plan) Bylaw 199i No. 3008 Amendment
(Updated Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 50101;
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment (Updated Official Community Plan) Bylaw 2013 No. 5011 ";
That Council give first and second reading to "Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979
No. 1842 Amendment (Rural Plan) Bylaw 1993 No. 3250 Amendment (Updated Official
Community Plan) Bylaw 20134 No. 5012
203.38 - b5 Avenue I Langley � British C�tilCanada � V2X 3J1 1604.534.3211 I tol.ca
Metro Vancouver — Board of Directors
Page 2..,
That Council authorize staff to schedule the required public hearing for Bylaw Nos, 5000,
V 10, 5011 and 5012; and further
That Council submit a request to the Board of the Greater Vancouver Regional District for
amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy land use designations as set out in
Schedule A of Bylaw No. 5000.
CARRIED
A copy of Report 13-75 is attached for reference purposes. You will note that Council has
requested amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy land use designations as set but in
Schedule A to the Official Community Plan Bylaw.
Yours truly,
Paul Crawford
Manager, Long Range Planning
Enclosure: Report 13-75
copy: T. Hoff, Metro Vancouver, Senior Regional Planner
P. Vetleson7 Corporate Secretary, Metro Vancouver
Mayor and Council
R. Seifi, General Manager, Engineering and Community Development
7563567
li4'.� 'ir•
5.2 Attachment 2
#
Current RGS
Proposed
RGS
Designation
RGS
Description
Amendment
Designation
Type
21
General Urban
Mixed
to"recognize existing commercial centre without
3
Employment
permitting residential use
22
Agriculture and
Rural and
to accurately show properties that are in and out
2
Rural
Agriculture
of the ALR at 8 Ave. & 272 St.
1.3.2. Significant Changes to the Regional Land Use Designations
More significant changes are listed in the table below and will require amendment to the RGS in
conformity with Metro Vancouver RGS Amendment procedures.
Current RGS
Proposed
RGS
#
Designation
RGS
Description
Amendment
Designation
Type
4
Mixed
General
to accommodate mixed use proposal (north of
3
Employment
Urban
freeway west of 200 St.)
11
Agriculture
General
to make a more consistent land use pattern along
2
Urban
the north side of 52 Avenue by moving the Urban
Containment Boundary north and designating the
land General Urban north Murrayville, subject to
approval of the ALC
13
Agriculture
General
To incorporate a development approved by the
-2
Urban
Agricultural Land Commission into the Urban
Containment Boundary and designate it as
General Urban
The University District areas shown as areas 7 and 8 on Map A4 were included in the OCP on
June 10, 2013 under the Regional Context Statement that applied at the time, in reliance on
representations by the Greater Vancouver Regional District arising from the prior ongoing
historical.development process.
77
RPAC-108-
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 9, 2013
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Maple Ridge Commercial and Industrial Strategy Consultation Summary Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On March 4, 2013, a report summarizing key concepts of the draft Commercial and Industrial
Strategy was presented at Council Workshop. The report included a recommended expansion of the
existing consultation program that was endorsed by Council at the February 20, 2013 Council
Workshop.
The expanded consultation program involved a second set of focus group sessions. This was in large
part in response from the property owners in the Albion Industrial Park who requested that they be
provided an opportunity for more detailed input with regard to the land within the Albion Industrial
Park. The purpose of these workshops was to review the recommendations of the Strategy, and to
assess the economic feasibility of potential changes to land use designations. The second set of
focus group sessions included the following:
A meeting with the original stakeholders was held on May 22, 2013. These stakeholders
included industry representatives from the private and public sector.
Two additional focus group meetings were held with property owners on June 5, 2013.
Invitees included owners of industrial, commercial, or potentially employment generating
lands.
A public open house was held on June 26, 2013. The broader community was invited to participate,
and several attendees had also been present at the landowner focus group sessions.
This report summarizes the input received over the consultation program of the Strategy for
Council’s review and consideration prior to finalizing the Strategy.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That the staff report titled “Maple Ridge Commercial and Industrial Strategy Consultation
Summary Report”, dated September 9, 2013, be received for information; and
2.That staff be directed to work with GP Rollo & Associates to finalize the draft strategy for
Council consideration
BACKGROUND:
Progress to Date. The following timeline outlines the steps taken so far in advancing the Strategy.
February 20, 2012 – Council endorsed the process as outlined in the staff report titled
“Maple Ridge Commercial and Industrial Strategy Process Report”.
4.3
2
April 23, 2012 - GP Rollo & Associates was the successful proponent of the Request for a
Proposal.
June 11 & 12, 2012 - Focus group workshops were held with key stakeholders.
July 9, 2012 – Council Workshop. Council was presented with initial findings and stakeholder
input from the June Focus Group Sessions.
July 25, 2012 - Presentation to Economic Advisory Commission outlining initial findings and
stakeholder input from the June Focus Group Sessions.
November 26, 2012 – Presentation of Strategy and Recommendations to Council. Council
passed the following resolution.
That the Commercial & Industrial Strategy, prepared for the District of Maple Ridge
by GP Rollo and Associates, be received for input and discussion.
At the same meeting, Council authorized the use of the report for consultation purposes.
November 28, 2012 - Presentation of Strategy and Recommendation to the Maple Ridge
Economic Advisory Commission.
March 4, 2013 - Staff report and presentation to Council summarizing key messages of the
strategy with recommendations for further direction. These recommendations included
hosting a second set of focus group workshops with the intent of receiving stakeholder input
on key messages in the Strategy.
Consultation Program Components
From the outset, the general goals of the consultation program of the Commercial & Industrial
Strategy is to engage the Economic Advisory Commission, Maple Ridge staff, industrial developers,
realtors, property owners, and the broader public in a consultation program to define a feasible and
a desired direction for the community.
Focus Group Sessions
June 2012 - The initial focus groups, held with industry representatives, were held in June 2012.
This phase of the program explored broad issues relating to the District’s economic goals, such as:
Development conditions in Maple Ridge, in light of constraints such as existing parcel sizes,
infrastructure, amenities, and development costs;
The types of industrial and commercial uses that could assist the District in achieving goals
over the short, medium & long term.
Regional trends that are currently shaping industrial demand and supply and their
implications for the future of Maple Ridge.
Local attributes that attract or deter business development in Maple Ridge.
Business sectors and industries with growth potential at the regional and local level.
3
May – June 2013 The purpose of a second set of focus group workshops was to present the original
stakeholders the draft Strategy and to obtain their feedback on the recommendations and time
horizons outlined in the Strategy. This feedback would assist in identifying and prioritizing key
elements of the Strategy for the short and medium-term time horizons.
After the March 4, 2013 Council Workshop, District staff were approached by concerned landowners
of industrial lands (particularly Albion Industrial) and the identified potential employment generating
lands (particularly of those lands in the vicinity of 128th and 232nd). In response, a total of 3 focus
group workshops were held, including:
May 22, 2013 with the original stakeholders reviewing both the Commercial and Industrial
components of the Strategy.
June 5, 2013. Two workshops were held. The morning workshop included industrial land
owners, and the afternoon workshop included the owners of potential employment
generating lands. Approximately 390 invitations went out by mail to industrial land owners,
and approximately 18 attended the event. Around 200 invitations were mailed to the owners
of potential employment generating lands, with 8 people attending.
Each focus groups session commenced with a presentation by a representative from the consulting
firm G.P. Rollo & Associates. The Director of Engineering presented the draft Transportation Plan,
and used this opportunity to seek input about desired objectives for local transportation for business
needs.
Public Open House
Following the focus group workshops, an open house was held on June 26, 2013 from 4:00 to 8:00
pm to provide an opportunity for the public to understand the process that was followed to prepare
the draft Strategy and to provide comments on the proposed strategies, priorities and anticipated
time horizons for each. Notification to this event was provided through the local newspaper, the
District website, and where possible, by email. Opportunities for comment at the Public Open House
were provided to attendees by speaking directly to staff or the consultant, through a questionnaire at
the event, or electronically through the District website. A total of 19 people signed in for the event.
After the Open House, opportunities for input were extended until July 26, 2013, for a total of 4
weeks. In addition to notes taken in response to comments made by attendees, two questionnaires
were provided by respondents. Following the focus group sessions property owners from the Albion
Industrial formed an association called the Albion Industrial Area Association. The Albion Industrial
Area Association provided their input through a letter to the District received on July 22, 2013.
Input from the consultation program is attached as Appendix A.
Consultation Input Summary
The following summarizes the themes noted at the focus group sessions that are germaine to the
Commercial Industrial Strategy. Very little written commentary has been provided. As noted the
Albion Industrial Area Association provided a letter and that is attached. Other responses to the
questionnaire are also attached.
4
Economy
The Industry representatives noted that an economic lull currently exists, but in the long run
the economic picture is optimistic as regionally there remains a shortage of industrial land.
In the short term, market absorption is slow, and industrial development west (Pitt Meadows)
or south of Maple Ridge (Surrey or Langley) could impact the timing of commercial and
industrial development in Maple Ridge, particularly in East Maple Ridge.
Maple Ridge industrial areas typically offer low rents but have difficulty attracting tenants.
This challenge exists throughout the District including more strategically located sites in west
Maple Ridge. These economic conditions provide little incentive for new industrial
development, as the amount of rent necessary to pay for new construction is not feasible in
the current market. It was also noted that there are large tracts of vacant land in the Albion
Industrial Area that have been underutilized for decades.
The Draft Strategy noted a concern about eroding the intent of the Zoning Bylaw (to protect
the industrial land supply) by allowing non-industrial uses (such as dance schools) on
industrial lands. However, concern was also expressed that allowing these uses would help
landlords facing difficulty in securing tenants.
The movie industry is a strong economic driver, but its future is uncertain, as provincial
economic incentives have been cut – it was also emphasized that this sector supports local
businesses such as restaurants and hardware stores that serve movie industry needs.
The Pitt Meadows Airport is an underutilized resource which could have significant economic
spin-offs for Maple Ridge.
Business Needs
It was pointed out that ideally, one big business park would be preferable to a few smaller
sites scattered throughout the community. For this purpose, West Maple Ridge and
Hammond should be the focus for industrial lands. For this reason, the Agricultural Land
Commission decision regarding Pelton’s was raised, with a suggestion that this decision be
revisited.
The long term future of the Albion Industrial Area was a concern, noting that its continued
intended use as industrial needs to be stated more clearly, with an expedited development
process, and a clear recognition of the global context and its impacts for local industry.
Specific feedback from the Albion Industrial Area Association is attached to this report.
Industry representatives from the May 22, 2013 focus group suggested that the incentive
program should be crafted to focus on desired objectives to target and attract specific
sectors and development. Specifically, it was thought that Maple Ridge needs meeting
space, hotels and conference centres.
5
The Abernethy connector needs to be built to 4 lanes and extended to & 256th Street.
Albion Industrial Area Association
The property owners in the Albion Industrial Area requested and were provided with opportunities for
further input. A letter from the Association is attached. As with all area planning or conceptplans,
any detailed planning for this are will include discussions and meetings with the property owners in
this area.
Lands Identified as Potential Employment Lands
The groups were asked to comment on the lands identified in the proposed strategy that have been
identified as potentially new employment lands.
1.Ministry of Transportation Lands (to the west of the Haney By-Pass – Lougheed Highway
intersection).
Comments include concerns around access and egress, but it was noted that
amenities are nearby, making this a strategic location.
2.Properties East and West of Kwantlen Lands.
6
Comments provided indicate that east of Kwantlen is a good location for industrial if terraced
and stratified. River access could be an asset at this site.
3. Southwest of the 128th Avenue 232nd Street intersection.
Comments for this site noted its strategic location would be good for Newport Village type
commercial or office development. Respondents were not supportive of industrial uses, and
noted concerns around:
a. creeks, challenges around soils, and developable land base;
b. residential context and need for a buffer if developed for anything other than
residential;
It was noted that Industrial land values would inevitably lose out to residential in considering
employment generating lands. Live work arrangements often generate conflicts – residential and
industrial uses should be kept separate.
7
Consultation Implications for Strategy
This disconnect between the current economic lull and the more optimistic long term forecast was
reflected in the feedback received from industrial land owners, who stated that the long-term
forecast of 2040 seems irrelevant in light of current problems that need to be addressed.
The District of Maple Ridge has an obligation under the Regional Growth Strategy to protect its
industrial land supply for the long term, and to provide a land base to meet its forecasted
employment targets. However, more western locations in Metro Vancouver currently may have a
competitive advantage over Maple Ridge in attracting industrial land users. The current economic
situation affects the present feasibility of the identified potential employment lands for uses other
than residential.
The comments received during the consultation program point to the challenges associated with
supporting and enhancing local business with protecting the industrial land supply for the long term,
and balancing priorities related to business retention versus business attraction.
There was little comment about the need to identify more land for commercial purposes, whic h is
consistent with the Strategy, which asserts that the District has sufficient commercial land supply to
meet its long term needs.
One of the findings of the Commercial and Industrial Strategy was the long term suitability of the site
at 256th and Dewdney Trunk Road as a rural village commercial node1. The site is not within the
Fraser Sewer Area. The Strategy noted that the approval from the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and
Drainage District for sewer connection would be required prior to being redevelo ped for commercial
purposes.
As a recent development inquiry reveals that the nearby intersection at 248th Street and Dewdney
Trunk Road (which is already fully serviced to an urban standard) may be preferable for this purpose,
the consultants have analyzed the suitability of commercial development at this location. This
analysis is attached as Appendix B. The 248th Street site would not require an application to a
regional authority to redevelop the property for commercial purposes.
Next Steps
The feedback received is being reviewed by the District’s Consultants, GP Rollo & Associates.
Council’s feedback and input from this report will also be provided to GP Rollo with the intent to bring
forward a final draft of the Commercial & Industrial Strategy for Council’s consideration.
CONCLUSION:
This report details the consultation program of the Commercial and Industrial Strategy from the
original focus groups held in June 2012, to its expanded program in the Spring of 2013, as endorsed
by Council in November 2012.
The expanded consultation program involved a second set of focus group sessions to review the
recommendations of the Strategy, and to assess the economic feasibility of potential changes to
1 The intended scope of a Rural Village Commercial Node would be approximately 10,000 – 20,000 square feet. New
commercial development outside of the Urban Area Boundary would involve an amendment to the Official Community Plan.
8
land use designations. As scheduled in the original proposal, a public open house was held to give
an opportunity for feedback to the broader public.
The recommended next steps are to direct staff to work with the consultants to finalize the Strategy,
followed by a Council review and endorsement of potential changes to the Strategy.
"Original signed by Diana Hall"
____________________________________________________
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MA, MCIP, RPP
Planner
"Original signed by Chuck Goddard for"
_______________________________________________
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
Attachments
Appendix A Consultation Input
Appendix B Memo about suitability of site at 248 Street and Dewdney Trunk Road for Commercial Development.
APPENDIX A
2. Marketing and promotion.
Responses indicate that the District needs to improve its marketing and promotion to business
interests. In addition, it was suggested that the District needs to attract educational institutions
to locate here.
What are priority interests that could be effectively targeted, and what strategies would be
most effective in reaching these interests?
3. Developing incentives.
Responses indicate a concern with development costs and municipal taxes being too high, and
with the development approvals process being too lengthy. Concerns have also been expressed
about inconsistency in the direction given by staff and Council.
Incentive programs are supported in the District that could potentially relax the application fee
schedule and processing priorities in order to attract desirable development
What are your thoughts on the potential for development incentives, similar to those in place
foI the Town Centre of Maple Ridge, to promote development/investment on industrial
lands?
4. Employment generating lands.
a. Specifically the MOT lands (to the west of the Haney By -Pass — Lougheed Highway
intersection),
b. the lands East and West of Kwantlen Lands,
c. the site to the southwest of the 128th Avenue 232"d Street intersection.
11 _
s
i `` aLL
FIFF
IF v
I IF
mm
s tq{�x9�32dit
r
k
F
T
1.
^ ; r41
What you think about the potential for commercial /industrial development on these
new lands as suggested in the report?
5. Transportation Routes.
The Engineering Department is involved in transportation upgrades to improve access to its
industrial lands. A priority concern is an east -west connector that would link the 256th Street
Industrial area to 203`d Street. Options include:
a. Expanding the Dewdney Trunk corridor east of 240thI or
b. Continuing with a northern corridor. There are practical implications and extensive
property acquisition that must occur for transportation upgrades along this corridor.
Does it make a difference to the economic feasibility of the northern industrial lands if the
route is diverted south along Dewdney Trunk Road?
t
Y
June 26 Commercial & Industrial Open House
Questions:
1. Land Servicing and Infrastructure:
r°
�C:e4f
Responses indicate that some of the obstacles faced by industrial developers include:
a. difficulty attracting large companies,
b. existing landlords not being able to secure tenants at competitive rental rates,
c. shortage of suitable land,
d. deficient servicing infrastructure (transportation, and bandwidth) built environment not
conducive to attract industries.
Some of these issues will be resolved over time as the Lower Mainland develops, and Maple
Ridge locations will become more desirable.
p� What is the top priority that would assist the District in attracting business interests to locate
hprp cnnnpr7
b) wnat measures would support and retain existing businesses?
!' .67
2. IViarketing and promotion:
Responses indicate that the District needs to improve its marketing and promotion to business
interests. In addition, it was suggested that the District needs to attract educational institutions
to locate here.
What are priority interests that could be effectively targeted, and what strategies would be
most effective in reaching these interests?
3. Developing incentives.
r�
Responses indicate a concern with development costs and municipal taxes being too high, and
with the development approvals process being too lengthy. Concerns have also been expressed
about inconsistency in the direction given by staff and Council.
Incentive programs are supported in the District that could potentially relax the application fee
schedule and processing priorities in order to attract desirable development
What are your thoughts on the potential for development incentives, similar to those in place
for the Town Centre of Maple Ridge, to promote development/investment on industrial
lands?
Zvi r � ;� � �' � �,,� . ,
d --
a
`��r> GYf t�C,t�� �//mot �' _ �. �_ �'_T�t'/�' .��-- � � r _� �7
� ��
%� Ge.�'�� GYM
4. Employment generating lands.
a. Specifically the MOT lands (to the west of the Haney By -Pass— Lougheed Highway
intersection),
� 3
i
a v g
z;
rr
I
the lands East and West of Kwantlen Lands,
c. the site to the southwest of the 128th Avenue 232"d Street intersection.
What you think about the potential for commercial /industrial development on these
new lands as suggested in the repart?
oer
F&
5. Transportation Routes.
The Engineering Department is involved in transportation upgrades to improve access to .its
industrial lands. A priority concern is an east -west connector that would link the 256th Street
Industrial area to 203`d Street. Options include:
a. Expanding the Dewdney Trunk corridor east of 240thI or
b. Continuing with a northern corridor. There are practical implications and extensive
property acquisition that must occur for transportation upgrades along this corridor.
Does it make a difference to the economic feasibility of the northern Indust ial lands if the
route is diverted south along Dewdney Trunk Road?
r,
Recommendations to the G. P. Rollo Commercial & Industrial Strategy Report 2012 - 2042
Christine Carter
Director of Planning
District of Maple Ridge
via Email (ccarterC mapleridge.ca)
Dear Ms. Carter:
First let me thank you for your response to our request for the District %J Maple Ridge to
engage seriously those individuals, families, and businesses that will be most affected
by the pending Commercial & Industrial Strategy Report and its recommendations. Your
extention of the closure for input to the July 26th 2013 was appreciated.
With that timeline in mind an association of Albion Industrial Area landowners and
business owners has been formed. This group met on two seperate occasions to put
some of our recommendations forward in time to be released for the deadline.
Please keep in mind that the recommendations that follow are put forward with the
direction from the DMR as to the current zoning of the AIA and represent the wishes
and concerns of the members of the Albion Industrial Area Association.
The recommendations are as follows:
1. Abandon the idea of a waterfront walkway in the AIA as it is incompatible with
ongoing industrial use and would add to the already considerable security and
liability issues for businesses and landowners
2. Creation of a controlled intersection at the west end of River Rd. to allow left hand
turns
3. Widen River Rd. using a program of full compensation for expropriation rather than
piecemeal penalty for development
4. Develop the Regional Park at the west end of River Rd to create an increase of visits
and traffic to the AIA
5. Storm sewer development
6. Signage on Lougheed Hwy advertising the businesses of the AIA
7. Creation of a clear line of sight from Lougheed Hwy of the whole of the AIA
8. Creation of a Albion Industrial Area plan
9. The creation of an Industrial Investment Incentive Program designed in collaboration
with the landowners and businesses who will be most affected by it to ensure our
interests and objectives are adequately addressed
10. Baselines established for DMR conduct such as concessions required for
development permits, timelines for approval processes, and so on. This to be
followed by discussions on how those baselines could be improved to meet the
goals of the DMR as well as the needs of commercial and industrial landowners in
the next 30 years
Recommendations to the G. P. Rollo Commercial & Industrial Strategy Report 2012 - 2042
11. The comments and recommendations regarding the AIA in the current draft must be
removed, as they were made by individuals who are not" stakeholders" in the AIA
and are directed towards converting the AIA from industrial to residential use, which
is incompatible with the spirit of this report as well as current zoning
12. The AIA landowners and other stakeholders must have a meaningful opportunity to
review the revised report before it is submitted to Council in order to confirm that our
comments have been incorporated
Once again thank you for the opportunity to let our collective voices be heard. We look
forward in the future to being a part of the complete decision making process where it
directly effects our properties, businesses, families and employees.
Sincerely,
Albion Industrial Area Association
Kathy Klassen, Pacific Coast Cedar Products
Bill Westernink, Maple Ridge Woodcraft
Lisa Cornish, ACEDCO Investments Ltd.
Peter Christensen, Supreme Heavy Movers
Cathy Dyck, Royell Western Urethane Ltd.
Jim Streifel, Streifel Industries Ltd,
Ted Hume, Kingfisher Ent. Ltd.
Mark Vander Wal, Van Der Wal Equipment
Joe Hide, Haney Marine
Henry Westerink, Maple Ridge Woodcraft
GPRA's retail analysis forecasts for Eastern Maple Ridge, and Silver Valley / North included the
following findings:
• Eastern Maple Ridge:
o Has a current inventory of 6,600 square feet of retail space. There is only a
small amount of commercial space in Eastern Maple Ridge, and it is quite
spread out between Dewdney Trunk Road, the Lougheed Highway and the
Ruskin Industrial Area.
o Population in Eastern Maple Ridge is expected to grow from over 6,300 in 2012
to over 10,600 by 2042.
o There is expected to be demand for an additional 10,000 square feet of retail
space in Eastern Maple Ridge by 2032, and by 2042 growth in the Eastern sub-
area would warrant an additional 21,000 square feet of new retail space.
• Silver Valley /North:
o Hasa current inventory of 56,000 square feet of retail space. A large
proportion of this space is located on the north side of Dewdney Trunk Road,
including the Cooper's anchored project at Dewdney Trunk Road and 240th
Street.
o Population in Silver Valley /North is forecasted to grow from over 15,600 in
2012 to over 22,200 in 2042.
o The Silver Valley / North sub -area is expected to see demand for an additional
33,000 square feet of retail space by 2032, and by 2042 growth in this sub -area
would warrant 66,000 square feet of retail space.
Regarding the potential placement of future retail demand, the report suggested that Eastern
Maple Ridge could see the development of a Village -style convenience node of 10,000 to 20,000
square feet at the intersection of Dewdney Trunk Road and 256th Street.
In the Silver Valley /North sub -area the majority of new space was recommended to be located
within the River Village within the Silver Valley, though a small amount of retail was also
suggested for the intersection of Dewdney Trunk Road and 256tn
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: September 09, 2013
and Members of Council FILE NO: E06-017-005
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Packaging and Printed Paper Recycling in British Columbia - Extended Producer
Responsibility Program
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In May 2011 the BC Recycling Regulation was amended to include the collection and recycling of
Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP) which obligates the industry to assume Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR) role for the materials defined as PPP, a list of which is appended to this report.
A not-for-profit agency, Multi-Material British Columbia (MMBC) was established to develop a
Stewardship Plan for PPP to comply with the Provincial regulation. MMBC subsequently prepared
and submitted a Stewardship Plan for PPP to the Province in November 2012 that was approved in
April 2013 with the intent of commencing the PPP program implementation in May 2014.
The Stewardship Plan addresses the collection, post-collection, processing and commodity
marketing of PPP throughout BC with the goal of increasing the PPP recycling rate from the current
estimated rate of 50-57% to 75%.
MMBC is focusing on the curbside collection of PPP materials only at this time and is requiring that
local governments throughout BC indicate, by September 16, 2013 their willingness or otherwise to
participate in curbside collection based upon a stated financial incentive rate.
The District has three options – accept the MMBC offer and continue to undertake curbside
collection of PPP; decline the offer and have MMBC select a contractor to collect curbside
recyclables and transition out of the collection operation, or decline the offer and opt out of the
MMBC plan and continue to provide curbside collection services but without receiving the MMBC
financial incentive.
MMBC issued their financial incentive offer letters to local governments for curbside collection in
mid-June 2013; municipalities throughout BC have expressed significant concerns on the nature of
the contract documents issued by MMBC as well as the timing but there has been little collaboration
from MMBC to seek clarification or resolution to the stated municipal concerns. Given the
compressed time frame as well as the time of year municipalities have been challenged to
coordinate responses to MMBC and the Province at both the technical and political levels.
Notwithstanding the timing constraints the Solid Waste Sub-committee of the Metro Vancouver
Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC) has had a number of deliberations regarding the
MMBC contract documents and REAC subsequently sent a letter to the Ministry of Environment
stating local governments concerns around the process and stated seven areas of concern:
4.4
1. Financial incentives and excessive penalties.
2. Contamination levels (3% maximum before penalty)
3. Labour and personnel
4. Termination and change clauses
5. Confidentiality and intellectual property
6. Collection service operations
7. Accountability.
The concerns listed above collectively impose an unacceptable level of risk on local governments
that should the concerns remain unresolved they may outweigh the financial benefits offered.
The purpose of this report is to present the MMBC financial offer to Council for consideration and
determine the support for considering the offer and responding to MMBC by September 16, 2013.
Municipalities with multi-year contractual obligations are being forced to decide on whether or not
they need to disentangle all or parts of those contracts. At the same time municipalities with in-
house services will have to address internal labour management and fleet retention issues.
Given the import of this issue an extension of time to resolve outstanding issues would be
appropriate. The Ministry of Environment is the lead provincial agency on this initiative and it is
recommended that the Mayor be authorized to send a letter to the Honourable Mary Polak, Minister
of Environment expressing concern around the MMBC offer and timeline and request the Minister
extend the stated September 16, 2013 acceptance date and that the Ministry staff be directed to
work with MMBC and local governments to establish a framework that recognizes concerns of all
parties involved.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
WHEREAS the District of Maple Ridge, along with other local governments in British Columbia
support the principle of Extended Producer Responsibilities and recognize the importance of
MMBC’s Stewardship Plan;
AND WHEREAS the District has considerable reservations regarding the timeline for acceptance of
the MMBC offer for curbside collection of Packaging and Printed Paper recyclables along with the
punitive nature of the draft contract documents;
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the District indicate to MMBC its willingness to accept the financial
incentive offer for curbside collection on the condition that both MMBC and the District work toward
suitable contract terms that are agreeable to both parties;
AND THAT the Mayor be authorized to send a letter to the Honourable Mary Polak, Minister of
Environment expressing concern around the MMBC offer and timeline and request the Minister
extend the stated September 16, 2013 acceptance date and that the Ministry staff be directed to
work with MMBC and local governments to establish a framework that recognizes concerns of all
parties involved.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
In May 2011 the BC Recycling Regulation was amended to include the collection and recycling of
Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP) which obligates the industry to assume Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR) role for the materials defined as PPP. A not-for-profit agency, Multi-Material
British Columbia (MMBC) was established to develop a Stewardship Plan for PPP to comply with the
Provincial regulation and a Stewardship Plan for PPP was subsequently prepared and submitted to
the Province in November 2012 and approved in April 2013 with the intent of commencing the PPP
program implementation in May 2014.
Through the development of the Stewardship Plan MMBC intimated that “the details” would follow.
The contract specifics were not provided until mid-June 2013 when municipalities were informed by
MMBC that they must respond on the collection issue by September 16, 2013. At the July 08, 2013
Council Workshop a verbal update was provided to Council noting that municipalities were struggling
to obtain clear answers to many questions. Given the time of year – summer, and with Council
recess – September is the first opportunity for most councils to be briefed on the work done over the
last few weeks.
The Stewardship Plan addresses the collection, post-collection, processing and commodity
marketing of PPP throughout BC with the goal of increasing the PPP recycling rate from the current
estimated rate of 50-57% to 75%.
A report on the PPP Stewardship Plan was brought to Council on February 04, 2013 and a
representative of MMBC made a presentation to Committee of the Whole on February 18, 2013. In
addition Council has also received verbal updates throughout this process.
Rather than seeking to secure commitments for curbside collection, depot services and material
processing at the same time MMBC are choosing to stage the selection process starting with
curbside collection which makes it very difficult to obtain a full understanding of the implications to
the recycling operations in the District given that it is unknown at this time if the District will be
successful in securing depot or processing contracts with MMBC.
Collection
By September 16, 2013 local governments throughout BC are required to indicate to MMBC whether
or not they wish to continue collecting PPP recyclable materials from both curbside and multi-family
locations. Municipalities such as the District that currently collect recyclable materials have the right
of first refusal for the curbside collection but multi-family sites with central storage areas may elect
to contract with either the local government or a private hauler.
On June 17, 2013 MMBC issued a letter to the District offering a financial collection incentive of $37
per household for curbside collection augmented with a further $0.75 per household for education
and $2.50 per household for service administration. The overall financial implications are
addressed later in this report but it is noted that the financial collective incentive offer from MMBC
does not cover the actual costs of curbside pickup.
The current $35 annual charge per household in the District is subsidized by the revenue gained
from selling the processed PPP materials. With the MMBC Stewardship Plan the District will no
longer control the sale of the processed materials; as such the actual cost of picking up the curbside
recyclable materials is approximately $72 per household based upon the current multiple streams of
materials and a weekly pickup so the District will still have to subsidize the curbside operation.
In considering the MMBC offer local governments have three options:
1. Accept the offer from MMBC, acknowledging that the financial incentive does not cover all
costs and continue curbside operations as MMBC’s collection contractor.
a. Agree to the financial incentive as determined by MMBC
b. Accept the contractual terms and conditions as written by MMBC for a Master
Services Agreement and Statements of Work
2. Decline the offer; MMBC will then proceed with a tender process to select a contractor to
collect curbside recyclables. In this case, local government will transition out of collection
operations and could not participate in curbside collection until the contract would be re-
tendered which is expected to be in 2019 or 2020, and not as a preferred candidate – the
local government would have to compete against private contractors.
3. Decline the offer and opt out of the MMBC system; the local government continues to provide
curbside collection services but does not receive the MMBC financial incentive.
Review of MMBC Offer – Curbside Collection
MMBC submitted their Stewardship Plan to the Province on November 19, 2012 and secured
approval in April 2013. Throughout that time local governments sought clarity on a lot of issues that
were not explicit in the MMBC plan to which the typical response was that MMBC did not have the
information at that time but concerns would be addressed through the financial offer to
municipalities and the Statements of Work that were to be developed subsequently.
MMBC issued their financial offer letters to local governments for curbside collection in mid-June
2013; municipalities throughout BC have expressed significant concerns on the nature of the
contract documents issued by MMBC but there has been little collaboration from MMBC to seek
clarification or resolution to the stated municipal concerns and MMBC would appear to be holding to
a “take it or leave it” stance rather negotiating mutually acceptable terms.
The Solid Waste Sub-committee of the Metro Vancouver Regional Engineers Advisory Committee
(REAC) has had a number of deliberations regarding the MMBC contract documents and REAC
subsequently sent a letter to the Ministry of Environment stating local governments concerns around
the process, noting seven areas of concern:
1. Financial incentives and excessive penalties.
2. Contamination levels (3% maximum before penalty)
3. Labour and personnel
4. Termination and change clauses
5. Confidentiality and intellectual property
6. Collection service operations
7. Accountability.
The concerns listed above collectively impose an unacceptable level of risk on local governments
that may well outweigh the financial benefits offered. Examples of concerns include:
Exorbitant penalties should a load of recyclable material have greater than 3%
contamination – as deemed by the processor (as yet undetermined) – resulting in a $5,000
fine per load. MMBC have just within the last couple of weeks set an annual cap of
$120,000 in fines for contamination which is some help but the impact obviously depends
upon the size of the municipality.
In the draft documents the ability to terminate the collection contract was unilaterally at the
discretion of MMBC. That requirement has now been revised such that either party can
terminate the contract with 180 days notice.
Whilst in the case of the two examples noted MMBC has revised their position there are a lot of other
issues still unresolved. Local governments on Metro Vancouver have asked that the September 16,
2013 date be extended to allow further dialogue on concerns such as those listed above. MMBC
have not expressed any willingness to accommodate such a request.
Local governments have also contacted the Ministry of Environment to seek their assistance in
addressing the stated concerns; MOE have stated that they see their role only as ensuring the MMBC
Stewardship Plan complies with the Recycling Regulations without being involved in resolving the
concerns of local governments. A number of Lower Mainland municipalities have written to the
Province expressing their concerns and seeking an extension of the September 16, 2013 deadline,
copies of which are appended to this report. It is recommended that the District also write a letter to
the Province expressing concern over the process and seek assistance in resolving the outstanding
issues with the contract documents and overall timeline. REAC also sent a letter to the Province with
similar stated concerns.
Lower Mainland municipalities collectively sought a legal opinion on the proposed contract
documents and that review is appended to this report.
Aside from the financial and contractual issues as noted, a significant concern for local governments
is the impact on the level of service for recycling curbside collection. Recycling is currently collected
weekly on a multi-stream basis. The offer from MMBC would seem to be based on a single-stream,
biweekly collection schedule which would seem to fly in the face of the stated desire to increase the
diversion rate for recycling from the current average of 54% to 75%.
Selection of Collection Option
There are a large number of unknowns with the overall collection and processing operations as
expressed in the MMBC Stewardship Plan that significantly inhibit local governments ability to
evaluate the impacts of the plan.
Based upon the three options noted – accept, decline or opt out – and the limited amount of
information available in this constrained time period it would seem that the least objectionable
option would be to indicate to MMBC that the District is willing to accept the MMBC financial
incentive offer – with the caveat that acceptance is subject to agreeable negotiation of contract
terms with MMBC.
b) Desired Outcome:
The goal of the PPP Stewardship Plan is to facilitate the increased diversion of recyclables from the
currently estimated 50-57% up to 75% in a reasonable time frame.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The goals of the PPP Plan are in alignment with the District’s goals of sustainability; however, the
process proposed by MMBC appears to do little to address the goal of reducing the amount of
packing and printed paper at the front end.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Assuming that the District successfully enters into a mutually satisfactory contract with MMBC for
curbside collection there should be little difference to the customer. One caveat is the level of
service funded – currently the curbside collection is weekly, but as previously stated it appears the
MMBC financial incentive may reflect a single-stream bi-weekly pickup and that may be considered a
negative result. Should the District choose to maintain the current multi-stream weekly pickup and
charge residents an annual fee, in line with the current $35 per household per year then the
curbside collection will continue with no disruption or reduction in level of service.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society (RMRS) has an excellent working partnership with the District and
the proposed PPP changes are not seen as having any impact on that relationship. The Operations
Department will continue to manage the RMRS vehicle fleet and the Engineering Department will
continue to liaise with RMMS on the management of the recycling functions.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
In 2013 the per household cost for the curbside blue box program is $35.55 which is determined by
taking the actual cost of collecting the recyclable materials at the curb less the revenues from the
processed materials. Acceptance of the MMBC financial incentive offer of $37.00 per household
which would seem to be an improvement but in this case the District will lose control of the
processed materials for sale resulting in the cost of the curbside blue box program increasing to
$72, and a net cost to households of $37 per annum.
As previously noted there are a significant numbers of unknowns around the total costs to
implement the MMBC plan; as such it is recommended that the current 2013 per household costs
for curbside pickup be maintained for at least 2014 and 2015 until the total costs of the program
are better known at which time the per household costs may be revisited.
g) Ministry of Environment – Request for Deadline Extension
The Ministry of Environment is the lead provincial agency on this important issue and to date the
ministry has taken what be best described as a passive role in assisting municipalities find
resolutions to the outstanding concerns. It is the view of most municipalities that more time is
needed to fully address the outstanding issues and fully understand the implications of the proposed
plan.
This report recommends that the Minister of Environment be requested to extend the stated
September 16, 2013 acceptance date and direct Ministry staff to work with MMBC and local
governments to establish a framework that recognizes concerns of all parties involved.
h) Alternatives:
Should the District choose not to accept the MMBC offer they may decline the offer and have MMBC
select a contractor to collect curbside recyclables and transition out of the collection operation. Or
they may decline the offer and opt out of the MMBC plan and continue to provide curbside collection
services but without receiving the MMBC financial incentive.
CONCLUSIONS:
Under the BC Recycling Regulation, MMBC will assume responsibility for residential PPP collection
and processing throughout the province. The general principles of the PPP Stewardship Plan are
supportable in that it promotes the increased diversion of residential recyclable materials but there
are many details that are still unknown at this time.
The focus at this time is on the curbside collection and MMBC are offering a financial incentive to
which local governments have to respond by September 16, 2013.
At this time the recommendation is to respond to MMBC indicating that the District is willing to
accept the financial incentive offer for curbside collection on the condition that both MMBC and the
District work toward suitable contract terms that are agreeable to both parties.
As noted in the report the majority of municipalities believe that more time is needed to work through
the details for curbside collection, and expect similar concerns when the matters of depot selection
and processing are brought forward for consideration.
A further recommendation of this report is that the Mayor be authorized to send a letter to the
Honourable Mary Polak, Minister of Environment expressing concern around the MMBC offer and
timeline and request the Minister extend the stated September 16, 2013 acceptance date and that
the Ministry staff be directed to work with MMBC and local governments to establish a framework
that recognizes concerns of all parties involved.
“Original signed by David Pollock”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, PEng., MBA.
General Manager, PW&DS
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
DP/dp
Appendices
1. MMBC Offer Letter – June 17, 2013
2. MMBC Master Service Agreement (Draft)
3. MMBC Statement of Work – Collection (Draft)
4. MMBC List of PPP Materials
5. Legal Opinion – Dentons Canada LLP - August 06, 2013
6. Letters to Ministry of Environment
a. REAC – July 30, 2013
b. Coquitlam – August 01, 2013
c. Abbotsford – August 19, 2013
7. Letter to MMBC from Coast Waste Management Association – July 17, 2013
8. Paper commenting on MMBC from Columbia Institute – August 2013
9. Memo to Council – August 09, 2013
10. Report to Council Workshop – February 04, 2013
June 17, 2013
District of Maple Ridge
11995 Haney Place
Maple Ridge
British Columbia V2X 6A9
Attention: Mr. David Pollock
Municipal Engineer
Dear Mr. Pollock:
RE: Collection of Packaging and Printed Paper from Residents
Multi-Material British Columbia (MMBC) is preparing to implement the Packaging and Printed Paper
(PPP) Stewardship Plan in May 2014. As set out in the approved Plan, MMBC is offering incentives for
the collection of PPP from residents. This letter sets out the offer from MMBC to the District of Maple
Ridge to provide collection of PPP from residents.
Notwithstanding the use of the word “offer” in this letter, this letter is only intended to describe the general
terms of a contemplated transaction and to allow you to indicate your interest and to provide MMBC with
the requested information. Neither this letter, nor your response to this letter, creates or is intended to
create any legally binding or enforceable obligation or relationship. This letter is not an offer to enter into
either a bidding contract or a contract to carry out the contemplated transaction.
The consummation of any transaction remains subject to the successful execution by you and MMBC of a
definitive written agreement covering the engagement. MMBC will not be obligated in any manner to you
until such a definitive written agreement has been signed by you and MMBC, and MMBC will have no
obligation to enter into such a definitive written agreement; to otherwise consummate a transaction; or to
conduct or continue discussions or negotiations.
MMBC provides no representations or warranties of any kind in connection with this letter, whether
express or implied, including as to the completeness or accuracy of any material included or referenced
herein. MMBC assumes no liability in respect of the transaction being discussed or for any errors or
omissions. MMBC reserves the right, in its sole discretion, at any time and for any reason, to modify or
supplement materials referenced in this letter (including the proposed form of agreement).
MMBC has developed a list of PPP to be collected from residents at curbside and multi-family buildings
and at depots. Of particular note:
• All types of printed papers are included except hard and soft cover books;
• All types of paper packaging are included except waxed corrugated cardboard;
Page 2
• All types of steel and aluminum packaging (including aerosol containers) except paint containers and
gas cylinders;
• Glass containers are to be separated from all other PPP;
• PET # 1, HDPE # 2, PVC # 3 and most types of LDPE # 4, PP # 5 and PS # 6 containers are included;
• HDPE # 2 and LDPE # 4 film packaging is to be accepted at depots only; and
• PS # 6 foam packaging is to be accepted at depots only.
Please review the Packaging and Printed Paper to be Collected from Households and at Depots available
on the MMBC website.
Curbside Collection
According to our records, the District of Maple Ridge was providing curbside collection of PPP as of
November 19, 2012. If you were providing these services, MMBC is offering you a collection incentive,
subject to certain terms and conditions, to continue to provide curbside collection of PPP to your
residents.
The curbside collection incentive is comprised of:
• An amount per year for each household 1 served based on the household density of your service area
and the number of streams collected 2 to collect a specified list of PPP 3;
• An amount per tonne for collection of glass segregated from all other PPP; and
• A performance bonus if the quantity of PPP collected per household per year reaches certain
thresholds.
According to our records, the household density of the District of Maple Ridge is 0.88 households per
hectare4 and the curbside service is based on multi-stream collection. Therefore the curbside collection
incentive being offered to the District of Maple Ridge is:
• $37 per household per year served by curbside collection;
• $80 per tonne for glass collected at curbside segregated from all other PPP; and
• A performance bonus set out in the following table reflecting the actual quantity of PPP collected per
curbside household (HH) calculated on an annual basis.
1 A household is a self-contained dwelling unit providing living accommodation to one or more people where the
resident delivers PPP to the curb for collection. 2 Single-stream or multi-stream. 3 Refer to PPP to be Collected from Households and Depots posted on the MMBC website. Note that glass may not
be commingled in single-stream collection or with containers in multi-stream collection. 4 Calculated using StatsCan 2011 census data. Where the curbside collection service area is a subset of the
municipality’s geographic area, the household density will be recalculated by MMBC after receiving the municipality’s
completed Curbside Collection Service Form. The corrected household density and applicable corresponding
collection incentive rate will be used in the contract with MMBC.
Page 3
Curbside Collection Performance Bonus
PPP Collected per
Curbside Household
Per Year
180 - 199
Kilograms
200 - 219
Kilograms
220 - 239
Kilograms
> 240
Kilograms
Performance Bonus $ per Curbside Household per year
$1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00
Should the District of Maple Ridge wish to accept the collection incentive for providing curbside collection
services to residents under contract to MMBC, please complete Sections 1, 2 and 3 of the MMBC
Collection Financial Incentives – Collector Response posted on the MMBC website and submit this form
electronically to forms@multimaterialbc.ca prior to September 16, 2013.
Should the District of Maple Ridge wish to decline the curbside collection incentive, please complete
Section 1 and questions 1 and 2 of Section 2 of the MMBC Collection Financial Incentives – Collector
Response posted on the MMBC website and submit this form electronically to forms@multimaterialbc.ca
prior to September 16, 2013.
Multi-Family Building Collection
According to our records, the District of Maple Ridge provides multi-family building collection service. The
multi-family building collection incentive is comprised of:
• An amount per year for each household 5 served based on the number of streams collected 6 to collect
a specified list of PPP 7;
• An amount per tonne for collection of glass segregated from all other PPP; and
• A performance bonus if the quantity of PPP collected per household per year reaches certain
thresholds.
According to our records, the multi-family building service is based on multi-stream collection. Therefore
the multi-family building collection incentive being offered to the District of Maple Ridge is:
• $20 per household per year served by multi-family building collection;
• $80 per tonne for glass collected from multi-family buildings segregated from all other PPP; and
• A performance bonus set out in the following table reflecting the actual quantity of PPP collected per
multi-family household (HH) calculated on an annual basis.
5 A household is a self-contained dwelling unit housing one or more people where the resident delivers PPP to a
central location within the multi-family complex from which the PPP is collected. 6 Single-stream or multi-stream. 7 Refer to PPP to be Collected from Households and Depots posted on the MMBC website. Note that glass may not
be commingled in single-stream collection or with containers in multi-stream collection.
Page 4
Multi-Family Building Collection Performance Bonus
PPP Collected
per Multi-
Family
Household Per
Year
100 – 109
Kilograms
110 – 119
Kilograms
120 – 129
Kilograms
130 – 139
Kilograms
140 - 149
Kilograms
> 150
Kilograms
Performance
Bonus
$ per Multi-Family Household per year
$0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 $3.00
Should the District of Maple Ridge wish to accept the collection incentive for multi-family building
collection services, please complete Section 4 of the MMBC Collection Financial Incentives – Collector
Response posted on the MMBC website and submit this form electronically to forms@multimaterialbc.ca
prior to September 16, 2013.
Terms and Conditions
MMBC’s terms and conditions are set out in a sample Master Services Agreement with schedules that
include a Statement of Work for each type of collection service available. A sample of the form of
agreement that MMBC expects the District of Maple Ridge to sign in order to receive one or more of the
collection incentives described above is available for your review on the MMBC website (see Service
Providers). As noted above, MMBC reserves the right to modify or supplement this form of agreement,
and the relevant schedules will need to be populated with the information provided in the MMBC
Collection Financial Incentives – Collector Response submitted by the District of Maple Ridge, and as
agreed upon by MMBC, before MMBC may present a finalized copy of the agreement to the District of
Maple Ridge for its execution. By indicating your interest in accepting the offer described in this letter, the
District of Maple Ridge acknowledges that it has reviewed, and agrees to, the form of agreement.
Resident Education and Service Administration
Should the District of Maple Ridge accept one or more of the collection incentives described above, it
would also be eligible for the associated top up payment set out in the following tables.
Resident Education Top Up Households Used to
Calculate Top Up
By Service
$/HH/year
Curbside collection Curbside households $0.75
Multi-family building collection Multi-family building
households $1.00
Page 5
Service Administration
Top Up
Households Used to
Calculate Top Up $/HH/year
Curbside collection Curbside households $2.50
Multi-family building collection Multi-family building households $2.50
We look forward to receiving your response prior to September 16, 2013.
If you have questions or if we can be of any assistance as you consider the collection financial incentives,
please contact MMBC by:
• Emailing info@multimaterialbc.ca;
• Calling MMBC at (604) 620-7540; or
• Calling Maura Walker, a member of the consulting team providing support to MMBC during
implementation of the PPP Stewardship Plan, at (250) 597-7997.
Sincerely,
Multi-Material British Columbia
Allen Langdon
Chair
- i -
DOCS 12280687
MASTER SERVICES AGREEMENT
Table of Contents
Page
SECTION 1. INTERPRETATION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Definitions. ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Interpretation. ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.3. Schedules. ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.4. Priority. ............................................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES ..................................................................................................... 4
2.1. Services. ............................................................................................................................ 4
2.2. Changes. ............................................................................................................................ 4
2.3. Non-Exclusive. ................................................................................................................... 5
SECTION 3. DURATION ........................................................................................................................ 5
3.1. Term of Agreement. ........................................................................................................... 5
3.2. Term of Statement of Work. ............................................................................................... 5
SECTION 4. SERVICE STANDARDS .................................................................................................... 5
4.1. Performance. ...................................................................................................................... 5
4.2. Contractor to Comply with MMBC Policies and Standards. ............................................... 5
4.3. Compliance with Law. ........................................................................................................ 5
4.4. Service Levels. ................................................................................................................... 6
4.5. Contingency Planning. ....................................................................................................... 6
4.6. Labour Disruption. .............................................................................................................. 7
SECTION 5. PAYMENT .......................................................................................................................... 7
5.1. Fees. .................................................................................................................................. 7
5.2. Set-Off. ............................................................................................................................... 7
5.3. Invoicing. ............................................................................................................................ 7
5.4. Taxes. ................................................................................................................................ 8
5.5. Withholding Taxes. ............................................................................................................. 8
5.6. Payment. ............................................................................................................................ 8
5.7. No Volume Commitment. ................................................................................................... 8
SECTION 6. PERSONNEL ..................................................................................................................... 8
6.1. Suitable Personnel. ............................................................................................................ 8
6.2. Key Personnel. ................................................................................................................... 9
6.3. Subcontracting. .................................................................................................................. 9
SECTION 7. REPORTING AND AUDIT ................................................................................................. 9
7.1. Record Keeping. ................................................................................................................ 9
7.2. Reporting. ........................................................................................................................... 9
7.3. Audit. .................................................................................................................................. 9
- ii -
DOCS 12280687
SECTION 8. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES .................................................................... 10
8.1. Contractor Representations and Warranties. ................................................................... 10
SECTION 9. CONFIDENTIALITY ......................................................................................................... 11
9.1. Confidentiality Covenant. ................................................................................................. 11
9.2. Legal Requirement. .......................................................................................................... 11
9.3. Return of Confidential Information. .................................................................................. 11
9.4. Privacy Laws. ................................................................................................................... 11
SECTION 10. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS ................................................................................................. 11
10.1. Ownership. ....................................................................................................................... 11
SECTION 11. INDEMNITY ..................................................................................................................... 11
11.1. Indemnity. ......................................................................................................................... 11
SECTION 12. INSURANCE AND PERFORMANCE BOND ................................................................... 12
12.1. Insurance. ........................................................................................................................ 12
12.2. Performance Bond. .......................................................................................................... 12
SECTION 13. TERMINATION ................................................................................................................ 12
13.1. Termination by MMBC for Convenience. ......................................................................... 12
13.2. Termination by MMBC for Cause. .................................................................................... 12
13.3. Termination by Contractor for Cause. .............................................................................. 13
13.4. Change in Applicable Law. ............................................................................................... 13
13.5. Disruption of Service. ....................................................................................................... 13
13.6. Termination Assistance. ................................................................................................... 13
13.7. Survival. ........................................................................................................................... 13
SECTION 14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION ................................................................................................. 13
14.1. Disputes. .......................................................................................................................... 13
SECTION 15. GENERAL PROVISIONS ................................................................................................. 14
15.1. Relationship of the Parties. .............................................................................................. 14
15.2. Assignment. ..................................................................................................................... 14
15.3. Force Majeure. ................................................................................................................. 14
15.4. Governing Law. ................................................................................................................ 14
15.5. Notices. ............................................................................................................................ 15
15.6. Further Assurances. ......................................................................................................... 15
15.7. No Publicity. ..................................................................................................................... 15
15.8. Timing. ............................................................................................................................. 15
15.9. Severability. ...................................................................................................................... 15
15.10. Waiver. ............................................................................................................................. 16
15.11. Remedies Cumulative. ..................................................................................................... 16
15.12. Amendment. ..................................................................................................................... 16
15.13. Entire Agreement. ............................................................................................................ 16
15.14. Counterparts. ................................................................................................................... 16
- 1 -
DOCS 12280687
This Master Services Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of ● (“Effective Date”)
BETWEEN:
[NAME OF CONTRACTOR], having a place of business at ● (“Contractor”),
AND:
MULTI-MATERIAL BC SOCIETY a not-for-profit agency incorporated under the Society Act (British
Columbia) (“MMBC”).
RECITALS:
A. Whereas MMBC represents companies and organizations (“Producers”) that supply products in
packaging and printed paper to residents of British Columbia obligated under the Recycling
Regulation under the Environmental Management Act (British Columbia);
B. Whereas MMBC developed the Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Plan;
C. Whereas the Director, Waste Management, Environmental Standards Branch, Ministry of
Environment approved the Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Plan on April 15, 2013;
D. Whereas MMBC is meeting Producers’ obligations under the Recycling Regulation by
implementing the Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Plan, including through this
Agreement;
E. Whereas MMBC wishes to receive, and Contractor wishes to provide, the services set out in this
Agreement, and the parties wish to foster dialogue and a good business relationship in carrying
out such services; and
F. ● [Note: Recitals to be updated to include appropriate context re: Contractor and its role].
In consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations contained herein and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, MMBC and Contractor
agree as follows:
SECTION 1. INTERPRETATION
1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, the following terms will have the following meanings:
“Affiliate” means any entity controlled by, controlling, or under common control with a party.
“Agreement” has the meaning set out on the first page of this document, and includes the Schedules
(including Statements of Work) attached hereto.
“Applicable Law” means any domestic or foreign law, rule, statute, subordinate legislation, regulation,
by-law, order, ordinance, protocol, code, guideline, treaty, policy, notice, direction or judicial, arbitral,
administrative, ministerial or departmental judgment, award, decree, treaty, directive, or other requirement
or guideline published or in force at any time during the Term which applies to or is otherwise intended to
govern or regulate any person (including any party), property, transaction, activity, event or other matter,
including any rule, order, judgment, directive or other requirement or guideline issued by any
governmental or regulatory authority.
“Business Day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or statutory holiday in the Province of
British Columbia.
- 2 -
DOCS 12280687
“Change” has the meaning set out in Section 2.2.1.
“Change Request” has the meaning set out in Section 2.2.1.
“Change Response” has the meaning set out in Section 2.2.4.
“Confidential Information” means information of or relating to a party (the “Disclosing Party”) that has
or will come into the possession or knowledge of the other party (the “Receiving Party”) whether such
information is or has been conveyed verbally or in written or other tangible form, and whether such
information is acquired directly or indirectly such as in the course of discussions or other investigations by
the Receiving Party, that: (a) where MMBC is the Disclosing Party, is any information of MMBC or relating
to its business or affairs including technical, financial and business information, ideas, concepts or know-
how, Services performance and Services delivery reporting information, and the terms of this Agreement;
and (B) where Contractor is the Disclosing Party, is limited to financial information of Contractor.
However, Confidential Information does not include information that: (i) was already known to the
Receiving Party, without obligation to keep it confidential, at the time of its receipt from the Disclosing
Party; or (ii) is or becomes available to the public other than as a result of a breach hereof by the
Receiving Party; provided that the foregoing exceptions will not apply with respect to any personal
information that is subject to privacy laws.
“Contractor” has the meaning set out on the first page of this Agreement.
“Dispute” has the meaning set out in Section 14.1.
“Effective Date” has the meaning set out on the first page of this Agreement.
“Fees” has the meaning set out in Section 5.1.
“Force Majeure” has the meaning set out in Section 15.3.
“Intellectual Property Rights” means inventions, patents, copyrights, trademarks, industrial designs,
integrated circuit topography rights, know-how, trade secrets, confidential information, and any other
intellectual property rights whether registered or unregistered, and including rights in any application for
any of the foregoing.
“Labour Disruption” has the meaning set out in Section 4.6.1.
“MMBC” has the meaning set out on the first page of this Agreement.
“MMBC Policies and Standards” has the meaning set out in Section 4.2.
“PPP Description” has the meaning set out in Schedule 4.2, as may be updated by MMBC pursuant to
Section 4.2.
“Service Levels” has the meaning set out in Section 4.4.1.
“Service Level Failure” has the meaning set out in Section 4.4.
“Service Level Failure Credit” has the meaning set out in Schedule 4.4.
“Services” has the meaning set out in Section 2.1, including the delivery of any Work Product.
“SOW Term” has the meaning set out in Section 3.2.
- 3 -
DOCS 12280687
“Statement of Work” means any statement of work attached hereto or as may from time to time be
issued hereunder.
“Term” has the meaning set out in Section 3.1.
“Work Product” means the deliverables to be created or provided to MMBC by Contractor pursuant to
any Statement of Work and any data, records, and reports that have been prepared, created, written or
recorded in performance of the Services, whether by Contractor, MMBC, or Contractor and MMBC
together.
1.2. Interpretation.
1.2.1. Including – Where the word “including” or “includes” is used in this Agreement, it means “including
(or includes) without limitation”.
1.2.2. Technical Terms – Any capitalized term used in this Agreement that is not defined in Section 1.1
or elsewhere in this Agreement will have the generally accepted industry or technical meaning
given to such term.
1.2.3. Number, Gender, and Persons – In this Agreement, words importing the singular number will
include the plural and vice versa, and words importing the use of any gender will include the
masculine, feminine and neuter genders and the word "person will include an individual, a trust, a
partnership, a body corporate, an association or other incorporated or unincorporated
organization or entity.
1.2.4. Headings – The headings in this Agreement are solely for convenience of reference and will not
be used for purposes of interpreting or construing the provisions hereof.
1.2.5. Currency – Unless otherwise provided for herein, all monetary amounts referred to herein will
refer to the lawful money of Canada.
1.2.6. Calculation of Time – When calculating the period of time within which or following which any act
is to be done or step taken pursuant to this Agreement, the date which is the reference date in
calculating such period will be excluded. If the last day of such period is not a Business Day, then
the time period in question will end on the first Business Day following such non-Business Day.
1.2.7. Legislation References – Any references in this Agreement to any law, by-law, rule, regulation,
order or act of any government, governmental body or other regulatory body, including any
Applicable Law, will be construed as a reference thereto as amended or re-enacted from time to
time or as a reference to any successor thereto.
1.3. Schedules. As of the Effective Date, the following Schedules form part of this Agreement (note
that Attachment numbering is not sequential and is based on a related section reference):
Schedule Description
Schedule 2.1(a) – Statement of Work for Curbside Collections [Note: List of
Statements of Work to be updated to match list of services
applicable to Contractor.]
Schedule 2.1(b) – Statement of Work for Multi-Family Building Collections
Schedule 2.1(c) – Statement of Work for Depot Collections
Schedule 4.2 – MMBC Policies and Standards
Schedule 4.4 – Service Level Methodology
- 4 -
DOCS 12280687
Schedule 12.1 – Insurance Requirements
1.4. Priority. In the event of any inconsistency between any of the provisions of the main terms and
conditions of this Agreement, any Schedule, and any Statement of Work, the inconsistency will be
resolved by reference to the following descending order of priority: (i) Article 1 through Article 15
of this Agreement; (ii) the Schedules annexed to this Agreement; and (iii) the applicable
Statement of Work, except to the extent a Statement of Work expressly states that it is intended
to have priority over the main body of this Agreement, in which case the Statement of Work will
have priority but solely with respect to such Statement of Work.
SECTION 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES
2.1. Services. Contractor will perform the Services set out in each Statement of Work, executed
simultaneous with this Agreement or separately executed, and any services that are inherent,
necessary, or customarily provided as part of those services (collectively, the “Services”), all in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Statement of Work. Each
Statement of Work will be effective, incorporated into and form a part of this Agreement when
mutually accepted and duly executed by both parties.
2.2. Changes.
2.2.1. An authorized MMBC representative may, at any time and from time to time, request additions,
deletions, amendments or any other changes to any Statement of Work (a “Change”) by issuing
a “Change Request”.
2.2.2. For a Change Request affecting the administration of this agreement, Contractor will provide an
initial response within five Business Days of receipt of a Change Request indicating whether it is
able to comply with the Change Request. If Contractor is unable to comply with the Change
Request, the parties will, on MMBC’s request, meet to discuss, in good faith, why Contractor is
unable to comply with the Change Request.
2.2.3. For any other Change Request, Contractor will provide an initial response within fifteen Business
Days of receipt of a Change Request indicating whether it is able to comply with the Change
Request. If Contractor is unable to comply with the Change Request, the parties will, on MMBC’s
request, meet to discuss, in good faith, why Contractor is unable to comply with the Change
Request.
2.2.4. Where Contractor is able to comply with the Change Request, Contractor will provide a further,
more detailed, response (a “Change Response”) within 10 calendar days of providing its initial
response, and such Change Response will include details of any costs or other changes required
to this Agreement to comply with the Change Request.
2.2.5. Contractor may request a Change by delivering a Change Request, together with a Change
Response, to MMBC.
2.2.6. If MMBC, in its discretion, accepts the Change Response, an authorized MMBC representative
will provide Contractor with written approval of MMBC’s acceptance in the form of an executed
change order. If MMBC does not accept a Change Response, the parties will, on MMBC’s
request, negotiate in good faith the terms pursuant to which the parties may agree to implement
the Change. Contractor will not make any Change to any Statement of Work without MMBC’s
prior written approval.
2.2.7. Contractor acknowledges that MMBC may be dependent on Contractor for the Services, and
Contractor agrees that Contractor will not be entitled to reject a Change Request unless it is not
technically possible to carry it out.
- 5 -
DOCS 12280687
2.2.8. Contractor will make requested Changes at no additional charge to MMBC unless implementing
the Change will require Contractor to incur material additional costs, in which case Contractor will
deal transparently with MMBC, including that Contractor will make available to MMBC all
supporting information and documentation reasonably requested by MMBC that relates to the
pricing of the proposed Change. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor will make any Change
required to comply with Applicable Laws at no additional charge to MMBC (other than an
Applicable Law that affects MMBC only and does not also apply to Contractor in the conduct of its
business).
2.3. Non-Exclusive. Neither this Agreement nor any Statement of Work will grant Contractor
exclusivity of supply unless expressly stated otherwise, with reference to this Section, in the
applicable Statement of Work (and in no event will the scope of such exclusivity extend beyond
the scope of Services under such Statement of Work).
SECTION 3. DURATION
3.1. Term of Agreement. This Agreement will commence on the Effective Date and will continue until
the expiration or termination of the last Statement of Work under this Agreement (the “Term”).
3.2. Term of Statement of Work. Each Statement of Work will set out the term of the Statement of
Work and any terms and conditions relating to the renewal of the Statement of Work (the “SOW
Term”).
SECTION 4. SERVICE STANDARDS
4.1. Performance. Contractor warrants that Contractor will perform, or cause to be performed
(including through appropriate supervision and inspection), the Services and otherwise fulfill its
obligations hereunder honestly and in good faith, exercising reasonable skill, care and diligence,
in accordance with recognized professional and North American industry standards, practices,
and methods, in a timely manner and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement and any Statement of Work, having regard for the concerns, needs, and interests of
residents and the environment. Except where otherwise set out in the Agreement, all weighing
and measurement to be performed by Contractor will be made in accordance with the MMBC
Policies and Standards on weights and measurements identified in Schedule 4.2.
4.2. Contractor to Comply with MMBC Policies and Standards. Contractor will comply at all times with
all terms and requirements set out in the policies and standards set out in Schedule 4.2, as such
policies and standards may be updated by MMBC from time to time, and such other policies and
standards that MMBC brings to the attention of Contractor from time to time (collectively, “MMBC
Policies and Standards”). Notice of updating of, or new, MMBC Policies and Standards may be
made by MMBC by publishing on the MMBC website. MMBC will endeavor to also provide notice
of any updated or new MMBC Policies and Standards directly to Contactor, provided however
that it is understood that where notice is made on the MMBC website, MMBC has no obligation to
do so.
4.3. Compliance with Law. Contractor will perform its obligations under this Agreement in a manner
that complies with all Applicable Laws, including:
(a) the British Columbia Employment Standards Act;
(b) the Workers' Compensation Act of the Province of British Columbia and the Occupational
Health and Safety Regulations thereunder;
(c) the Environmental Management Act; and
- 6 -
DOCS 12280687
(d) the Waste Management Act.
4.4. Service Levels.
4.4.1. Contractor will continuously monitor each Service in order to identify, measure and report and
correct problems and to ensure that Contractor is meeting or exceeding the following service
levels (the “Service Levels”):
(a) all service levels set out in this Agreement, including in the applicable Statement of Work;
(b) if Contractor is providing a service similar to services performed by Contractor prior to the
start of the applicable SOW Term, all additional service levels for such service that
Contractor achieved prior to the start of the applicable SOW Term; and
(c) if no service level is provided for a Service or component thereof, all performance levels
and measurements for such Service or component that are industry best practices,
provided that in the event of a conflict between any service levels, the highest service level
standard will apply. Contractor will notify MMBC in writing immediately if Contractor knows that
Contractor has failed, or believes Contractor will fail, to achieve a Service Level.
4.4.2. Contractor recognizes that Contractor’s failure to meet a Service Level will have a material
adverse impact on the business and operations of MMBC and that damages resulting from
Contractor’s failure to meet a Service Level may not be capable of precise determination. As such
(and without limiting MMBC’s rights or remedies), MMBC will be entitled to any express remedies
for Contractor’s failure to meet a Service Level (each such failure a “Service Level Failure”) that
may be set out in Schedule 4.4 or the applicable Statement of Work. Contractor agrees that it is
obligated to meet all Service Levels, even if no express remedy for a failure to meet such Service
Level is provided in Schedule 4.4 or in a Statement of Work.
4.4.3. Upon MMBC’s request, and in any event at least once per year, MMBC will meet with Contractor
(which meeting may be in person or by phone as determined by MMBC) to review and discuss
Contractor’s performance level of the Services and Service Levels.
4.5. Contingency Planning. Without limiting Contractor’s liability for performance of its obligations
under this Agreement, Contractor will implement and maintain throughout the Term such
contingency measures as may be appropriate, in MMBC’s sole discretion (acting reasonably),
including a comprehensive business continuity plan (the “Business Continuity Plan”), to
continue the performance of its obligations under this Agreement under various scenarios
including equipment failure, fuel shortage, strike, road closures (including due to weather,
construction or otherwise), fire, pandemic, quarantine, and natural disasters. MMBC will have the
right, upon demand from time to time, to review the Business Continuity Plan. Contractor will
update its Business Continuity Plan at least once each year and in the event of any material
change in operations or circumstance. Contractor will invoke its Business Continuity Plan where
necessary due to any incident or event, including an event of Force Majeure, that has the
potential to have a material impact on Contractor’s ability to provide any material part of the
Services for any material period of time, or upon the request of MMBC. Without limiting
Contractors’ obligations under this Agreement, whenever an incident or event that invokes the
Business Continuity Plan also impacts other services provided by Contractor, and as a result
Contractor is allocating resources or implementing temporary service changes or workarounds,
Contractor will treat MMBC and the Services no less favourably than any other services it
provides, or any of its other customers, in the allocation of such resources or in the
implementation of such temporary service changes or workarounds
- 7 -
DOCS 12280687
4.6. Labour Disruption.
4.6.1. Contractor will provide MMBC with at least 30 days prior written notice of the expirations of any
labour agreement and Contractor will include, with such notice, an assessment of the likelihood of
a Labour Disruption (as defined below).
4.6.2. In the event that a labour disruption of any kind causes a reduction in Service Levels (a “Labour
Disruption”), Contractor will inform MMBC within four hours by phone and e-mail of the nature
and scope of the disruption, as well as Contractor’s immediate plans to invoke any or all of its
Business Continuity Plan.
4.6.3. Without limiting Contractor’s obligations under this Agreement, where a Labour Disruption also
impacts other services provided by Contractor, and as a result Contractor is allocating resources
or implementing temporary service changes or workarounds, Contractor will treat MMBC and the
Services no less favourably than any other services it provides, or any of its other customers, in
the allocation of such resources or in the implementation of such temporary service changes or
workarounds (for example, if Contractor provides collection Services hereunder and other
collection services, and Contractor proposed to provide temporary drop-off sites in respect of its
other collection services, then Contractor will also proposed to provide such sites in respect of the
Services hereunder).
4.6.4. MMBC will have the right to make an equitable reduction to any Fees to reflect the value of any
Services not received by MMBC due to a Labour Disruption.
4.6.5. In the event that a Labour Disruption lasts more than seven days, and for so long as the Labour
Disruption continues, MMBC will have the right to terminate this Agreement or any Statements of
Work, for cause, immediately upon delivery of written notice of termination by MMBC to
Contractor.
SECTION 5. PAYMENT
5.1. Fees. In consideration of the complete and proper fulfillment of Contractor’s obligations in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, MMBC will pay Contractor the
amounts set forth in any Statement of Work (the “Fees”). Except as expressly set out in a
Statement of Work, there will be no other amounts payable by MMBC to Contractor in respect of
the Services or this Agreement, including any amounts for expenses or costs of travel, personnel,
fuel, equipment, or facilities relating to the Services or this Agreement.
5.2. Set-Off. MMBC may set-off and deduct from any amounts payable to Contractor: (a) any amounts
owing by Contractor to MMBC pursuant to this Agreement or any other agreement between
Contractor and MMBC, including any Service Level Failure Credits; and (b) any costs incurred by
MMBC in collecting any amounts owing by Contractor to MMBC pursuant to this Agreement or
any other agreement between the parties. The failure by MMBC to set-off or deduct any amount
from an invoiced payment will not constitute a waiver of MMBC’s right to set-off, deduct or collect
such amount.
5.3. Invoicing.
5.3.1. Submission of Claim - Unless otherwise set out in a Statement of Work, Contractor will submit
claims using the MMBC claims reporting portal, or through such other method as MMBC may
designate. MMBC will review submitted claims and will issue a purchase order to Contractor for
valid approved claims.
5.3.2. Generation of Invoice - After receipt of a purchase order from MMBC, Contractor will invoice
MMBC for the validated claim, with reference to the issued purchase order; provided that MMBC
- 8 -
DOCS 12280687
may, at its discretion, choose to issue payment to the Contractor based on the approved
purchase order without the need for Contractor to submit an invoice. Contractor will send invoices
to the following contact (as may be updated by MMBC from time to time):
●
●
●
●
Attention: ●,
or preferably electronically to ●
5.3.3. Late Submission - Contractor must submit all claims within 30 days of the performance of the
applicable Services, and all invoices (where required to be submitted by MMBC) within 30 days of
the purchase order date. In no event will MMBC be liable for payment of any claim submitted
more than 90 days after the performance of the applicable Services, or payment of any invoice
submitted more than 90 days after the purchase order date.
5.4. Taxes. Except where otherwise noted, the Fees exclude all applicable sales, goods and
services, value added, use or other commodity taxes that may be lawfully imposed upon the
Services; where Contractor clearly and separately itemizes such taxes on Contractor’s invoice to
MMBC, MMBC will pay and Contractor will remit such taxes to the appropriate taxing authority.
On request, Contractor will provide reasonable assistance to MMBC to challenge the validity of
any tax imposed on it due to this Agreement. If it is determined that MMBC paid Contractor an
amount for tax that was not due, Contractor will refund the amount (plus any interest earned on it)
to MMBC. The parties will cooperate with each other to enable each party to determine its tax
liabilities accurately and to reduce such liabilities to the extent permitted by Applicable Law.
5.5. Withholding Taxes. MMBC may deduct or withhold from any payment(s) made to Contractor any
amount that MMBC is required to deduct or withhold in accordance with Applicable Law, including
administrative practice (“Withheld Taxes”) and will remit such Withheld Taxes to the appropriate
taxing authority in a timely manner. All such Withheld Taxes will be treated as having been paid
to Contractor by MMBC.
5.6. Payment. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any Statement of Work,
MMBC will pay Contractor, via electronic funds transfer, the undisputed Fees for the Services
within 30 days of the invoice date. Contractor will provide MMBC with complete and accurate
billing and contact information, including all information required by MMBC to effect electronic
funds transfers and a billing email address to which MMBC may send submission reports and
purchase orders. Contractor will promptly provide MMBC with any updates to such billing and
contact information.
5.7. No Volume Commitment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreement, Contractor
acknowledges that MMBC makes no representation or warranty as to the nature, timing, quality,
quantity or volume of Services required from Contractor under this Agreement or the
compensation that may be earned by Contractor, including as to any amounts of materials to be
collected or managed through post-collection services by a Contractor.
SECTION 6. PERSONNEL
6.1. Suitable Personnel. Upon MMBC’s request, Contractor will promptly investigate any written
complaint from MMBC regarding any unsatisfactory performance by any of Contractor’s
personnel (including employees of a subcontractor or agent) and take immediate corrective
action. If the offending conduct is repeated, MMBC may require that such person be removed
from all performance of additional work for MMBC. Removal of such person will be addressed by
Contractor immediately.
- 9 -
DOCS 12280687
6.2. Key Personnel. Contractor must (a) employ those people described as key personnel (“Key
Personnel”) in any Statement of Work in the roles described in any Statement of Work and
ensure that the Key Personnel maintain those roles; not replace any Key Personnel without
MMBC’s prior informed consent unless the person: (i) dies, becomes ill or incapacitated so as to
be unable to perform their role; (ii) is terminated for cause or just cause; or (iii) resigns from
Contractor’s employment (other than to be employed by an associated entity of Contractor); and
(c) ensure that any people replacing Key Personnel with the consent of MMBC, have at least
equivalent ability, experience and expertise as the Key Personnel replaced.
6.3. Subcontracting. Contractor will not delegate or subcontract all or any part of Contractor’s
obligations under this Agreement to anyone without the prior written consent of MMBC, including
that MMBC’s prior written consent is required by Contractor to continue to delegate or
subcontract to a person following a change in control (including a sale of all or substantially all
assets) of such person. The delegation or subcontracting of all or any part of Contractor’s
obligations under this Agreement will not relieve Contractor from any obligation or liability
hereunder. Any breach of this Agreement by any delegate or subcontractor will be deemed to be
a breach of this Agreement by Contractor.
SECTION 7. REPORTING AND AUDIT
7.1. Record Keeping. During the Term and thereafter until the later of three years (or such longer
period as may be required by Applicable Law) or the date all disputes or other matters relating to
this Agreement are resolved, Contractor will keep and maintain complete and accurate data,
records, and documents in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently
applied to support and document all claims and amounts becoming payable to Contractor by
MMBC hereunder, and all data, records, and documents relating to the performance of the
Services, and compliance with Contractor’s obligations under this Agreement.
7.2. Reporting. In addition to any other reporting obligations under this Agreement or a Statement of
Work, Contractor will provide the following reporting to MMBC:
(a) at least every two weeks (or such other period as may be set out in a Statement of Work),
Contractor will report, through MMBC’s claims reporting portal, or through such other
method as MMBC may designate, the reporting information set out in the applicable
Statement of Work for Services performed. Such reporting may include applicable sites;
amount, type, or weight of materials; and service dates;
(b) upon such frequency as MMBC may request (but not more frequently than monthly),
reports pertaining to the performance of the Services and Contractor’s other obligations
under this Agreement reasonably sufficient to permit MMBC to monitor and manage
Contractor’s performance; and
(c) such additional reports as MMBC may reasonably identify from time to time to be
generated and delivered by Contractor on an ad hoc or periodic basis.
7.3. Audit.
7.3.1. Without limiting any other audit right, during the Term and for the period Contractor is required to
comply with Section 7.1, MMBC (or its audit representative) will have the right upon reasonable
prior written notice to audit and inspect: (a) any site, facility, vehicle, or equipment relating to the
performance of the Services; and (b) all data, records, documentation and other information of
Contractor relating to this Agreement or the Services, in order to verify Contractor’s performance
and compliance with its obligations under this Agreement, including that MMBC (or its audit
representative) may conduct a financial audit to verify the amounts paid or payable by MMBC
hereunder. If any audit reveals that MMBC has been overbilled, Contractor will reimburse the
- 10 -
DOCS 12280687
overcharged amount to MMBC with interest at prime plus 1%. If the overbilled amount exceeds
five percent of the total amounts charged during the time period audited, Contractor will bear all of
MMBC’s costs in relation to such audit.
7.3.2. Without limiting any other audit right, during the Term and for the period Contractor is required to
comply with Section 7.1, Contractor will make the data, records, and documents retained
pursuant to Section 7.1 available for inspection or audit by MMBC (or its audit representative)
upon MMBC’s request.
7.3.3. Without limiting any other audit right, during the Term MMBC (or its audit representative) may
conduct composition studies, without notice, of any materials collected, transported, processed,
or otherwise handled under this Agreement, at any stage of the Services and regardless of the
location of such materials.
7.3.4. Contractor will co-operate with and provide to MMBC (or its audit representative) such reasonable
assistance as they require in order to exercise the rights set out in this Section 7.3. Contractor will
ensure that it has agreements in place with all subcontractors to enable MMBC (or its audit
representative) to directly exercise the audit rights under this Section 7.3 in respect of such
subcontractor.
SECTION 8. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
8.1. Contractor Representations and Warranties. Contractor represents and warrants to and
covenants with MMBC that:
(a) it is duly incorporated, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of its jurisdiction
of incorporation, and is duly qualified to do business in all jurisdictions in which qualification is
necessary in order to transact its business and perform its obligations set out in this
Agreement;
(b) it has full power, authority, and right to execute and deliver this Agreement, to make the
representations, warranties, and covenants set out herein, and to perform its obligations
under this Agreement in accordance with its terms. This Agreement has been validly
executed by an authorized representative of Contractor, and constitutes a valid and legally
binding and enforceable obligation of Contractor;
(c) it has and will, at his own expense, procure all permits, certificates and licenses required by
Applicable Law for the performance of the Services;
(d) the representations, warranties, covenants, claims, inducements, and agreements made by
Contractor in Contractor’s written response to any procurement process related to the
Services or this Agreement are true and correct as of the Effective Date, including those in
any proposal submitted in response to a request for proposals and any statements or claims
in any completed and submitted questionnaire in response to any offer of a collection
financial incentive; and
(e) it has not given and will not give commissions, payments, kickbacks, gifts, lavish or extensive
entertainment, or other inducements of more than minimal value to any employee or agent of
MMBC in connection with this Agreement and, to the best of its knowledge, no officer,
director, employee, agent or representative of Contractor has given any such commissions,
payments, kickbacks, gifts, entertainment or other inducements to any employee or agent of
MMBC.
- 11 -
DOCS 12280687
SECTION 9. CONFIDENTIALITY
9.1. Confidentiality Covenant. The Receiving Party will: (i) take all measures reasonably required to
maintain the confidentiality and security of the Confidential Information of the Disclosing Party; (ii)
not use or reproduce Confidential Information for any purpose, other than as reasonably required
to exercise or perform its rights or obligations under this Agreement; (iii) not disclose any
Confidential Information other than to employees, agents or subcontractors of the Receiving Party
(“Representatives”) to the extent, and only to the extent, they have a need to know the
Confidential Information in order for Receiving Party to exercise its rights or perform its
obligations under this Agreement and who are bound by a legal obligation to protect the received
Confidential Information from unauthorized use or disclosure; and (iv) be responsible for any
breach of this Agreement by any of its Representatives.
9.2. Legal Requirement. Notwithstanding Section 9.1, the Receiving Party may disclose Confidential
Information of the Disclosing Party to the extent required by a court of competent jurisdiction or
other governmental authority or otherwise as required by Applicable Law, provided that, unless
prohibited by Applicable Law, the Receiving Party gives the Disclosing Party an opportunity to
oppose the disclosure or to seek a protective order protecting such Confidential Information prior
to any such disclosure.
9.3. Return of Confidential Information. Upon expiry or termination of this Agreement, or upon request
by the Disclosing Party, the Receiving Party will return to the Disclosing Party, or irrecoverably
destroy, any Confidential Information of the Disclosing Party.
9.4. Privacy Laws. Contractor will not access, collect, use, disclose, dispose of or otherwise handle
information of or about individuals that is subject to Applicable Laws relating to privacy (“Privacy
Laws”) in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, except: (a) to the extent
necessary to perform the Service; (b) in accordance with all Privacy Laws; and (b) in a manner
that enables MMBC to comply with all Privacy Laws, including that Contractor will obtain
appropriate consents from the applicable individuals to allow Contractor and MMBC to exercise
their rights and to perform their obligations under this Agreement as they relate to such
information. Unless prohibited by Applicable Law, Contractor will immediately notify MMBC of any
demand, or request by a third party (including any government or a regulatory authority) for the
disclosure of any information of MMBC that is subject to Privacy Laws, and, to the maximum
extent permitted by law, will oppose, seek judicial relief of and appeal any such demand or
request. Contractor will immediately notify MMBC if Contractor becomes aware that Contractor
has failed to comply with Privacy Laws in connection with the performance of this Agreement.
SECTION 10. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
10.1. Ownership. Except as otherwise specifically provided in any Statement of Work, or as otherwise
agreed to by the parties in writing, the Work Product, together with any Intellectual Property
Rights therein will be owned by MMBC; accordingly, Contractor will assign and hereby assigns to
MMBC all rights, title and interest it may have from time to time in the Work Products effective
upon creation. During the Term, Contractor will have a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to
use the Work Products for the sole purpose of providing and completing the Services. Contractor
will obtain from all individuals involved in the development of the Work Product an express and
irrevocable waiver in favour of MMBC, its successors and assigns of any and all moral rights
arising under the Copyright Act (Canada) as amended (or any successor legislation of similar
force and effect) or under similar legislation in other jurisdictions or at common law that
Contractor or such individuals, as authors, have with respect to the Work Products.
SECTION 11. INDEMNITY
11.1. Indemnity. Contractor will indemnify and save harmless MMBC, its Affiliates, and their respective
directors, officers, contractors, employees, volunteers, and agents from and against any and all
- 12 -
DOCS 12280687
manner of actions or causes of actions, damages, costs, losses or expenses of whatever kind
(including related legal fees on a solicitor and client basis) which may be sustained or incurred by
reason of or directly or indirectly arising out of any act or omission of Contractor or any person for
whom the Contractor is, at law or under this Agreement, responsible, in relation to the Services or
this Agreement, including without limitation arising out of any (i) breach of this Agreement; (ii)
damages to persons or property, personal injury or death; (iii) breach of Applicable Law; (iv) spill,
leak, contamination, or other environmental impact; or (v) claim that any Services or Work
Product constitute an infringement, violation or misappropriation of any third party’s right,
including any Intellectual Property Right.
SECTION 12. INSURANCE AND PERFORMANCE BOND
12.1. Insurance. During the Term and for any additional period following the end of the Term set out in
in Schedule 12.1, Contractor will have and maintain in force in Canada, and will cause it
subcontractors to have and maintain in force in Canada, at a minimum, the insurance coverages
set out in Schedule 12.1, and Contractor will (and will cause its subcontractors to) otherwise
comply with the provisions of Schedule 12.1. Failure to secure such insurance coverage, or the
failure to comply fully with any of Schedule 12.1 will be deemed to be a material breach of this
Agreement. None of the requirements contained herein as to types, limits and approval of
insurance coverage to be maintained by Contractor are intended to and will not in any manner
limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations assumed by Contractor under this Agreement.
12.2. Performance Bond. Contractor will comply with any performance bond requirements that may be
set out in a Statement of Work.
SECTION 13. TERMINATION
13.1. Termination by MMBC for Convenience. Either party may, at any time and without cause,
terminate this Agreement or any Statements of Work for convenience upon giving the other party
180 days’ prior written notice. Upon receipt of a notice of termination by either party, Contractor
will commence the orderly wind down of the Services contracted hereunder, prepare its statement
of account on the basis of the effective date specified in the notice, and immediately return all
Work Product to MMBC, whether completed or not.
13.2. Termination by MMBC for Cause. MMBC may elect to terminate this Agreement or any
Statements of Work by providing written notice of such termination, effective immediately or at
such other time set out in the notice of termination, to Contractor in the event that:
(a) Contractor becomes subject to proceedings in bankruptcy or insolvency, voluntarily or
involuntarily, if a receiver is appointed with or without Contractor’s consent, if Contractor
assigns its property to its creditors or performs any other act of bankruptcy or if the other
party becomes insolvent and cannot pay its debts when they are due;
(b) Contractor commits a material breach of this Agreement and does not cure such breach
within 30 days of receipt of notice thereof from MMBC;
(c) Contractor fails to provide all or a material portion of the Services for a consecutive period
of more than seven days;
(d) Contractor’s performance creates a hazard to public health or safety or to the
environment;
(e) Contractor is assessed Service Level Failure Credits in excess of $10,000 during any
rolling six month period; or
- 13 -
DOCS 12280687
(f) any other termination right described in this Agreement or a Statement of Work is
triggered.
13.3. Termination by Contractor for Cause. Contractor may elect to terminate this Agreement by
providing written notice of such termination, effective immediately, to MMBC in the event that
MMBC fails to pay undisputed Fees, as they become due, in an amount that exceeds the
aggregate Fees invoiced by Contractor under the three most recent prior monthly consolidated
invoices issued by Contractor and MMBC does not cure such non-payment within 60 days of
receipt of notice thereof from Contractor.
13.4. Change in Applicable Law. MMBC may elect to terminate this Agreement or any Statements of
Work by providing written notice of such termination, effective immediately or at such other time
set out in the notice of termination, to Contractor in the event that there is a material change in
Applicable Law applicable to MMBC or the Services, including if there is a material change to an
approved plan under the Recycling Regulations of the Environment Management Act (British
Columbia) or if any new plan (whether submitted by MMBC or any other person) is approved
thereunder.
13.5. Disruption of Service. The parties expressly agree that the failure or inability of Contractor to
perform its obligations under this Agreement will constitute a breach hereunder, and that any
costs and expenses reasonably incurred by MMBC for any replacement services as a result of
such a failure or inability will be considered direct damages hereunder.
13.6. Termination Assistance. Upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, Contractor will
continue to provide Services hereunder and will make reasonable efforts to cooperate and assist,
according to mutually agreeable terms and conditions, to ensure that there is an orderly transfer
of the Services required by MMBC pursuant to this Agreement.
13.7. Survival. The following sections will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement,
regardless of the reasons for its expiration or termination, in addition to any other provision which
by law or by its nature should survive: SECTION 9 (Confidentiality), , SECTION 11 (Indemnity),
SECTION 12 (Insurance and Performance Bond) [NTD: This reference to Section 12 to be
removed by MMBC if Section 7 of Schedule 12 is not applicable.] SECTION 14 (Dispute
Resolution) and SECTION 15 (General Provisions) in their entirety, and Sections 7.1, 7.3, 10.1,
13.6, and 13.7. The expiry or termination of this Agreement will not affect the rights of any party
to make a claim for damages arising from a breach of any provision of this Agreement which
occurred prior to such expiry or termination.
SECTION 14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
14.1. Disputes. Any dispute that touches upon the validity, construction, meaning, performance or
effect of this Agreement or the rights or liabilities of the parties or any matter arising out of, or in
connection with this Agreement (a “Dispute”), between MMBC and Contractor will be addressed
as follows:
(a) The parties will first attempt to resolve the Dispute through representatives from each of
MMBC and Contractor who work most closely with each other on related matters, within
15 days after written notice of the Dispute was first given, or as otherwise agreed upon.
(b) If the Dispute is not resolved at the first stage, either party may escalate the Dispute to the
senior MMBC and Contractor representatives, who will meet and work together in good
faith to attempt to resolve the Dispute within a further 15 days, or as otherwise agreed
upon.
- 14 -
DOCS 12280687
(c) If the Dispute is not resolved through the discussion above within the time period set out
above, then either party may escalate the Dispute to non-binding third party mediation.
The mediation will take place at a time and place mutually agreed by the parties and will
be led by a third-party facilitator jointly selected by the parties (who, unless otherwise
mutually agreed by the parties, will be an individual accredited to provide such services). If
the Dispute remains unresolved within 45 days from the point at which a party escalated
the Dispute to non-binding third party mediation, either party may escalate the Dispute by
delivering a written notice to the other party referring the matter to binding arbitration.
(d) If the parties are unable to resolve the Dispute within the above period, unless otherwise
mutually agreed by the parties in writing, the Dispute will be conclusively settled by
means of private and confidential binding arbitration, to the exclusion of courts of law.
The arbitration will take place before a single arbitrator in Vancouver in the English
language and will otherwise be undertaken under the auspices and rules of the British
Columbia Arbitration & Mediation Institute. The decision of the arbitrator will be final and
binding on the parties and will not be subject to appeal on any grounds whatsoever, and
will be enforceable against MMBC and Contractor as the case may be. MMBC may from
time to time establish a panel of approved arbitrators for the purposes of this Section,
whose names will be provided to Contractor with whom MMBC has a dispute. The
arbitrator will be chosen from this panel, unless MMBC and Contractor mutually agree
otherwise.
(e) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section 14.1, either party may start
litigation proceedings in a court of law at any time for an application for a temporary
restraining order or other form of injunctive relief and each party hereby attorns to the non-
exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the province of British Columbia for such purpose.
SECTION 15. GENERAL PROVISIONS
15.1. Relationship of the Parties. It is acknowledged by the parties hereto that the Contractor is being
retained by MMBC in the capacity of independent contractor and not as an employee of MMBC.
The Contractor and MMBC acknowledge and agree that this Agreement does not create a
partnership, joint venture, agency, or other special relationship between them. Except as may be
specified in writing, neither party will have the power to obligate or bind the other party. Personnel
supplied by Contractor will work exclusively for Contractor and will not for any purpose by
considered employees or agents of MMBC.
15.2. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by Contractor in whole or in part, without
MMBC’ prior written consent. Any attempt by Contractor to assign any of the rights of this
Agreement without such prior written consent is void. Any assignment by Contractor occurring by
operation of law such as on a bankruptcy or amalgamation will be deemed an event of default
under this Agreement, entitling MMBC to exercise all of the rights and remedies it would
otherwise be entitled to exercise for an assignment made without consent. MMBC may assign
this Agreement to any person at any time without restriction or consent.
15.3. Force Majeure. Neither party to this Agreement or any Statement of Work will be liable to the
other party for any failure or delay in fulfilling an obligation hereunder, if said failure or delay is
attributable to a fire, act of God, war, riot, civil disturbance, earthquake, flood, or court or
governmental order beyond such party’s reasonable control (“Force Majeure”). The parties agree
that the deadline for fulfilling the obligation in question will be extended for a period of time equal
to that of the continuance of the Force Majeure. The party to which the Force Majeure applies will
use all commercially reasonable efforts to minimize the effect of the Force Majeure on its
performance under this Agreement or any Statement of Work.
15.4. Governing Law. This Agreement and any Statement of Work will be governed by and construed
in accordance with the laws of the Province of British Columbia and the laws of Canada
- 15 -
DOCS 12280687
applicable therein without regard to conflicts of law that would apply a different body of law. The
parties hereby irrevocably attorn to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of
British Columbia for any legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, any Statement of Work
or the performance of the obligations hereunder.
15.5. Notices. All notices, requests, demands or other communications (collectively “Notices”) given
by one party to the other party, will be in writing, in the english language, and will be deemed duly
given (i) when delivered by hand; (ii) when sent by facsimile (with receipt confirmed), (iii) except
for a notice of termination permitted under this Agreement, by e-mail (with receipt confirmed),
(iii),on the designated day of delivery after being given to an express overnight courier with a
reliable system for tracking delivery, or (iv) six (6) days after the day of mailing, when mailed by
Canada Post, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid, and
addressed as follows:
To Contractor:
●
Fax No.: ●
E-mail: ●
Attention: ●
To MMBC:
●
Fax No.: ●
E-mail: ●
Attention: ●
or to such other address as may be designated by notice given by either party to the other.
15.6. Further Assurances. The parties will do, execute or deliver all such further acts, documents and
things as the other party may reasonably require from time to time for the purpose of giving effect
to this Agreement and will use reasonable efforts and take all such steps as may be reasonably
within its power to implement to their full extent the provisions of this Agreement.
15.7. No Publicity. Contractor will not use the name or trademarks of MMBC nor make any statement
or issue any advertisement, publicity release, press releases to the public or the media with
respect to this Agreement or MMBC, unless it has obtained MMBC’s prior written approval,
including that Contractor will not disclose or otherwise publicly report on any Service performance
metrics (including volumes of material collected or processed).
15.8. Timing. Time will be of the essence of this Agreement and of every part hereof and no extension
or variation of this Agreement will operate as a waiver of this provision.
15.9. Severability. If any provision, or portion thereof, of this Agreement or any Statement of Work is
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, such
determination will not impair or affect the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining
provisions of this Agreement or any Statement of Work, and each provision, or portion thereof, is
hereby declared to be separate, severable and distinct.
- 16 -
DOCS 12280687
15.10. Waiver. A waiver of any provision of this Agreement or any Statement of Work will only be valid if
provided in writing and will only be applicable to the specific incident and occurrence so waived.
The failure by either party to insist upon the strict performance of this Agreement or any
Statement of Work, or to exercise any term hereof, will not act as a waiver of any right, promise or
term, which will continue in full force and effect.
15.11. Remedies Cumulative. No single or partial exercise of any right or remedy under this Agreement
or any Statement of Work will preclude any other or further exercise of any other right or remedy
in this Agreement or any Statement of Work or as provided at law or in equity. Rights and
remedies provided in this Agreement or any Statement of Work are cumulative and not exclusive
of any right or remedy provided at law or in equity.
15.12. Amendment. This Agreement or any Statement of Work may only be amended by written
agreement duly executed by authorized representatives of the parties.
15.13. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and any Statement of Work will constitute the entire
agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and will replace all prior
promises or understandings, oral or written. There is no representation, warranty, collateral term
or condition or collateral agreement affecting this Agreement, other than as expressed in writing
in this Agreement. Any purchase order or other instrument of Contractor accompanying either a
Statement of Work, a Contractor payment or otherwise is for Contractor’s internal use only and its
terms will not alter or amend the terms of this Agreement.
15.14. Counterparts. This Agreement and any Statement of Work may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together will
be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed signature page to
this Agreement or any Statement of Work by any party by electronic transmission will be as
effective as delivery of a manually executed copy of this Agreement or the Statement of Work by
such party.
(Signature page follows.)
- 17 -
DOCS 12280687
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the Effective Date.
MULTI-MATERIAL BC SOCIETY [CONTRACTOR]
Per: SAMPLE – NOT FOR SIGNATURE
Per: SAMPLE – NOT FOR SIGNATURE
Title: _______________________________
Title: __________________________________
- 18 -
DOCS 12280687
SCHEDULE 4.2
MMBC POLICIES AND STANDARDS
As of the Effective Date, the following are MMBC Polices and Standards:
1. MMBC’s Weight and Measurement Standards, a copy of which is set out below:
MMBC requires that PPP collected, transported and processed be weighed, and that accurate weights be
reported to MMBC.
Weight is defined by MMBC as the following:
Gross Weight means the weight of the truck or container plus its contents, measured in
kilograms unless otherwise noted.
Tare Weight means the weight of the empty truck or container and any equipment without its
contents, measured in kilograms unless otherwise noted.
Net Weight is the weight of the contents of the container or truck, calculated as Gross Weight
minus Tare Weight, measured in kilograms unless otherwise noted.
The above weights will always exclude the weight of the vehicle and any contents other than the PPP
collected.
The following equation must always be true.
Net Weight = Gross Weight – Tare Weight
Measurement Canada has produced a comprehensive guide on taking and recording weights, available
at http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/mc-mc.nsf/eng/lm00205.html.
Collector Responsibilities
All loads must be documented in a manner specified by MMBC, as amended by MMBC from time to time,
including a certified scale ticket. The certified scale ticket may be provided by the Designated Post-
Collection Service Provider to the Collector if the weighing is performed by the Post-Collector. If the
Collector is performing the actual weighing, the Post-Collector responsibilities noted below must be
followed by the Collector.
Collectors are to maintain the following Net Weight records and provide upon request to MMBC:
• Curbside Collection: Tonnage by collection date and truck number
• Multi-Family Building Collection: Tonnage by collection date and truck number
• Depot Collection: Tonnage by the date on which the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider
removed the PPP from the Depot
Post-Collector Responsibilities
The Designated Post-Collection Service Provider must have the necessary equipment to accurately
weigh all PPP received regardless of material category and container type, including the ability to subtract
the container weight (Tare deduction) from the Gross Weight to report Net Weight to MMBC.
All loads must be documented in a manner specified by MMBC, as amended by MMBC from time to time,
including a certified scale ticket provided by the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider, with Depot
name and address, Designated Post-Collection Service Provider name and address, date, time, truck
number, Net Weight by material type (in accordance with the material type classifications set out in
Exhibit A to Attachment 5), and such other information as MMBC may designate (collectively, “Claim
- 19 -
DOCS 12280687
Information”). Standard Tare Weights for specific trucks may only be used on specific written permission
of MMBC.
At least every two weeks, the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider will report the Claim
Information through MMBC’s claims reporting portal, or through such other method as MMBC may
designate.
A note on material en-route:
A Post-Collection transporter may deliver PPP to a consolidation or transfer point prior to delivering
it to the processing site. In such cases Net Weights must be measured and recorded for reporting
purposes at the consolidation or transfer point by the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider
to MMBC.
Post-Collection Service Providers may repack PPP at consolidation or transfer point prior to
transporting it to the processing site. If contamination is found and discarded during the repacking
process then the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider must report the quantity of
contamination (Net Weight) and the management method to MMBC in the final diversion report.
The Designated Post-Collection Service Provider must provide diversion reports to MMBC. All recycling
and disposal activities must be detailed on the diversion reports, and Net Weights of material directed to
recycling, recovery and disposal must be provided. The total Net Weight of PPP recycled, recovered and
disposed recorded on diversion reports should match the total Net Weight of PPP received. These totals
will be reviewed by MMBC on a regular basis as part of its chain of custody audits.
- 20 -
DOCS 12280687
2. MMBC’s Packaging and Printed Paper Description (the “PPP Description”), a copy of which is
set out in the table below:
Material Type Examples of PPP Accepted
Examples of
PPP Not
Accepted
Category 1 - Printed Papers
Newspapers Daily and community newspapers
Newspaper Inserts Newsprint advertising inserts and flyers
Magazines Daily, weekly, monthly magazines; travel or promotional
magazines
Catalogues Retailer product catalogues; automotive and real estate
guides/catalogues
Telephone Directories Phone books; newsprint directories
Other Printed Media Notepads; loose leaf paper; non-foil gift wrap
Residential Printed Paper White or coloured paper for general use, printers and
copiers
Miscellaneous Printed
Papers Blank and printed envelops; greeting cards
Category 2 - Old Corrugated Cardboard (OCC)
Old Corrugated Cardboard Grocery store/liquor store boxes; pizza boxes
Category 3 (a) – Other Paper Packaging (containing liquids when sold)
Paper Cup (hot) (polycoated
liner) Non-foam paper cups
Paper Cup (hot)
(biodegradable liner) Non-foam paper cups
Paper Cup (cold) (waxed) Non-foam paper cups
Paper Cup (cold) (2-sided
polycoated) Non-foam paper cups
Polycoated Milk Cartons Milk, soy, rice milk and cream cartons
Aseptic Containers Milk, soy, rice milk, cream, soup, broth and sauce
containers, typically about 1 litre in size
Multi-laminated Paper
Packaging
Microwavable paper containers; paper bowls/cups for
soup
Category 3 (b) – Other Paper Packaging (not containing liquids when sold)
Old Boxboard (OBB) Cereal boxes; shoe boxes; tissue boxes; paper towel
and toilet paper tubes; detergent boxes
Wet Strength Boxboard Carrier boxes for soft drink containers; some frozen
food paper packaging
Moulded Pulp Egg cartons; formed coffee take put trays; paper based
flower pots
- 21 -
DOCS 12280687
Material Type Examples of PPP Accepted
Examples of
PPP Not
Accepted
Kraft Papers Paper bags
Polycoated Boxboard Some frozen food packaging
Category 4 - Polyethylene (PE) Film Packaging
HDPE Films Some retail bags; some frozen vegetable bags
LDPE/LLDPE Films
Grocery bags; newspaper bags; dry cleaning bags;
bread bags; frozen vegetable bags; soft drink case over-
wrap; garden product bags; paper towel over-wrap;
diaper and feminine hygiene product outer bags
Stretch film
Category 5 - Polystyrene (PS) Foam Packaging
PS Clamshells (EPS) Egg cartons
PS Trays/Plates (EPS) Deli and take-out food trays
PS Meat Trays (EPS) White and coloured meat trays
PS Hot Drink Cups (EPS) Foam drink cups
PS Cushion Packaging
(EPS)
White foam cushion packaging used for appliances,
computers, TVs, printers
Foam packaging
peanuts
Category 6 - Other Plastic Packaging
PETE Bottles (non-
beverage)
Salad dressing bottles; edible oil bottles; dish soap or
mouthwash bottles; window cleaners
PETE Jars Peanut butter containers; wide-mouth jars for nuts
PETE Clamshells Bakery trays; pre-made fruit and salad packages; egg
cartons
PETE Trays Single serve meals; deli and bakery items; housewares
and hardware products
PETE Tubs & Lids Plastic lids for some containers
PETE Cold Drink Cups Take–out drink cups
HDPE Bottles (non-
beverage)
Shampoo bottles, milk jugs; spring water containers;
bleach containers; vinegar containers; windshield
washer fluid containers; pill bottles
HDPE Jars Personal care products; pharmaceuticals, vitamin and
supplements containers
HDPE Pails Laundry detergent, ice cream pails Pails for
lubricants
HDPE Trays Single serve meals; deli and bakery items; housewares
and hardware products
HDPE Tubs & Lids Plastic lids for spreads and dairy containers
HDPE Planter Pots Plastic garden pots
PVC Bottles
Water bottles; travel sized personal and hair care
product bottles; household and automotive liquids
containers
- 22 -
DOCS 12280687
Material Type Examples of PPP Accepted
Examples of
PPP Not
Accepted
PVC Jars Peanut butter containers
PVC Trays Housewares and hardware products
PVC Tubs & Lids Plastic lids for some containers
LDPE Bottles (non-
beverage)
Hygienic, cosmetics and hair care containers
LDPE Jars Cosmetics containers
LDPE Tubs & Jars Plastic lids for spreads and dairy containers
PP Bottles (non-beverage)
Butter and margarine containers; translucent squeeze
bottles; travel sized personal and hair care product
bottles
PP Jars Cosmetics containers
PP Clamshells Hinged containers e.g. sanitary wipes
PP Trays Single serve meals; deli and bakery items; housewares
and hardware products
PP Tubs & Lids Large yogurt tubs; kitty litter containers; ice cream
containers
PP Cold Drink Cups Some cold drink cups
PP Planter Pots Garden planter pots
PS Bottles (non-beverage) Pharmaceuticals, vitamin and supplements containers
PS Clamshells (rigid) Clear clamshell containers such as berry, muffin and
sandwich containers
PS Trays (rigid) Clear rigid trays used for deli foods
PS Tubs & Lids (rigid) Dairy product tubs and lids
PS Tubs & Lids (high impact) Single serve yogurt containers
PS Cold Drink Cups (rigid) Clear rigid plastic drink cups
PS Planter Pots Some garden pots and trays
Other1 Plastic Bottles (non-
beverage) Bottles without a resin code or with resin code # 7
Other Plastic Jars Jars without a resin code or with resin code # 7
Other Plastic Clamshells Clamshells without a resin code or with resin code # 7
Other Plastic Trays Trays without a resin code or with resin code # 7
Other Plastic Tubs & Lids Tubs & lids without a resin code or with resin code # 7
Other Plastic Cold Drink
Cups
Cold drink cups without a resin code or with resin code #
7
1 ‘Other’ plastic packaging is typically: manufactured from a combination of recycled resins; manufactured with a
barrier layer; or, lacking a resin code mark.
- 23 -
DOCS 12280687
Material Type Examples of PPP Accepted
Examples of
PPP Not
Accepted
Other Plastic Planter Pots Planter pots without a resin code or with resin code # 7
Category 7 – Metal Packaging
Steel Cans (non-beverage) Steel dog food and vegetable cans; metal lids and
closures
Steel Aerosol Cans Food spray cans; solvent spray cans
Spiral Wound Cans (steel
ends)
Spiral wound containers for frozen juice, chips, cookie
dough, coffee, nuts
Aluminum Cans (non-
beverage) Cat food and other food cans
Aluminum Aerosol Cans Air freshener, deodorant and hairspray containers; food
spray cans; wax and polish spray cans
Aluminum Foil and Foil
Containers Foils wrap; pie plates; aluminum food trays
Bimetal Containers/Aerosols Lubricating oil spray cans; insulating foam spray cans;
pesticide spray cans
Category 8 – Glass Packaging
Clear Glass Bottles and Jars
(non-beverage)
Food containers; ketchup bottles; pickle jars; jam and
jelly containers; cosmetic jars
Coloured Glass Bottles and
Jars (non-beverage) Cooking oils; vinegar bottles; cosmetic containers
- 24 -
DOCS 12280687
SCHEDULE 4.4
SERVICE LEVEL METHODOLOGY
1. Contractor will measure and record all data reasonably required by MMBC to determine
Contractor’s performance of the Services against the applicable Service Levels. Contractor will
retain such records in accordance with Section 7.1 of the main terms of the Agreement. Upon
request, and upon such frequency as MMBC may indicate (which may not be more frequently
than monthly), Contractor will deliver to MMBC a report, in a form and format approved by
MMBC, setting out details of Contractor’s actual performance of the Services as measured
against each Service Level during the applicable reporting period.
2. In the event of a Service Level Failure in respect of a Service Level expressly set out in a
Statement of Work, Contractor will credit to MMBC the applicable Service Level Failure Credit set
out in such Statement of Work. Contractor agrees that Service Level Failure Credits compensate
MMBC in part for the reduced value of the Services actually provided by Contractor (and not as a
penalty or exclusive liquidated damages). Contractor agrees that the Service Level Credits are
only partial compensation for the damage that may be suffered by MMBC as a result of
Contractor’s failure to meet a Service Level and that payment of any Service Level Failure Credit
is without prejudice to any entitlement MMBC may have to damages or other remedies under this
Agreement, at law or in equity. Service Level Failure Credits will be due regardless of the manner
in which the Service Level Failure is identified (including where reported by Contractor or
identified by MMBC).
- 25 -
DOCS 12280687
SCHEDULE 12.1
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
1. Insurance Coverage. The insurance coverage required pursuant to Section 12.1 of the main
body of the Agreement is as follows:
(a) Comprehensive General Liability coverage with limits of not less than $5,000,000 (five
million dollars) per occurrence with a deductible not exceeding $100,000 per occurrence,
or, where Contractor is a local government, Contractor may self-insure for equivalent or
better coverage (in which case Contractor will respond to all claims, actions, demands,
expenses and losses by whomsoever made in the same manner as if commercial
comprehensive general liability insurance was purchased for same and as if MMBC were
included in such policy as an additional insured);
(b) Contractor will seek advice and obtain any necessary environmental impairment liability
insurance or other such policy as may be recommended by their insurance broker or
legal counsel to adequately protect against risks of environmental liability, with typical
environmental impairment liability insurance for the Services having a limit of not less
than $1,000,000 (one million dollars) per occurrence with a deductible not greater than
$100,000 (for clarity, neither the amount nor type of environmental impairment liability
insurance obtained by Contractor will in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and
obligations assumed by Contractor under this Agreement);
(c) Workers’ Compensation Insurance or Workplace Safety & Insurance coverage with the
applicable Provincial (including in all cases British Columbia) or Territorial Workplace
Safety & Insurance Board or Employer’s Liability Insurance or both with limits as required
by Applicable Law covering all Contractor personnel; and
(d) Such other insurance coverage as may be set out in a Statement of Work.
2. Requirements for Insurer. All insurers must be reputable and financially creditworthy insurers
with an A.M. Best financial strength rating of “A-” or higher (or equivalent rating by a similar
agency, in MMBC’s sole discretion).
3. MMBC as Additional Insured. Contractor will add MMBC as an additional insured on its
Commercial General Liability policy with the following language: “Multi-Material BC Society and
its affiliated entities, officers, partners, directors, employees, representatives and agents are
included as Additional Insureds for Comprehensive General Liability. Such coverage is primary
and non-contributing.”
4. Evidence of Insurance. Contractor will cause its insurers to issue to MMBC certificates of
insurance on the Effective Date, and once each calendar year thereafter, evidencing that the
coverages and policy endorsements required under this Agreement are maintained in force.
Where Contractor is a local government and opts to self-insure pursuant to Section 1(a),
Contractor will provide a written attestation stating and evidencing such self-insurance (including
evidence of authority and financial ability to self-insure), in a form acceptable to MMBC, on the
Effective Date and once each calendar year thereafter.
5. Changes to Insurance Coverage. Contractor will not reduce any insurance coverage below the
requirements set out in this Schedule without MMBC’s prior written consent. Contractor will
provide not less than 30 days’ notice to MMBC prior to any material change to its insurance
coverage or to its insurer.
6. Coverage Details. The insurance coverages under which MMBC is named as additional insured
will be primary, and all coverage will be non-contributing with respect to any other insurance or
- 26 -
DOCS 12280687
self insurance that may be maintained by MMBC. All coverage required by this Agreement will,
where allowed by Applicable Law, include a waiver of subrogation and a waiver of any insured-
versus-insured exclusion regarding MMBC.
7. Additional Period of Coverage. Contractor will continue to have and maintain in force the
insurance coverages set out in this Schedule, and Contractor will continue to comply with Section
12.1 of the main body of the Agreement and Schedule 12.1, beyond the end of the Term for an
additional [2] years thereafter. [NTD: If insurance obligations are not required following the
end of the Term, this Section 7 may be deleted by MMBC.]
MT DOCS 12526910
SCHEDULE [●]
STATEMENT OF WORK FOR CURBSIDE COLLECTION SERVICES PROVIDED BY LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
This Statement of Work is incorporated into and forms part of the Master Services Agreement made
between [●] (“Contractor”) and Multi-Material BC Society (“MMBC”) made as of [●] (the “Agreement”).
The effective date of this Statement of Work (the “SOW Effective Date”) is [●].
SECTION 1. Interpretation
1.1 Definitions. In this Statement of Work, the following terms will have the following meaning.
Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Statement of Work will have the respective
meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.
“Agreement” has the meaning set out on the first page of this Statement of Work.
“Container” means any blue bin, bag, open container or cart used for household storage and
curbside set-out of PPP in the performance of this Statement of Work.
“Corrugated Cardboard” means paper-based material consisting of a fluted corrugated sheet
and one or two flat linerboards.
“Curb” or “Curbside” means a location within one (1) metre of the Public Street or Private Road.
“Curbside Collection” has the meaning set out in Section 2.1.
“Curbside Household” means a self-contained dwelling unit providing accommodation to one or
more people, including single-family dwellings and buildings with up to four suites, where the
resident is expected to deliver PPP to the Curb for collection.
“Customer” means residents of Curbside Households within the Service Area.
“Designated Post-Collection Service Provider” means the delivery point, designated by
MMBC, for the Contractor-collected PPP.
“Industrial, Commercial and Institutional” or “ICI” means any operation or facility other than a
Curbside Household, including: industrial facilities such as warehouses, distribution centres,
manufacturing facilities; commercial facilities such as retail stores, offices, strip malls and
vacation facilities, such as hotels, motels, cottages, cabins and rental, co-operative, fractional
ownership, time-share or condominium accommodation associated with sports and leisure
facilities (e.g., ski resorts); and, institutional facilities such as schools, churches, community
buildings, local government buildings, arenas, libraries, fire halls, police stations and residences
at which medical care is provided, such as nursing homes, long-term care facilities and hospices.
“Missed Collection” means failure of Contractor to collect PPP that has been set out by a
Customer on the Customer’s scheduled collection day by the appointed set out time.
“Non-PPP Items” means any material that is not PPP.
“Private Road” means a privately-owned and maintained way that allows for access by a service
vehicle and that serves multiple residences.
“Public Street” means a public right-of-way used for public travel, including public alleys.
MT DOCS 12526910
“Packaging and Printed Paper” or “PPP” mean the materials set out in Attachment Error!
Reference source not found. and such other materials identified as PPP by MMBC in writing
from time to time.
“Service Area” means the geographic area delineated in Attachment 2.1.1.
“Service Commencement Date” means May 19, 2014.
“SOW Effective Date” has the meaning set out on the first page of this Statement of Work.
“SOW Services” has the meaning set out in Section 2.
1.2 Attachments. As of the Effective Date, the following Attachments form part of this Agreement
(note that Attachment numbering is not sequential and is based on a related section reference):
Attachment Description
Attachment 2.1.1 - Service Area
Attachment 2.1.2 - Packaging and Printed Paper
Attachment 3.3.2(a) - Service Level Failures
Attachment 5 - Fees
SECTION 2. Services
Contractor will provide, on the terms and conditions set out in the Agreement as supplemented and
modified by the terms and conditions of this Statement of Work, the following Services (the “SOW
Services”):
2.1 Curbside Collection Services. Beginning on the Service Commencement Date, Contractor will
collect PPP at Curbside from all Customers within the Service Area as further described in this
Section 2(a) (the “Curbside Collection”) and in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and
this SOW.
2.1.1 Service Area.
(a) Contractor will perform Curbside Collection from Customers in the Service Area.
(b) Except for changes that result from an annual baseline review made pursuant to
Attachment 5, changes to the Service Area will be made in accordance with the
change process set out in Section 2.2 of the main body of the Agreement.
(c) Notwithstanding the Curbside Household Baseline (as defined in Attachment 5),
Contractor is obligated to provide the SOW Services to all Customers in the
Service Area.
2.1.2 PPP Materials.
(a) Contractor will collect all PPP from all Customers that: (I) are placed in
Containers (including both Contractor-provided and Customer-owned
Containers); and (II) any Corrugated Cardboard, tied securely and stacked by the
Customers’ Container (or stacked alone if no Container is present).
(b) Collected PPP may not contain more than three percent (3%) by weight of Non-
PPP Items. PPP delivered to the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider
MT DOCS 12526910
will consist of no more than three percent (3%) by weight of Non-PPP Items.
Loads exceeding three percent (3%) by weight of Non-PPP Items may be subject
to rejection by the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider and Service
Level Failure Credits.
(c) Notwithstanding Section 2.1.2(b) above, Contractor may not collect, and
collected PPP may not contain, any packaging containing hazardous or special
waste under this SOW.
2.1.3 Collection.
(a) Contractor will not place limits on the quantity of PPP collected from Customers.
(b) Contactor will pick up PPP placed by Customers (in accordance with Section
2.1.2(a)(I) or (II)) at the Curb along the collection vehicle route which may be a
Public Street or a Private Road.
(c) Contractor will perform Curbside Collection no more frequently than weekly and
no less frequently than bi-weekly.
(d) Section 2.1.3 (c) does not apply to Category 8 Glass Packaging.
(e) Contractor will not compact PPP in Curbside Collection vehicles at a ratio higher
than 2.5:1.
(f) Contractor will make collections in an orderly, non-disruptive, and quiet manner,
and will return Containers (including, in the case of Carts, with their lids closed) in
their set out location in an orderly manner. Location of Containers should not
block sidewalks, driveways, or on street parking.
(g) Contractor will monitor the quality of PPP set out for collection. Customers with
more than three percent (3%) by weight of Non-PPP Items in a given Container
will receive a written notice from Contractor to reduce the quantity of Non-PPP
Items. Customers that receive three or more written notices per calendar quarter
(three months) will be contacted by the Contractor by phone or in person to
resolve the issue. If the quantity of Non-PPP Items is not reduced to less than
three percent (3%) by weight after a minimum of three (3) attempts to educate
the Customer, MMBC may remove the Customer from the Service Area.
(h) Where Contractor provided PPP collection services to Customers immediately
prior to the Service Commencement Date, Contractor will provide Curbside
Collection Services that meet or exceed the level of service provided by
Contractor prior to the Service Commencement Date.
2.1.4 Containers.
(a) Contractor will, at Contractor’s cost provide Containers that provide Customers
with sufficient volume to accommodate PPP generated by the Customers
between collections so that Container capacity is not a barrier to Customer use of
the Curbside Collection service.
(b) Where Customers or geographical area are added to a Service Area under
Section 2.1.1(b), Contractor will deliver Containers to Customers at least ten (10)
Business Days prior to the start date provided by MMBC.
MT DOCS 12526910
(c) Contractor will procure and deliver a Container to a requesting Customer within
seven (7) Business Days of the Customer’s initial request.
(d) Where Customer chooses to provide their own Container, Contractor will handle
the Customer-owned Container in such a way as to prevent undue damage, and
Contractor will be responsible for unnecessary or unreasonable damage to
Customer-owned Containers.
(e) In the event that a particular Customer repeatedly damages a Container or
requests more than one replacement Container more frequently than a time
period allowing for reasonable wear and tear during the SOW Term, Contractor
may charge Customer for the depreciated value of the Container and will forward
in writing the Customer’s name and address to MMBC with a full explanation of
the incident(s). In the event that the problem continues, Contractor may
discontinue service to that Customer provided MMBC provides prior written
approval.
(f) Where Contractor did not provide PPP collection services to Customers
immediately prior to the Service Commencement Date, Contractor will comply
with the following:
(i) Contractor will, at Contractor’s cost, procure, assemble, deliver to each
Customer, and to otherwise prepare for use, Containers that meet the
requirements set out in this Agreement.
(ii) Contractor will deliver Containers to Customers at least ten (10)
Business Days prior to the Service Commencement Date.
2.1.5 Designated Post-Collection Service Provider.
(a) Contractor will deliver all collected PPP to the Designated Post-Collection
Service Provider on the day of collection and Contractor may not charge any
amounts to the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider in connection
therewith. Contractor will not release PPP to anyone other than the Designated
Post-Collection Service Provider or dispose of any collected PPP without prior
written authorization from MMBC.
(b) If the Service Area is within the Metro Vancouver Regional District, the
Designated Post-Collection Service Provider will accept delivery of PPP from the
Contractor at a location within 30 minutes (on average based on typical traffic
conditions between 10 am and 2 pm Monday to Friday) from the municipal
boundary at the point of least distance to the facility operated by the Designated
Post-Collection Service Provider. If the Service Area is not within Metro
Vancouver Regional District, the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider will
accept delivery of PPP from the Contractor at a location 60 kilometers from the
municipal boundary at the point of least distance to the facility operated by the
Designated Post-Collection Service Provider. If delivery to the Designated Post-
Collection Service Provider requires the use of a ferry, then delivery boundary is
the ferry terminal and the portion of the trip that requires ferry travel is to be the
responsibility of the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider.
(c) MMBC may change the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider upon 30
days’ notice. If MMBC changes the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider
such that the new location is greater than 10 kilometers beyond the applicable
maximum distance set out in Section 2.1.5(b), such change will be made
MT DOCS 12526910
pursuant to the change process in Section 2.2 of the main body of the Agreement
(provided that Contractor may not refuse such a change).
(d) If the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider refuses to receive PPP from
Contractor due to a verified claim that Contractor’s collected PPP contains more
than three percent (3%) by weight of Non-PPP Items or contains any hazardous
or special waste, MMBC reserves the right to designate an alternative
Designated Post-Collection Service Provider and deduct any additional costs
associated with use of the alternative Designated Post-Collection Service
Provider from the Fees due to Contractor.
2.1.6 Spillage.
(a) All loads collected by Contractor will be completely contained in collection
vehicles at all times, except when material is actually being loaded. Hoppers on
all collection vehicles will be cleared frequently to prevent the occurrence of
blowing or spillage.
(b) Any spillage of materials that occurs during Curbside Collection will be
immediately cleaned up or removed by Contractor at its sole expense.
Contractor will keep accurate records of each occurrence of spillage and of its
clean-up, and will make such records available to MMBC on request, and if
requested by MMBC, as part of a regular report to be delivered with such
frequency as requested by MMBC (but not more frequently than monthly).
Contractor expressly acknowledges it is solely responsible for any violations of
Applicable Law that may result from said spillage.
(c) Without limiting subsection (b) above, Contractor will maintain all collection
vehicles to ensure that no liquid wastes (e.g., leachate) or oils (e.g., lubricating,
hydraulic, or fuel) are discharged to Customer premises or Public Streets or
Private Roads. All collection and route supervisor vehicles used by Contractor
will be equipped with a spill kit sufficient in size to contain a spill of equivalent
volume to the largest lubricating, hydraulic or fuel tank on the largest collection
vehicle. Any discharge of liquid wastes or oils that may occur from Contractor’s
collection vehicles prior to them being removed from service will be cleaned up or
removed by Contractor within three hours of being noticed by route staff,
Customers, or MMBC, and will be remediated by Contractor at its sole expense.
Such clean-up or removal will be documented with pictures, and notice of such
clean-up or removal will be provided to MMBC in writing. Contractor will
immediately notify the MMBC-designated spill coordinator of any spills that enter
ground-water or drainage systems.
2.1.7 Routes.
(a) Contractor Curbside Collection routes may not extend outside the Service Area.
Contractor collection vehicles used to perform Curbside Collection may only be
used elsewhere if they are emptied before and after such other use and
Contractor has obtained prior approval from MMBC in writing.
2.1.8 Pilot programs.
(a) MMBC may wish to test or implement one or more new services or developments
in PPP material segregation, processing, or collection technology. MMBC will
notify Contractor in writing at least 90 days prior of its intention to implement a
pilot program or of its intentions to utilize a new technology system in a Service
MT DOCS 12526910
Area. The costs (or savings) accrued by MMBC-initiated pilot programs will be
negotiated prior to implementation pursuant to the change process in Section 2.2
of the main body of the Agreement. If MMBC deems the pilot a success, and
desires to incorporate the service or development represented in the pilot
program into this SOW, such a change will be made pursuant to the change
process in Section 2.2 of the main body of the Agreement.
(b) Contractor-initiated pilot programs will require prior written notification to and
written approval by MMBC. Contractor-initiated pilot programs will be performed
at no additional cost to MMBC.
2.2 Customer Service and Management. As part of Curbside Collection, Contractor will provide the
following Services.
2.2.1 Customer Service Requirements.
(a) Contractor’s Customer service office and call center will be accessible by a local
area code and prefix phone number. Customer service representatives will be
available through Contractor’s call center during office hours for communication
with Customers and MMBC representatives. Customer calls will be taken during
office hours by a person, not by voice mail. During all non-office hours for the call
center, Contractor will have an answering or voice mail service available to
record messages from all incoming telephone calls, and include in the message
an emergency telephone number for Customers to call outside of normal office
hours in case of an emergency.
(b) Contractor will maintain a twenty-four (24) hour emergency telephone number for
use by MMBC. Contractor will have a representative, or an answering service to
contact such representative, available at such emergency telephone number for
MMBC-use during all hours, including normal office hours.
(c) Contractor’s Customer service representatives will have instantaneous electronic
access to Customer service data and history to assist them in providing excellent
Customer service.
2.2.2 Customer Service Representative Staffing.
(a) Contractor will maintain sufficient staffing to answer and handle complaints and
service requests in a timely manner made by all methods, including telephone,
letters, e-mails and text messages. If staffing is deemed to be insufficient by
MMBC to handle Customer complaints and service requests in a timely manner,
the Contractor will increase staffing levels to address the performance deficiency.
(b) Where Contractor did not provide PPP collection services to Customers
immediately prior to the Service Commencement Date, Contractor will provide
additional staffing from Service Commencement Date through the end of the
fourth month after the Service Commencement Date to ensure that sufficient
staffing is available to minimize Customer waits and inconvenience. Contractor
will receive no additional compensation for increased staffing levels during the
implementation period. Staffing levels during the implementation period will be
subject to prior MMBC review and approval.
MT DOCS 12526910
2.2.3 Customer Complaints and Requests.
(a) Contractor will record all Customer complaints and service requests, regardless
of how received, including date, time, Customer’s name and address, if the
Customer is willing to give this information, method of transmittal, and nature,
date and manner of resolution of the complaint or service request in a
computerized daily log. Any telephone calls received via Contractor’s non-office
hours voice mail or answering service will be recorded in the log the following
business day. Contractor will make a conscientious effort to resolve all
complaints and service requests within twenty-four (24) hours of the original
contact. If a longer response time is necessary for complaints or requests, the
reason for the delay will be noted in the log, along with a description of
Contractor’s efforts to resolve the complaint or request.
(b) Customer service log will be available for inspection by MMBC during
Contractor’s office hours, and will be in a format approved by MMBC. Contractor
will provide a copy of this log in an electronic format from the Microsoft Office
suite of software to MMBC on request, and if requested by MMBC, as part of a
regular report to be delivered with such frequency as requested by MMBC (but
not more frequently than monthly).
2.3 Promotion and Education.
2.3.1 Contractor will have primary responsibility for executing public promotion, education, and
outreach programs. Contractor will incorporate MMBC-developed communications
messages and images in Contractor public promotion, education, and outreach
programs.
2.3.2 Contractor will have primary responsibility for providing Customers service-oriented
information such as dates and times of Curbside Collection.
2.4 Transition and Implementation Services. Where Contractor did not provided PPP collection
services to Customers immediately prior to the Service Commencement Date, Contractor will,
beginning on the SOW Effective Date, develop, with MMBC’s input and prior written approval,
and submit to MMBC no later than two weeks after the SOW Effective Date, a transition and
implementation plan (the “Transition and Implementation Plan”) for implementing Curbside
Collection, including a specific timeline as to when different activities and events will occur, details
of how different events impact other events in the timeline, and the process to be used to ensure
that implementation occurs on the Service Commencement Date with no disruption. The
Transition and Implementation Plan will cover the entire period from the SOW Effective Date, up
through and including the six month period following the Service Commencement Date.
Contractor will describe in detail what is involved with each of the activities and events listed in
the Transition and Implementation Plan.
SECTION 3. Performance Standards and Operational Requirements
3.1 Personnel Conduct. Contractor personnel performing Curbside Collection will at all times be
courteous, refrain from loud, inappropriate or obscene language, exercise due care, perform their
work without delay, minimize noise, and avoid damage to public or private property. If on private
property, Contractor personnel will follow the regular pedestrian walkways and paths, returning to
the street after replacing empty Containers. Contractor personnel will not trespass or loiter, cross
flower beds, hedges, or property of adjoining premises, or meddle with property that does not
concern them or their task at hand.
MT DOCS 12526910
3.2 Vehicle Standards. Without limiting any other requirements or obligations of Contractor,
Contractor will meet or exceed the following standards in respect of collection vehicles used to
perform Curbside Collection.
3.2.1 All collection vehicles will be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner, and will be
thoroughly washed at least once each week. All collection vehicles will have appropriate
safety markings, including all highway lighting, flashing and warning lights, clearance
lights, and warning flags, all in accordance with applicable law. All collection vehicles and
all parts and systems of all collection vehicles will operate properly and be maintained in
a condition compliant with all applicable laws, good industry standards, and be in a
condition satisfactory to MMBC. Any vehicles not meeting these standards will not be
used within the Service Area until repairs are made. All collection vehicles will be
equipped with variable tone or proximity activated reverse movement back-up alarms.
3.2.2 Contractor will maintain all vehicles used in the performance of Curbside Collection in a
manner intended to achieve reduced emissions and particulates, noise levels, operating
costs, and fuel use.
3.3 SOW Record and Reporting Requirements. In addition to the record keeping and reporting
requirements in the Agreement, Contractor will:
3.3.1 Service Delivery Reporting
(a) maintain an electronic record of all calls related to Missed Collections and the
response provided by Contractor.
(b) maintain an electronic record of all Customer requests, complaints and inquiries,
including Customer name, mailing address, contact information (both telephone
number and e-mail, if available), property name and service address, if different
from mailing address, date of contact, reason for contact, results of Customer
request, complaint or inquiry, resulting changes, additional follow-up needed,
follow-up conducted, results of follow-up, and list of educational or outreach
materials provided.
(c) maintain the following records, and such other records as may be requested by
MMBC:
(i) Tonnage by collection date and truck number;
(ii) Customer communications related to Curbside Collection including
telephone calls, letters, e-mails, text messages or webpage messages
received; and
(iii) Notices left for Customers.
(d) make all records maintained pursuant to this Statement of Work available to
MMBC upon request, and if requested by MMBC, will provide a regular (but no
more frequently than monthly) report to MMBC, in a format and by a method
approved by MMBC, setting out or summarizing (at MMBC’s discretion) such
records as may be indicated by MMBC for the reporting period.
(e) upon MMBC’s request, provide up to four ad-hoc reports each year, at no
additional cost to MMBC. These reports may include Customer service database
tabulations to identify specific Service Level or participation patterns or other
similar information. Reports will be provided in MMBC-defined format and
MT DOCS 12526910
software compatibility. These reports will not require the Contractor to expend
more than sixty (60) staff hours per year to complete.
3.3.2 Claims Reporting.
(a) All loads must be documented in a manner specified by MMBC, from time to
time, including by a certified scale ticket provided by the Designated Post-
Collection Service Provider, with Contractor name and address, Designated
Post-Collection Service Provider name and address, date, time, truck number,
net weight by material type (in accordance with the material type classifications
set out in Exhibit A to Attachment 5), and such other information as MMBC may
designate (collectively, “Claim Information”). Standard tare weights for specific
trucks may only be used on specific written permission of MMBC.
(b) At least every two weeks, Contractor will report the Claim Information through
MMBC’s claims reporting portal, or through such other method as MMBC may
designate.
3.4 Service Levels. If Contractor fails to meet any Service Level set out in Attachment 3.3.2(a),
MMBC will be entitled to the applicable Service Level Failure Credits set out in Attachment
3.3.2(a).
SECTION 4. SOW Term
This Statement of Work will commence on the SOW Effective Date and its initial term will continue until
the expiry of a five (5) year period following the SOW Effective Date. MMBC may extend this Statement
of Work for up to two (2) further periods of one (1) year each, by giving Contractor notice in writing not
less than 180 days before the expiration of the initial term or any such additional term or terms. The initial
term and any such additional term or terms are herein referred to as the “SOW Term”.
SECTION 5. Fees
The Fees payable by MMBC for the performance by Contractor of the SOW Services are set out in
Attachment 5 to this Statement of Work.
SECTION 6. Additional Terms
6.1 No Double Charge. Contractor will not charge Customers a price for delivery of the SOW
Services that includes the value of the Fees to be paid by MMBC under this Statement of Work.
6.2 Scavenging Forbidden. Contractor will not scavenge, or permit any person (including its
employees) to scavenge any materials (including, if permitted by law, materials other than PPP
that have been set out to be collected by other collection service providers) at any time and at
any location during Contractor’s performance of the Services or otherwise.
6.3 Risk. Contractor will be responsible for all risks, including risk of loss of, or damage caused by,
the PPP from the time the PPP is collected by Contractor until delivery to the Designated Post-
Collection Service Provider. PPP will be deemed to be delivered when off-loaded from
Contractor’s vehicles at the Designated Post-Collection Service Provider’s facility and accepted
by the signature of an authorized representative of the Designated Post-Collection Service
Provider. Contractor will be responsible for the cost of any damage to Containers or the
Designated Post-Collection Service Provider facility caused by the Contractor.
MT DOCS 12526910
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Statement of Work effective as of the SOW
Effective Date.
MULTI-MATERIAL BC SOCIETY [CONTRACTOR]
By: SAMPLE – NOT FOR SIGNATURE By SAMPLE – NOT FOR SIGNATURE
Signature Authorized Representative Signature Authorized Representative
Print Name: Print Name:
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
MT DOCS 12526910
ATTACHMENT 2.1.1 TO SCHEDULE [●]
DESIGNATED SERVICE AREA
1. Under this Statement of Work,
(a) the initial Curbside Household Baseline (as defined in Attachment 5) will be [●]; and
(b) the initial Curbside ICI Baseline (as defined in Attachment 5) will be [●].
2. The Service Area is:
[Note: When the SOW is executed, Attachment 2.1.1 will include a description of the geographic
area to be serviced with Curbside Collection by Contractor.]
MT DOCS 12526910
ATTACHMENT 2.1.2 TO SCHEDULE [●]
PACKAGING AND PRINTED PAPER
For the purpose of this Statement of Work, PPP will mean the material described in the following
categories of the PPP Description:
• Contractor must collect PPP in Category 1, Category 2, Category 3, Category 6 and Category 7.
• Contractor may collect PPP in Category 8 if segregated from all other PPP.
MT DOCS 12526910
ATTACHMENT 3.3.2(a) TO SCHEDULE [●]
SERVICE LEVEL FAILURES
1. Contractor will incur the following Service Level Failure Credits on the following Service Level
Failures:
Service Level Failure Service Level Failure Credit
1 Overstatement of Curbside Households or understatement of
Industrial, Commercial and Institutional locations in Service
Area.
$5,000 per incident.
2 Failure to provide a required report pursuant to Section 3.3.1
on time.
$500 per day past deadline.
3 Failure to separate Curbside Collection of PPP from
Customers in Service Area from materials collected outside of
the Service Area without prior written approval from MMBC.
$5,000 per route, plus $3,000 per
month until the route is Service
Area only or a request for
approval has been submitted in
writing and has been approved in
writing by MMBC.
4 Delivery of materials to Designated Post-Collection Service
Provider that contain more than 3% by weight of Non-PPP
Items.
$5,000 per weigh-scale ticketed
load, but not to exceed in the
aggregate in any year: (i) an
amount that is equal to 24 loads
at the foregoing Service Level
Failure Credit amount, or (ii) the
total Fees paid or payable to
Contractor in the year, whichever
is lower.
5 A failure to comply with Section 4.6.1 and 4.6.2, or a failure to
enact its applicable Business Continuity Plan, on the
occurrence of a Labour Disruption.
An equitable reduction in the Fees
to reflect the value of any
Services not received by MMBC
plus $5,000 per day of Labour
Disruption.
6 Contractor delivers PPP to any location, such as a landfill,
incinerator or energy recovery facility, other than the
Designated Post-Collection Service Provider without the prior
written permission of MMBC
$25,000 per weigh-scale ticketed
load.
2. If the average annual amount of PPP collected per Curbside Household by Contractor, in any 12
month period (based on the Curbside Household Baseline defined in Attachment 5), falls
below135 kilograms, then Contractor will, within 90 days, prepare and submit to MMBC for
approval a remediation plan designed to raise its collection yield above 135 kilograms per
Curbside Household. Following approval of the remediation plan by MMBC, Contractor will
execute the plan. Contractor will provide monthly reporting to MMBC detailing the progress and
outcomes of the remediation plan. If material improvement does not occur within 90 days of
beginning to execute the plan, then Contractor will work with MMBC to establish additional
changes and to adopt best practices recommended by MMBC in order to increase collection
yield, and, at MMBC’s discretion, may result in an equitable downward change in the Fees to
reflect the reduced value of the amount of PPP being collected by Contactor.
3. If the quantity of Category 8 Glass Packaging has not declined to less than 3% (by weight) in
Categories 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 PPP collected through Curbside Collection within one year of the
Service Commencement Date, Contractor will, within 90 days, prepare and submit to MMBC for
approval a remediation plan designed to reduce the quantity of Category 8 Glass Packaging to
this level. Following approval of the remediation plan by MMBC, Contractor will execute the plan.
Contractor will provide monthly reporting to MMBC detailing the progress and outcomes of the
MT DOCS 12526910
remediation plan. If material improvement does not occur within 90 days of beginning to execute
the plan, then Contractor will work with MMBC to establish additional changes and to adopt best
practices recommended by MMBC in order to achieve the stated objective.
MT DOCS 12526910
ATTACHMENT 5 TO SCHEDULE [●]
FEES
1. In this Attachment, the following terms will have the following meaning:
“Bonus Period” means each 365 day period during the SOW Term, commencing on the Service
Commencement Date.
“Curbside Household Baseline” means the number of Curbside Households in Service Area as
initially set out in Attachment 2.1.1, as may be modified in accordance with Section 3 of this
Attachment, or pursuant to a change order made pursuant to Section 2.2 of the main body of the
Agreement.
“Curbside ICI Baseline” means the number of Industrial, Commercial and Institutional locations
in the Service Area receiving Curbside Collection Service as initially set out in Attachment 2.1.1,
as may be modified in accordance with Section 3 of this Attachment, or pursuant to a change
order made pursuant to Section 2.2 of the main body of the Agreement.
2. In consideration for Contractor’s performance of the SOW Services MMBC will pay Contractor:
(a) The highlighted annual amount in the table below times the Curbside Household Baseline
(to be invoiced and paid in arrears, in equal quarterly payments, provided that Contractor
has submitted all applicable claims): [Note: Table to be customized for Contract to
highlight only the applicable row.]
Curbside Collection Financial Incentive
Single-stream – Categories 1, 2, 3 (a), 3 (b), 6 and
7
$ per Curbside Household per
Year
>2 per Curbside Household per hectare $32.00
0.2 to 2 per Curbside Household per hectare $34.00
<0.2 per Curbside Household per hectare $36.00
Multi-stream – Categories 1, 2 and 3 (b) separate
from Categories 3 (a), 6 and 7
$ per Curbside Household per
Year
>2 per Curbside Household per hectare $35.00
0.2 to 2 per Curbside Household per hectare $37.00
<0.2 per Curbside Household per hectare $39.00
(b) The following per tonne amount, to be invoiced and paid pursuant to the claims
submission process in accordance with the terms of the Agreement:
Curbside Collection Financial Incentive
Category 8 - Glass Packaging $ per Tonne
$80.00
(c) For each Bonus Period, the Achieved Bonus Amount times the Curbside Household
Baseline, where the “Achieved Bonus Amount” is the performance bonus amount in the
table below that corresponds with the average amount of PPP per Curbside Household
actually collected by Contractor during the Bonus Period. The foregoing will be calculated
annually, at the end of each Bonus Period, based on the Curbside Household Baseline
MT DOCS 12526910
and the approved claims submitted for the Bonus Period. The annual performance
bonus, if any, will be paid no later than 30 days after the contract anniversary date.
If Contractor also provides collection services to multi-family buildings pursuant to
another Statement of Work under this Agreement (“Multi-Family Household
Collection”), and PPP collected during Multi-Family Household Collection is collected in
a vehicle with PPP collected from Curbside Households under this Statement of Work,
then, for the purpose of calculating the performance bonus under this subsection (c), the
Curbside Household Baseline will be adjusted to include the number of multi-family
households whose PPP has been collected in this manner.
Curbside Collection Performance Bonus
Avg PPP
Collected per
Curbside
Household Per
Year
180 - 199
Kilograms
200 - 219
Kilograms
220 - 239
Kilograms
> 240
Kilograms
Performance
Bonus
$ per Curbside Household
$1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00
(d) Each of: (i) the Resident Education Top Up amount; (ii)the Service Administration Top Up
amount; and (iii) if Contractor also provides depot services pursuant to this Agreement in
the Service Area pursuant to an active Statement of Work for Depot Collection Services,
the Depot Top Up, in each case as set out in the table below times the Curbside
Household Baseline to be invoiced and paid in arrears, in equal quarterly payments,
provided that Contractor has submitted all applicable claims: [Note: Table to be
customized for Contract to show only the applicable rows.]
Top Up
available to local governments
accepting Curbside Collection incentive
$ per Curbside Household
Resident Education Top Up $0.75
Depot Top Up $0.25
Service Administration Top Up $2.50
Without limiting Contractor’s obligations under this Statement of Work (including without
limiting the cost Contractor is required to incur to perform such obligations), the Resident
Education Top Up amount must be used for the purpose of providing resident education
in respect of the Collection Services.
3. Annual Baseline Review.
(a) On an annual basis, on a date to be determined by MMBC, Contractor will, in good faith,
report and attest (in a form acceptable to MMBC) to the then-current number of:
(i) Curbside Households in the Service Area;
(ii) Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) locations in the Service Area
receiving Curbside Collection Service; and
(iii) Curbside Households per hectare in the Service Area.
MT DOCS 12526910
(b) MMBC may also provide evidence of the then-current numbers for the foregoing. Based
on Contractor’s attestation and the evidence provided by MMBC, MMBC and Contractor
will work in good faith to mutually agree on the new Curbside Household Baseline and to
identify and agree upon any changes in population density and the Curbside ICI
Baseline. If the agreed upon new values of the foregoing trigger a price change (as, and
only as, per the pricing categories listed in this Attachment), the parties will update this
Attachment by execution of a change order. Any Dispute in establishing the foregoing
will be resolved by the Dispute resolution process under the Agreement.
(c) For purposes of reporting and determining the number of Curbside Households:
(i) A single family dwelling is considered one (1) Curbside Household;
(ii) A laneway house is considered one (1) Curbside Household;
(iii) A duplex is considered two (2) Curbside Households;
(iv) A triplex is considered three (3) Curbside Households;
(v) A fourplex is considered four (4) Curbside Households;
(vi) A single family dwelling that has been converted into two, three or four residential
dwelling units, shall be considered a duplex, triplex or fourplex, as described in
(iii), (iv) and (v) respectively, where the Contractor recognizes the conversion for
utility and/or contract billing and provides Curbside Collection to each unit in the
converted building at an equivalent service level as a single family dwelling; and
(vii) A single family dwelling that has been converted into multiple dwelling units that
is recognized by the Contractor as a single family dwelling for utility and/or
contract billing is considered one (1) Curbside Household.
(d) The number of Curbside ICI Baseline locations and the pro-rated quantity of PPP from
the Curbside ICI Baseline locations will be excluded from the Fees set out in this
Attachment 5.
MT DOCS 12526910
EXHIBIT A TO ATTACHMENT 5
CLAIM REPORTING CATEGORIES
The following material type classifications, as may be amended by MMBC by notice to Contractor from
time to time, will be used when providing claim information:
• Glass (segregated from all other PPP)
• All PPP except glass on a single vehicle (may be single stream in a single compartment or multi-
stream in multiple compartments but the truck weight would represent all non-glass PPP)
• Containers only (in an alternating week collection system where only containers are collected in
one week so the truck weight would represent only containers)
• Fibres only (in an alternating week collection system where only fibres are collected in one week
and the truck weight would represent only fibres)
• OCC (segregated from all other PPP)
1
Packaging and Printed Paper to be Collected from Households and at Depots
The following table sets out packaging and printed paper (PPP) to be accepted in Multi-Material British Columbia’s (MMBC) PPP Stewardship Plan when it launches in May 2014.
This list is intended to provide information to municipalities, private companies and not-for-profit organizations that are considering accepting the market-clearing price financial
incentive to provide PPP collection services under contract to MMBC.
The list in its current form is not intended as the basis for communications to residents. MMBC will be developing a resident education and communications strategy that will
build on the list below.
Criteria to Include PPP in the Collection System
Answers to questions 1 to 4 must each be ‘yes’ and the answer to either 5a) i) or 5a) ii) must be ‘yes’ to include a type of PPP in the list of PPP to be collected.
1. Is there end-market demand for the PPP?
2. If yes
a. Is the end-market demand sufficient to absorb the quantity of PPP expected to be collected from BC households?
3. If yes
a. Is there processing capability to prepare the PPP to meet the end-market specifications?
4. If yes
a. Does the processor(s) have capacity to manage the quantity of PPP expected to be collected from BC households?
5. If yes
a. Can the PPP be sorted effectively from other PPP so as not to compromise the marketability of PPP already in the collection system?
i. If yes
§ Can the PPP be collected effectively by commingling with other PPP in the collection system?
ii. If no
§ Can the PPP be collected effectively in a manner which avoids commingling with other PPP?
2
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
PRINTED PAPER
Newspapers Yes Yes Daily and community newspapers
Newspaper Inserts Yes Yes Newsprint advertising inserts and
flyers
Magazines Yes Yes Daily, weekly, monthly magazines;
travel or promotional magazines
Catalogues Yes Yes
Retailer product catalogues;
automotive and real estate
guides/catalogues
Telephone Directories Yes Yes Phone books; newsprint directories
Hardcover Books No Hardcover books
Paperback Books No Paperback books
Other Printed Media Yes Yes Notepads; loose leaf paper; non-foil
gift wrap
Residential Printed Paper Yes Yes White or coloured paper for general
use, printers and copiers
Miscellaneous Printed
Papers Yes Yes Blank and printed envelops; greeting
cards
PAPER PACKAGING
Old Corrugated Containers
(OCC) Yes Yes Grocery store/liquor store boxes;
pizza boxes
1
While the majority of PPP diverted is collected in dedicated recycling systems, some local governments accept specific types of PPP, such as soiled paper packaging, in organic waste collection programs. MMBC
will undertake research to determine the quantity of PPP in organic waste collection programs.
3
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
Waxed Old Corrugated
Containers Yes No No Not
accepted Contaminant in OCC
Corrugated cardboard containers coated
with wax which are used for products
packed wet or with ice
Old Boxboard (OBB) Yes Yes
Cereal boxes; shoe boxes; tissue
boxes; paper towel and toilet paper
tubes; detergent boxes
Wet Strength Boxboard Yes Yes Carrier boxes for soft drink containers;
some frozen food paper packaging
Moulded Pulp Yes Yes Egg cartons; formed coffee take put
trays; paper based flower pots
Kraft Papers Yes Yes Paper bags
Paper Cup (hot)
(polycoated liner) Yes Yes Non-foam paper cups
Paper Cup (hot)
(biodegradable liner) Yes Yes Non-foam paper cups
Paper Cup (cold) (waxed) Yes Yes Non-foam paper cups
Paper Cup (cold) (2-sided
polycoated) Yes Yes Non-foam paper cups
Polycoated Milk Cartons Yes Yes Milk, soy, rice milk and cream cartons
Aseptic Containers Yes Yes
Milk, soy, rice milk, cream, soup, broth
and sauce containers, typically about
1 litre in size
Polycoated Boxboard Yes Yes Some frozen food packaging
Multi-laminated Paper
Packaging Yes Yes Microwavable paper containers; paper
bowls/cups for soup
4
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
GLASS PACKAGING
Clear Liquor Glass No Deposit containers
Coloured Liquor Glass No Deposit containers
Clear Beer Glass No Deposit containers
Coloured Beer Glass No Deposit containers
Refillable Beer Glass No Deposit containers
Clear Bottles and Jars
(non-beverage) Yes
Yes if
segregated
from other
PPP
Food containers; ketchup bottles;
pickle jars;; jam and jelly containers;
cosmetic jars
Coloured Bottles and Jars
(non-beverage) Yes
Yes if
segregated
from other
PPP
Cooking oils; vinegar bottles; cosmetic
containers
METAL PACKAGING
Steel Cans (non-beverage) Yes Yes Steel dog food and vegetable cans;
metal lids and closures
Steel Paint Cans No Steel paint cans
Steel Aerosol Cans Yes Yes Food spray cans; solvent spray cans
Spiral Wound Cans (steel
ends) Yes Yes
Spiral wound containers for frozen
juice, chips, cookie dough, coffee,
nuts
Steel Gas Cylinders No Steel gas cylinders
Aluminum Beverage Cans No Deposit containers
5
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
Aluminum Cans (non-
beverage) Yes Yes Cat food and other food cans
Aluminum Aerosol Cans Yes Yes
Air freshener, deodorant and
hairspray containers; food spray cans;
wax and polish spray cans
Aluminum Foil and Foil
Containers Yes Yes Foils wrap; pie plates; aluminum food
trays
Bimetal
Containers/Aerosols Yes Yes Lubricating oil spray cans; insulating
foam spray cans; pesticide spray cans
PLASTIC PACKAGING – PETE (#1)
PETE Bottles (non-
beverage) Yes Yes
Salad dressing bottles; edible oil
bottles; dish soap or mouthwash
bottles; window cleaners
PETE Jars Yes Yes Peanut butter containers; wide-mouth
jars for nuts
PETE Clamshells Yes Yes Bakery trays; pre-made fruit and salad
packages; egg cartons
PETE Trays Yes Yes
Single serve meals; deli and bakery
items; housewares and hardware
products
PETE Tubs & Lids Yes Yes Plastic lids for some containers
PETE Cold Drink Cups Yes Yes Take–out drink cups
PETE Films Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in #2 and
#4 films
Non-packaging films such as X-ray,
video and photographic films,
PET-G (all) Yes No No Not Contaminant in bottle Packaging with moulded grips; shrink
6
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
accepted and thermoform PET labels
PLASTIC PACKAGING - HDPE (#2)
HDPE Bottles (non-
beverage) Yes Yes
Shampoo bottles, milk jugs; spring
water containers; bleach containers;
vinegar containers; windshield washer
fluid containers; pill bottles
HDPE Jars Yes Yes
Personal care products;
pharmaceuticals, vitamin and
supplements containers
HDPE Pails Yes Yes
<25 litres Laundry detergent, ice cream pails Pails for lubricants
HDPE Trays Yes Yes
Single serve meals; deli and bakery
items; housewares and hardware
products
HDPE Tubs & Lids Yes Yes Plastic lids for spreads and dairy
containers
HDPE Planter Pots Yes Yes Plastic garden pots
HDPE Films Yes Yes Some retail bags; some frozen
vegetable bags
PLASTIC PACKAGING - PVC (#3)
PVC Bottles Yes Yes
Water bottles; travel sized personal
and hair care product bottles;
household and automotive liquids
containers
PVC Jars Yes Yes Peanut butter containers
7
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
PVC Trays Yes Yes Housewares and hardware products
PVC Tubs & Lids Yes Yes Plastic lids for some containers
PVC Films Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in #2 and
#4 films
Layer in laminated films, cigarette
package wrap
PLASTIC PACKAGING - LDPE (#4)
LDPE Bottles (non-
beverage) Yes Yes Hygienic, cosmetics and hair care
containers
LDPE Jars Yes Yes Cosmetics containers
LDPE Tubs & Jars Yes Yes Plastic lids for spreads and dairy
containers
LDPE/LLDPE Films Yes Yes
Grocery bags; newspaper bags; dry
cleaning bags; bread bags; frozen
vegetable bags; soft drink case over-
wrap; garden product bags; paper
towel over-wrap; diaper and feminine
hygiene product outer bags
Stretch film
LDPE Cushion Packaging Yes No No Not
accepted
Difficult to separate and
contributes to cross-
contamination of other
materials
Bubble packaging
PLASTIC PACKAGING - PP (#5)
PP Bottles (non-beverage) Yes Yes
Butter and margarine containers;
translucent squeeze bottles; travel
sized personal and hair care product
bottles
PP Jars Yes Yes Cosmetics containers
8
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
PP Clamshells Yes Yes Hinged containers e.g. sanitary wipes
PP Trays Yes Yes
Single serve meals; deli and bakery
items; housewares and hardware
products
PP Tubs & Lids Yes Yes Large yogurt tubs; kitty litter
containers; ice cream containers
PP Cold Drink Cups Yes Yes Some cold drink cups
PP Planter Pots Yes Yes Garden planter pots
PP Cushion Packaging Yes No No Not
accepted
Difficult to separate and
contributes to cross-
contamination of other
materials
Bubble wrap; courier packaging
PP Films Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in #2 and
#4 films
Lumber wrap
PLASTIC PACKAGING - PS (#6)
PS Bottles (non-beverage) Yes Yes Pharmaceuticals, vitamin and
supplements containers
PS Clamshells (rigid) Yes Yes Clear clamshell containers such as
berry, muffin and sandwich containers
PS Clamshells (EPS) Yes Yes Egg cartons
PS Trays (rigid) Yes Yes Clear rigid trays used for deli foods
PS Trays/Plates (EPS) Yes Yes Deli and take-out food trays
PS Meat Trays (EPS) Yes Yes White and coloured meat trays
PS Tubs & Lids (rigid) Yes Yes Dairy product tubs and lids
9
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
PS Tubs & Lids (high
impact) Yes Yes Single serve yogurt containers
PS Cold Drink Cups (rigid) Yes Yes Clear rigid plastic drink cups
PS Hot Drink Cups (EPS) Yes Yes Foam drink cups
PS Planter Pots Yes Yes Some garden pots and trays
PS Cushion Packaging
(EPS) Yes Yes
White foam cushion packaging used
for appliances, computers, TVs,
printers
Foam packaging peanuts
PS Films Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in #2 and
#4 films Shrink wrap around PET and HDPE
bottles; floral wrap
PLASTIC PACKAGING - OTHER (#7)
PLA Bottles (non-
beverage) Yes No No Not
accepted
Insufficient information
to confirm processing
capability and capacity
Personal care, health, cosmetic, hair
care, pharmaceutical, vitamin and
supplements bottles and jars; travel size
personal care products containers;
condiments and squeeze bottles
PLA Clamshells Yes No No Not
accepted
Insufficient information
to confirm processing
capability and capacity
Hinged containers for deli meats, salads,
sandwiches and single serve meals
PLA Cold Drink Cups Yes No No Not
accepted
Insufficient information
to confirm processing
capability and capacity
Dispensed single serve clear cold
beverage cups with domed or flat lids
(with or without straw-ports)
PHA Bottles Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in
recyclable plastics
Some water bottles
Multi-laminated Juice/Drink
Pouches No Beverages in stand-up pouches
10
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
Multi-laminated Plastic
Packaging Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in
recyclable plastics
Plastic packaging that includes one or
more barrier layers and/or is comprised
of layers of different resins
EVOH Films Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in #2 and
#4 films
Barrier layer in laminated films
Other2 Bottles (non-
beverage) Yes Yes Bottles without a resin code or with
resin code # 7
Other Jars Yes Yes Jars without a resin code or with resin
code # 7
Other Clamshells Yes Yes Clamshells without a resin code or
with resin code # 7
Other Trays Yes Yes Trays without a resin code or with
resin code # 7
Other Tubs & Lids Yes Yes Tubs & lids without a resin code or
with resin code # 7
Other Cold Drink Cups Yes Yes Cold drink cups without a resin code
or with resin code # 7
Other Planter Pots Yes Yes Planter pots without a resin code or
with resin code # 7
Other Cushion Packaging Yes No No Not
accepted
Difficult to separate and
contributes to cross-
contamination of other
materials
Cushion packaging without a resin code
or with resin code # 7
Other Films Yes No No Not Contaminant in #2 and Films without a resin code or with resin
2 ‘Other’ plastic packaging is typically: manufactured from a combination of recycled resins; manufactured with a barrier layer; or, lacking a resin code mark.
11
Material Type1
Is item
residential
PPP under
Schedule 5?
Residential PPP under Schedule 5
Curbside,
MF
Buildings
and Depot
Depot
Only
Not
accepted in
PPP
collection
system
Reason for Exclusion Examples of PPP Accepted Examples of PPP Not Accepted
accepted #4 films code # 7
PLASTIC PACKAGING – COMPOSITE
Sealed/blister packaging Yes No No Not
accepted
Contaminant in
recyclable plastics
Packaging with a boxboard or foil
backing attached to a plastic cover
molded to contain the product
Karen Martin
Dentons Canada LLP
karen.martin@dentons.com
D +1 604 691 6455
Dentons Canada LLP
20th Floor, 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3R8
T +1 604 687 4460
F +1 604 683 5214
Salans FMC SNR Denton
dentons.com
DISCUSSION DRAFT - August 6, 2013
3824437_2|NATDOCS
MEMORANDUM
This is a summary of the legal position of the local governments with respect to MMBC’s implementation
of its PPP Plan.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL POSITION
1.0 LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND
1. Local government has the legal authority to provide waste collection services, including recycling
of packaging and printed paper (“PPP”), as set out in various statutes granting the authority to
provide municipal services, primarily the Community Charter (the “Community Charter”), SBC
2003, c26 Vancouver Charter, SBC 1953, c55, the Local Government Act, RSBC 1996, c323 and
the Environmental Management Act, RSBC 2003, c53 (the “EMA”).
2. Pursuant to their statutory authority, local governments have passed bylaws in relation to
recyclables, including bylaws to:
a. establish single family and multi-family recyclables collection services;
b. charge and collect fees for the funding of such services; and
c. authorize contracts with third party haulers,
(the “Municipal Bylaws”).
3. Local governments have made significant investments and entered into long-term contracts with
the private sector related to the collection and management of PPP in furtherance of this
authority. In some cases substantial capital expenditures in facilities and equipment have been
made and long-term collective agreements have been entered into with internal collection staff.
4. The Municipal Bylaws related to the collection of recyclable materials establish legally valid PPP
collection regimes, fee structures and contractual relationships (with third party haulers and
collective bargaining agreements).
5. The Province enacted the Recycling Regulation, BC Reg 449/2004 (the “Recycling Regulation”)
under the EMA in 2004 to implement a framework for extended producer responsibility (EPR)
programs in respect of particular products.
6. The Recycling Regulation was amended in 2011 to include a new product category, PPP. Unlike
prior product categories, at the time it was incorporated into the provincial scheme, PPP had a
pre-existing, well-established and successful collection system in place run by local governments.
7. Section 4 of the Recycling Regulation requires a producer of PPP to submit a product
stewardship plan for the approval of a director of waste management under the EMA.
8. Section 5(1) of the Recycling Regulation requires that in order to approve a submitted product
stewardship plan, the director must be satisfied that:
[…] (b) the producer has undertaken satisfactory consultation with stakeholders prior to submitting
the plan for approval and will provide opportunity for stakeholder input in the implementation and
operation of the product stewardship program,
(c) the plan adequately provides for
Karen Martin
Dentons Canada LLP
Page 2
karen.martin@dentons.com
D +1 604 691 6455
Dentons Canada LLP
20th Floor, 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3R8
T +1 604 687 4460
F +1 604 683 5214
Salans FMC SNR Denton
dentons.com
DISCUSSION DRAFT - August 6, 2013
3824437_2|NATDOCS
(i) the producer collecting and paying the costs of collecting and managing products within
the product category covered by the plan, whether the products are currently or previously
sold, offered for sale or distributed in British Columbia,
[…]
(d) with respect to the packaging and printed paper category, the plan adequately provides for the
collection of the product by the producer
(i) from residential premises, and
(ii) from municipal property that is not industrial, commercial or institutional property
(underlining added).
9. Schedule 5 of the Recycling Regulation requires a producer of PPP to submit a product
stewardship plan within 18 months of the Recycling Regulation coming into effect. In addition a
producer of PPP must have an approved plan and must comply with it within 36 months.
10. The Recycling Regulation obligates a PPP producer to comply with an approved plan.
2.0 PPP PLAN
11. Multi-Material British Columbia (“MMBC”) prepared a Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship
Plan (the “PPP Plan”), which was submitted on November 19, 2012, updated on February 25,
2013, further updated on April 8, 2013, and then formally approved by the director on April 15,
2013. The 36 month period by which MMBC must be in compliance with the PPP Plan expires in
May 2014.
12. The PPP Plan sets out some principles to be followed by the producers.
a. At Section 1:
The PPP Stewardship Plan outlined in this document proposes to build on these existing
services in order to minimize economic dislocation for those currently operating the
system, to avoid confusion for residents, and to mitigate any temporary loss of
environmental performance.
b. At Section 4.2:
Selecting the PPP program design has been driven by one overarching objective –
continuous improvement in recovery effectiveness and efficiency without undermining
existing PPP recovery efforts in British Columbia.
c. At Section 4.3:
Under the Recycling Regulation, MMBC will assume responsibility for driving residential
PPP collection and recycling activity in BC, effectively supplanting the role that local
governments have historically played. Accordingly, at the outset, it is assumed that MMBC
will largely assume responsibility for the existing BC PPP collection and recycling system
and will set conditions for future improvements in effectiveness and efficiency of PPP
recovery in BC.
d. At Section 4.3:
The approach to delivery of PPP collection services is based on providing opportunity for
those involved in the collection of PPP today to be part of the PPP collection system when
Producers assume responsibility for the PPP recovery system in May 2014.
Qualified collectors will be offered financial incentives for PPP collection. The value
offered will be established as market-clearing prices.
(Underlining added.)
13. Regarding curbside collection service, the PPP Plan states in section 5.2:
Karen Martin
Dentons Canada LLP
Page 3
karen.martin@dentons.com
D +1 604 691 6455
Dentons Canada LLP
20th Floor, 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3R8
T +1 604 687 4460
F +1 604 683 5214
Salans FMC SNR Denton
dentons.com
DISCUSSION DRAFT - August 6, 2013
3824437_2|NATDOCS
MMBC will deliver PPP curbside collection service by:
• Contracting with local governments that accept the market-clearing price financial
incentive to continue to provide PPP curbside collection; and
• Where a local government declines the market-clearing price financial incentive,
contracting with a private company selected through a competitive procurement
process.
Should a local government that currently provides curbside collection of PPP decline the
market-clearing price and indicate that it wishes to continue to provide the PPP collection
service, MMBC will not implement a competitive procurement process and will not provide
curbside collection in the jurisdiction. In this circumstance, MMBC will not be responsible
for providing reasonable access to curbside collection of PPP within the jurisdiction.
14. Similar, though not identical, provisions regarding pricing are provided for multi-family building
collection service. Specifically, the PPP Plan provides that financial incentives will be offered to
any interested party (i.e., local governments and others at the same time).
3.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PPP PLAN
15. On May 31, 2013 and June 14, 2013, MMBC released pricing information and sample contracts
as part of the implementation phase. Pursuant to these details, in order for a local government to
be part of MMBC’s PPP collection system, MMBC is proposing that a local government is
required to accept:
a. the “market-clearing” prices that have been set by MMBC, which are low in comparison to
local governments actual collection costs; and
b. the terms of the Master Services Agreement and Statements of Work that have been
developed by MMBC, which include some commercially unacceptable terms (i.e.,
significant penalties, unfair termination clauses).
16. A local government has the option of:
a. entering into a contract with MMBC by which a local government agrees to be MMBC’s
collection contractor by:
i. accepting the market-clearing prices for the collection as determined by MMBC;
and
ii. accepting the contractual terms and conditions as written by MMBC for a Master
Services Agreement and Statements of Work;
and under that contract continue the collection of PPP (using the local government’s staff
or third party contractor);
b. declining to accept MMBC’s offer and transition all responsibility for the collection of PPP
to MMBC, (and in this case, contracts with third parties or collective bargaining groups
would be adversely affected, likely attracting legal liability for damages, the extent of
which will depend on the individual contract); or
c. declining to accept MMBC’s offer (price and terms) and continue the collection of PPP
without any involvement of MMBC (and therefore without any cost contribution from
MMBC).
17. MMBC has set a deadline of September 16, 2013 by which local governments must make their
election.
Karen Martin
Dentons Canada LLP
Page 4
karen.martin@dentons.com
D +1 604 691 6455
Dentons Canada LLP
20th Floor, 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3R8
T +1 604 687 4460
F +1 604 683 5214
Salans FMC SNR Denton
dentons.com
DISCUSSION DRAFT - August 6, 2013
3824437_2|NATDOCS
4.0 POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
18. By virtue of the approved PPP Plan, MMBC has the legal authority to act in accordance with that
plan. However, MMBC cannot use the implementation process to expand its rights under the
PPP Plan. It is the position of the local governments that MMBC’s recent actions:
a. are inconsistent with the PPP Plan;
b. are not specifically authorized by the PPP Plan;
c. are contrary to the principles set out in s. 5(1) of the Recycling Regulation, which were
required to be met in the PPP Plan; and
d. are outside its sphere of express legal authority because there is no express legislative
language authorizing MMBC under the PPP Plan to disturb a valid municipal regime that
already “occupies” the field.
19. Local governments support the aims and objectives of the Recycling Regulation with respect to
PPP.
20. Local governments take the position that it is not reasonable for MMBC to unilaterally set the
terms under which local governments hand over responsibility to administer the collection and
processing of PPP to MMBC, nor is it necessary.
a. Local governments have the knowledge and the proven record of being able to provide
educational, collection and processing services within their boundaries. To meet
MMBC’s stated objective of “…continuous improvement in recovery effectiveness and
efficiency without undermining existing PPP recovery efforts” MMBC’s required focus
should be to cooperate with local governments and enlist their assistance, rather than be
entitled to dictate the terms of such cooperation, or to take over all responsibility.
b. The “management” of the recycling of PPP is not the challenge facing the Province or the
people of BC. The Recycling Regulation is focused on making producers (and indirectly
consumers) responsible for the costs of collection and management of PPP. A key to
this objective is to ensure that the producers pay the actual costs of recycling, not for the
producers (and indirectly consumers) to be able to determine how much of PPP recycling
costs they will pay.
c. Effective residential recycling is best achieved at the source, and this has been achieved
through the relationship established between the resident and the local government. Any
MMBC PPP collection system should include assurance that these standards will be
maintained. An interruption in the quality of PPP recycling services from the standards
currently set will result in reduction in recovery rates that will not easily be recovered.
d. Local governments can agree that, as an objective, the producers will take over the
actual management of all PPP recycling, but for that to happen the producers will:
i. be required to assume responsibility for all PPP, not selected elements of it;
ii. do so progressively in a way that gives local governments reasonable assurance
that the levels current of PPP recycling services will be maintained; and
iii. do so in a way that avoids unnecessary, potentially inefficient and punitive costs
associated with prematurely terminating existing contractual and labour
agreements.
21. Local governments believe that the approved PPP Plan can be made to work, but that there are
significant issues outstanding, particularly with respect to the market-clearing prices and the
terms of an agreement between a local government and the producers.
Karen Martin
Dentons Canada LLP
Page 5
karen.martin@dentons.com
D +1 604 691 6455
Dentons Canada LLP
20th Floor, 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3R8
T +1 604 687 4460
F +1 604 683 5214
Salans FMC SNR Denton
dentons.com
DISCUSSION DRAFT - August 6, 2013
3824437_2|NATDOCS
22. MMBC is in an obvious conflict of interest and cannot be entitled to establish the actual “costs of
collecting and managing PPP”.
23. Prices are clearly affected not only by the standard of recycling services required, but also by
efficiencies such as collection programs that include other elements of municipal solid waste.
24. The MMBC approach, that focuses on outcomes, should be applied to establishing the standards
of service required to achieve the 75% recovery as mandated by the Recycling Regulation.
25. The principles of pricing should be established, rather than simply setting prices. The
implementation of an MMBC collection system should also reflect a Recycling Regulation
objective of applying economic pressure on the producers so as to encourage lower volumes of
PPP and better recovery rates. Pricing principles should include the following:
a. pricing paid for recycling collection services should be competitively set and an
alternative approach should be established to ensure services provided in-house are
comparably priced;
b. local governments should not be required to subsidize producers obligations to pay for
PPP collection and recycling;
c. adjustments for local and geographic differences; and
d. take account of the fact that some collection prices include credit for processing
recyclables.
These pricing principles could be as agreed between MMBC and the local governments, but in
the event of a failure to agree, should be set by an independent adjudicator.
26. It is not reasonable for MMBC to have the authority to demand that a local government accept
MMBC’s contract terms for the Master Services Agreement and the Statement of Work as a
condition of participating in the MMBC PPP collection system. A healthy agreement is based on
each party being free to negotiate terms.
a. The terms, such as MMBC’s unilateral right to terminate or amend the terms, are ones
most counterparties could not accept.
b. It is not necessary for MMBC to demand that local government agree to be the
producer’s “collection contractor”.
c. The regime between a local government and the producers could more simple,
consistent with the Recycling Regulation:
i. Local government agrees to provide/continue recycling services, not as a
“contractor” but consistent with the local government’s authority to provide those
services to residents within the boundaries of the municipality.
ii. MMBC agrees to pay the established rates for PPP collected.
iii. If established recovery rates were not achieved then MMBC could have the
option to take over – no other condition of termination is necessary or
reasonable.
27. MMBC has advised that its proposal on market-clearing prices and the terms and conditions of
the Master Services Agreement and the Statement of Work must be accepted by September 16,
2013. This is too short a time to achieve the agreements required.
28. The local governments urge that an interim process be set in place by which the producers:
a. “… provide opportunity for stakeholder input in the implementation and operation of the product
stewardship program; and
b. adequately provide for “…the producer collecting and paying the costs of collecting and managing
products within the product category covered by the plan…”
Karen Martin
Dentons Canada LLP
Page 6
karen.martin@dentons.com
D +1 604 691 6455
Dentons Canada LLP
20th Floor, 250 Howe Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3R8
T +1 604 687 4460
F +1 604 683 5214
Salans FMC SNR Denton
dentons.com
DISCUSSION DRAFT - August 6, 2013
3824437_2|NATDOCS
as required by the Recycling Regulation. This could be achieved in a fair way by making
better use of the existing local government PPP recycling services currently in place while
these issues are developed more fully in cooperation with local governments.
5.0 LEGAL OPTIONS
29. Local governments can request the director to amend the PPP Plan as a statutory remedy under
s.5(5) of the Recycling Regulation. Local governments reserve the right to appeal a refusal by
the director to amend the PPP Plan to the EAB and if necessary to the courts by way of an
application for judicial review under the Judicial Review Procedure Act, RSBC 1996, c 241.
30. Local governments have the right to challenge the implementation of the PPP Plan because:
a. MMBC’s current implementation process goes beyond its authority in the PPP Plan, and
further is inconsistent with the legislative scheme in the Recycling Regulation, (e.g., the
PPP Plan does not clearly authorize MMBC to impose an unreasonable deadline, or
commercially unreasonable prices or terms and conditions on local governments);
b. MMBC’s unilaterally set market clearing price does not “adequately” provide for the
producer’s payment of costs of collection in the full context of a valid regulatory scheme
in which some local governments have existing contracts with contractors that were
competitively procured;
c. MMBC’s scheme does not adequately providing for the provision of collection services
from residential premises as required by s. 5(1)(d) of the Recycling Regulation; and
d. the September 16, 2013 deadline for local governments to make their one-time election is
contrary to the requirement to provide satisfactory consultation in s. 5(1)(b) of the
Recycling Regulation.
31. It should be noted that s.25 of the Community Charter prevents local governments from providing
assistance to businesses. Local governments have concerns that accepting MMBC’s Master
Services Agreement could be considered to be a violation of s.25 in two ways:
a. Because the market clearing price is lower than actual cost of collection, local
governments would be effectively subsidizing MMBC’s statutory obligation under the
Recycling Regulation; and
b. the onerous indemnity and penalty provisions in the Master Services Agreement shift a
disproportionate risk onto local governments and thereby provides indirect financial
‘assistance’ to MMBC.
32. Local governments are also prohibited from entering into contracts that restrict council’s right to
legislate. Section 13.4 of the Master Services Agreement may be considered as a practical
restriction on a local government’s legislative authority to the extent that exercising valid
legislative authority could result in a termination of the Master Services Agreement.
Coçu itlam
Office of
the Mayor
August 1,2013
Our File:11-5280-01100012013-1
Doc#:1513231.vl
The Honorable Mary Polak
Minister of Environment
P0 Box 9047
Stn.Prov.Govt.
Victoria BC V8W 9E2
Dear Minister Polak:
RE:Multi-Material BC Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Plan
I write to you on behalf of Council for the City of Coquitlam regarding the current status
of the Implementation of the Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP)Stewardship Plan
(Plan).This Plan was developed by Multi-Material BC (MMBC),acting as the agent fortheproducers,and is intended to comply with the requirements of the Provincial
Recycling Regulation (Regulation).The City certainly supports the Ministry’s direction
to apply the principles of Extended Producer Responsibility to require producers of PPP
to be responsible for the end-of-life management of these materials within the
residential sector.
The City has been very hopeful that a mutually beneficial partnership would develop
between the City and MMBC to bring the Ministry’s vision to fruition.However,as
documents related tothe implementation of the Plan are released by MMBC,Council isbecomingincreasinglyconcernedastothenatureoftheproposedpartnership.In
general,the approach
b
e
i
n
g
taken by MMBC appears to favour MMBC’s interests only,
and conflicts with
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
local government processes and policies.Given that the Cityhascommittedsignificantresourcesovermanyyearstodeveloparespectedand
comprehensive residentIal recycling program,it is of critical importance that any newprogramgoingforwardwillatleastmaintain,if not enhance,the high standards ofserviceourresidentsactivelysupportandhavecometoexpect.MMBC’s approach doesnotfacilitateaspiritofcooperation,and Council requests the assistance of your Office
and staff to help ensure a healthy process can be established respecting our shared
goals of efficiently and effectively improving the diversion of recyclables from the waste
stream,and increasing the recovery rates of PPP.
,Office of the Mayor I city of Coqulttam
3000 Guildford WaCoquItlam.cc vp vu
Offict 604927 3001 Fat 6049233015
wwwcoquitlam.ca
Page 2
August 1,2013
would like to outline only a few key issues to illustrate the nature of Council’s concern
with the current direction being taken by MMBC to implement the Plan:
Financial Incentives:The Regulation calls for producers to pay for the costs of
collecting and managing the products covered by the Plan.In this case,MMBC
has determined what it is prepared to pay collectors,including municipalities
who wish to become qualified as collectors.The proposed financial “incentives”
do not cover the City’s costs with respect to curbside,multi-family or depot
collection,let alone accounting for inflationary cost increases that are normally
included in the provision of this type of service.MMBC has declared these
“incentives”to be non-negotiable.This approach does not meet a fundamental
principle of the Plan,which is to have producers accept responsibility for the
costs of collecting and managing their products.Further,MMBC has unilaterally
determined the value of the incentives for the entire Province,without
adequate consultation or apparent consideration for regional or geographic
influences.
Proposed Service Agreements:There are numerous examples throughout the
draft Master Service Agreement and the draft Statements of Work where the
arbitrary,biased and prescriptive terms and conditions laid out in these
documents will put the City,or any municipality,at a level of risk that would far
outweigh any financial benefits that could be realized by accepting the
incentives offered.Some of the areas of particular concern to the City include
the provisions for substantial penalties for service level failures,unrealistic
expectations of contaminant limits,intrusive labour termination clauses,
exclusive rights in favour of MMBC with respect to confidentiality and
ownership of intellectual information,and overly prescriptive terms for
managing the service operations.
Taken collectively,these issues are not conducive to achieving a mutually beneficial
agreement between the City and MMRC.Moreover,if there is no agreement with theCity,Coquitlam Council is gravely concerned that no reputable collector would concede
to these conditions and this would inevitably lead to an unacceptable degradation of
the existing quality of service collection and a failure of the process that created this
program.
Page 3
August 1,2013
In closing,I would like to reiterate that Coquitlam Council strongly supports the goals
and intent of the Stewardship Plan,and wants to see it be successful.However,there
are significant issues outstanding,particularly with regard to the establishment of
financial incentives and the terms of any potential agreement between MMBC and the
City.Therefore,the assistance of your Ministry is urgently needed to resolve these
issues so the successful commencement of
t
h
i
s
program can be achieved by the
deadline set by the Ministry.
Y5urstruLy/7 /
Richard Stewart
Mayor
c -Hon.Premier Christy Clark
Lower Mainland Municipal Councils
Coquitlam Council members
City Manager
Deputy City Manager
City Clerk
General Manager Engineering and Public Works
Manager Environmental Services
City Solicitor
1185 ROLMAR CRES • COBBLE HILL, BC • V0R 1L4
TEL: 250-733-2213 • FAX: 250-733-2214 • EMAIL: INFO@CWMA.BC.CA
July 17, 2013
Ms. Glenda Gies
Multi Material BC
209 - 1730 West 2nd avenue,
Vancouver, BC V6J 1H6
email; glendagies@ggies.ca
Dear Glenda.
MMBC Packaging and Printed Paper proposal
The Coast Waste Management Association represents over 130 organizations involved in
the management of waste and recyclables in BC.
I am writing today regarding the MMBC Master Services Agreement, Statement of Work
for Depot Collection issued in June 2013.
During a recent conference call, many of our depot operator members expressed concern
with the terms that are proposed in this contract and the ability for them to continue to
provide the same, or any, level of recycling service to their communities.
Depots are unique in the services that they provide, especially in remote areas of our
province. Many depot operators believe that some of the conditions stipulated in the
contract are so onerous that it will greatly restrict their ability, or make it impossible, to
operate as they do today and negatively impact the communities that they serve.
Before proceeding further, we urge you to please contact all of them, listen and address
their concerns, with a view to reaching an acceptable resolution so that they can
function in a similar manner as they do now.
While CWMA seeks no role in the negotiations between service providers and MMBC, we
do feel that we need to ensure that the concerns expressed by a number of our members
are given due weight by MMBC and that every effort will be made to address them. If
CWMA can provide liaison or coordination services that expedite constructive dialogue
between MMBC and the concerned depots we stand ready to assist in a supportive
capacity at any time.
Yours sincerely.
Will Burrows
Executive Director
cc David Lawes – BC Ministry of Environment
Columbia institute 1
august 2013
Will the new industry-run recycling
system cause backsliding?
by Rob Duffy
m ulti-mate R ial b C an D lo C al Gove R nments
multi-mateRial bC anD loCal GoveRnments2
b.C. loCal GoveRnments have a long and largely successful track record of running programs
that get products like paper, glass and cans out of the garbage stream and into recycling. Reli-
able, easy to use curbside ‘blue box’ collection by municipalities has been central to the success
of recycling programs in many parts of the province.
in 2011, the province amended the regulations governing recycling and began a process of
shifting responsibility and jurisdiction over packaging and printed paper (PPP) recycling to
industry. to meet the requirements of the Regulation, the key industry players formed a not-for-
profit agency, multi-material british Columbia, (mmbC) to develop and implement a residential
stewardship plan. local governments and others are voicing concerns about how this new
system is being implemented and raising questions about whether it is capable of meeting the
stated goals of the bC Recycling Regulation.1 an august 2013 letter from the mayor and Council
of Port moody summarized many of these concerns, writing that “we do not feel the program, as
presented, is helpful in increasing diversion and lowering waste generation, nor do we feel that
it is respectful of the taxpayer who will continue to subsidize the packaging material life cycle.”2
1 For examples, see Capital Regional District, Report to environmental services Committee meeting of
Wednesday, July 24, 2013 (eRm 13-29); mike Clay, mayor of the City of Port moody, letter to the board Chair
and Waste Committee Chair of the Greater vancouver Regional District (GvRD), July 3, 2013; vincent lalonde,
letter from vincent lalonde, Chair of the metro vancouver Regional engineers advisory Committee (ReaC),
to mr. David lawes, Director of the environmental standards branch, ministry of environment , July 20, 2013;
CoastFm (nanaimo), “Recycling depot operators concerned about proposed mmbC contract,” 2013: http://
www.917coastfm.com/coast_news/news/v/local/227063/Recycling-depot-operators-concerned-about-
proposed-mmbC-contract ; Central Kootenay Regional District, “Recycling in the RDCK, changes on the
horizon,” media Release, July 19, 2013; “RDCK concerned about proposed recycling changes,” the nelson star,
July 19, 2013: http://www.nelsonstar.com/news/216193451.html ; Jeff ainge, Zero Waste Coordinator, City of
nanaimo, “Packaging and Printed Paper - Curbside Collection Financial incentive Report,” July 17, 2013; village
of tahsis, Regular Council minutes, July 18, 2013; Richard stewart, mayor of Coquitlam, bC, letter to minister
mary Polak, bC minister of environment, re: Re: multi-material bC Packaging and Printed Paper stewardship
Plan, august 1, 2013. an overview of mmbC offers can be found at http://multimaterialbc.ca/service-providers
2 mike Clay, mayor of the City of Port moody, letter to the board Chair and Waste Committee Chair of the
Greater vancouver Regional District (GvRD), July 3, 2013
P a R t 1
i ntroduction
moving toward
‘zero waste’ is
crucial to meeting
greenhouse gas
reduction targets,
conserving
resources
and reducing
environmental
impacts associated
with landfills and
incineration.
Columbia institute 3
>local Government Recycling Programs in b.C . .
in most large bC communities, local governments have been responsible for the creation of the
residential recycling collection programs. this usually involves a curbside collection service in dense
areas and a depot collection system in rural areas. .
local governments have a strong track record in implementing and managing these programs. several
municipalities in bC instituted the blue box curbside collection programs in the early 1990’s. the success of
these programs is based on a 20-30 year public investment and education on the part of local governments.
in the lower mainland, for example, metro vancouver established a goal of reducing per-capita solid
waste disposal by 50% by the year 2000. that goal was met and then exceeded. the current overall
waste diversion rate is 55% (i.e. 2 million tonnes) and metro vancouver has set a new goal of 70%
diversion by 2015. blue box residential curbside recycling programs have been central to lower
mainland municipalities meeting their waste reduction goals.
>extended Producer Responsibility and the shift
to an industry-run recycling system in b.C.
Canadian local and provincial governments are increasingly looking towards ‘zero waste’ strategies that
reduce and ultimately eliminate the flow of recyclable and reusable materials into municipal landfills
and incinerators. moving towards ‘zero waste’ is crucial to meeting greenhouse gas reduction targets,
conserving resources and reducing environmental impacts associated with landfills and incineration.
an important component of the move towards zero waste is ‘extended producer responsibility’ (ePR).
under this approach, the producers are meant to assume responsibility for the whole life cycles of their
products, all the way from production to ‘end of life’ collection, dismantling, recycling and material
recovery. as a policy approach, ePR is meant to provide incentives for product design and production
that emphasizes easier recycling, dismantling and repair, as well as reduced packaging.
P a R t 2
background
multi-mateRial bC anD loCal GoveRnments4
most ePR programs to date have been for items not part of traditional curbside recycling (for
example paint cans, electronics, beverage containers, etc) and instead use drop off depots as
collection points. However, the b.C. provincial government is in the process of trying to launch
an ePR program that targets a significant portion of what the public currently puts into their
blue box, including packaging and printed-paper.
in may 2011, the b.C. Government amended the Recycling Regulation (the Regulation) to include
packaging and printed paper (PPP) generated by the residential sector. this amendment shifts
financial and administrative responsibility for managing PPP from local governments to the
producers of packaging and printed paper.
to meet the requirements of the Regulation, the key industry players formed a not-for-profit
agency, multi-material british Columbia, (mmbC) to develop and implement a residential steward-
ship plan for PPP by may 2014. this transfer of responsibility is intended to improve the recovery
of PPP in bC as well as incent producers of PPP to incorporate environmental considerations
into the design of their products. the ultimate goal is to generate less packaging and to have
packaging that is more easily re-used and recycled.
in response to these changes, the ubCm established a Packaging and Printed Paper Working
Group to act as a forum for discussing local government issues with producers, identify relevant
issues that may require negotiating with industry and propose recommendations for resolv-
ing potential issues. the ubCm working group released a policy paper in august 2012 which
recommended, among other things, that local governments be given right of first refusal for
providing PPP collection services. this request was respected by mmbC in the creation of the
stewardship plan.
in april 2013 the Province approved the mmbC stewardship plan. under the plan, mmbC splits the
delivery of the stewardship program into two elements: PPP collection services (from residential
and multi-family households and depots) and PPP processing services.
mmbC has offered local governments that were providing residential PPP curbside collection
services in november 2012 a financial incentive to continue providing PPP curbside collection
after may 2014. local governments who do not currently offer curbside are also being offered
the incentive, e.g. smithers and terrace.
in addition, mmbC has offered a collection incentive to local governments and qualified private
companies and not-for-profit organizations to provide collection of PPP from multi-family build-
ings and to operate depots for accepting PPP from residents. there are separate incentives for
curbside and depot collection as well as top-up allowances for education and administration.
the annual payment amounts are fixed for three years.
Post-collection activities, including transportation, processing and marketing of recyclable
materials, will be contracted by mmbC through a competitive Request-For-Proposals process.
metro vancouver
established a
goal of reducing
per-capita solid
waste disposal
by 50% by
the year 2000.
that goal was
met and then
exceeded. the
current overall
waste diversion
rate is 55% (i.e. 2
million tonnes)
and metro
vancouver has
set a new goal
of 70% diversion
by 2015.2013 actual2015 Goal2000 Goal50%
55%
70%
Columbia institute 5
Despite their lengthy experience running recycling programs, local governments have had only limited
input in the process of making b.C.’s new recycling regulations. While b.C. local governments agree
in principle that producers should assume more of the costs associated with waste management
and recycling, they are not convinced that system being put forward by mmbC can do this fairly and
effectively. in particular, local governments and other observers are raising concerns about the low
financial incentives, problematic mmbC contract clauses and the limited, unilateral ‘negotiation’ process
with mmbC.3 as one bC mayor wrote in a letter to the bC environment minister, “the approach being
taken by mmbC appears to favour mmbC’s interests only, and conflicts with existing local government
processes and policies.” 4 2
>one sided process, limited options
Curbside recycling for single-family households
mmbC’s options for integrating existing local government paper and packaging collection servi-
ces are non-negotiable and amount to essentially “a take-it-or-leave-it offer” that municipalities
are required to individually commit to or reject by september 16, 2013. many municipalities are
concerned by the lack of consultation, the terms of the offers and the limited time frame in which
to make a decision on a matter of such importance.5
there are three core options offered by mmbC. option one is municipalities contracting their in-house
collection services to mmbC, which unilaterally sets “market clearing prices” for materials and/or
contract terms and conditions. mmbC ‘financial incentives’ under this option may not be sufficient to
3 Richard stewart, mayor of Coquitlam, bC, letter to minister mary Polak, bC minister of environment, re: Re: multi-
material bC Packaging and Printed Paper stewardship Plan, august 1, 2013; Capital Regional District, Report to
environmental services Committee meeting of Wednesday, July 24, 2013 (eRm 13-29); mike Clay, mayor of the City of
Port moody, letter to the board Chair and Waste Committee Chair of the Greater vancouver Regional District (GvRD),
July 3, 2013
4 Richard stewart, mayor of Coquitlam, bC, letter to minister mary Polak, bC minister of environment, re: Re: multi-
material bC Packaging and Printed Paper stewardship Plan, august 1, 2013
5 ibid.
P a R t 3
Concerns over the new recycling
system and its implementation
multi-mateRial bC anD loCal GoveRnments6
cover the actual cost of running recycling programs and do not allow local governments to charge
fees. this would likely lead either to service reductions or municipalities running programs at a loss.
option two involves a municipality withdrawing from PPP collections and transitioning control
and responsibility for recycling over to mmbC (and potentially taking a loss on capital and program
development investments in the existing municipal system).
the third option is essentially the status quo; municipalities continue their programs without mmbC
involvement. However, the third option puts local governments in the politically challenging position
of appearing to ‘refuse’ cash incentives (even if these ‘incentives’ are in reality not sufficient to maintain
effective recycling programs). Given the apparent inadequacy of mmbC pricing and the loss of municipal
revenue from resale of recyclable materials, the third option could make sense for some municipal
programs over the longer term. However it could be politically difficult to be seen ‘refusing cash’ from
mmbC, given the challenging fiscal environment faced by bC local governments.
multi-family building recycling
under the new system, mmbC essentially has complete control over how multi-family residential
recycling is administered. it is not required to provide municipalities a ‘right of first refusal’, as with
curbside recycling. this may mean that the mmbC program will take over all multi-building collection,
even if a municipality is currently providing that pick up.
a local government can accept or decline the multi-family building incentive. if it accepts, mmbC “will
assess application against collector standards” that are self-determined by mmbC. unfortunately, this
offers no guarantee that successful municipal programs will continue.
Recycling Depots
local governments that want to provide depot collection can also accept or decline the financial
incentive being offered. if a municipality accepts, mmbC will then work with a collector to provide
the depot service. in a similar fashion to multi-family collection, mmbC will “assess application against
collector standards.”
mmbC’s financial incentives for depots are offered to local governments, non-profit groups and private
operators. However, some staff and current depot operators are concerned as mmbC’s financial incen-
tives for depots are far below cost recovery, and mmbC will not allow local governments to charge for
collecting PPP materials. 613
i t is unclear what mmbC will do if no municipalities accept these depot incentives. in their
stewardship plan, which was approved by the ministry, mmbC committed to provide service
levels according to the stewardship agencies of bC (sabC) depot service standards. sabC is not
expected to publish the standards until september 2013 - likely after or close to the deadline for
a muncipal response to mmbC offers - resulting in lack of clarity and uncertainty about the level
of PPP collection services in areas with depots.
6 “Recycling depot operators concerned about proposed mmbC contract,” CoastFm (nanaimo), 2013: http://
www.917coastfm.com/coast_news/news/v/local/227063/Recycling-depot-operators-concerned-about-proposed-
mmbC-contract; village of tahsis, Regular Council minutes, July 18, 2013
Columbia institute 7
both private and non-profit depot operators across bC have expressed concern about the low
financial incentives and uncertainties to ministry staff and mmbC, and some smaller and rural
communities are concerned that mmbC depot requirements will amount to a form of cost down-
loading onto local governments.714
it is also worth noting that some non-profit depots and recycling processors perform important
social service and economic development functions by providing employment for people with
developmental disabilities and other employment barriers. this factor is given little weight in the
introduction of the new regulations, and there is no guarantee that these important social capital
programs will continue under mmbC governance.
>inadequate financial incentives don’t cover program costs
many local governments are concerned that the non-negotiable financial terms offered by mmbC
are not sufficient to address the real costs of delivering effective collection services. Having a
process whereby mmbC sets the ‘market clearing prices’ being offered to local governments for
materials may even place the agency in a conflict of interest. mmbC’s incentives are based on
self-determination of ‘market clearing prices,’ which may not match the actual costs incurred
by collection services. it should be noted that mmbC has a structural imperative to pay as little
as possible for material, both to keep costs down for industry and also to maximize revenue on
resale of material collected through the program. When prices don’t match actual program, local
governments could be left to pick up the tab for the remainder. in effect, local governments could
end up subsidizing materials collection for mmbC.
Concerns about pricing and incentives are wide ranging. according to the metro vancouver
Regional engineers advisory Committee, “mmbC’s overall contract and pricing methodology are
so problematic that a clause-by-clause negotiation would not be the best way to reach agree-
ment, and could potentially be long, expensive, and adversarial.”815 staff at the Capital Regional
District similarly note that the way mmbC calculates households does not address the full costs of
collection programs, and that the mmbC definition for single-family dwellings excludes secondary
suites, which reduces the mmbC’s incentive payments to the regional district.916
several communities have also indicated that mmbC ‘top-up allowances’ for education and admin-
istration are below the current local government costs, and that mmbC reporting requirements
will in fact generate new administrative expenses.107
echoing these concerns, the mayor of Port moody authored correspondence stating that the mmbC
offer would not cover the costs of continuing that city’s highly successful recycling program, which
7 village of tahsis, Regular Council minutes, July 18, 2013; “RDCK concerned about proposed recycling changes,” the
nelson star, July 19, 2013
8 vincent lalonde, letter from vincent lalonde, Chair of the metro vancouver Regional engineers advisory Committee
(ReaC), to mr. David lawes, Director of the environmental standards branch, ministry of environment , July 20, 2013
9 Capital Regional District, Report to environmental services Committee meeting of Wednesday, July 24, 2013 (eRm
13-29)
10 see for example Capital Regional District, Report to environmental services Committee meeting of Wednesday, July
24, 2013 (eRm 13-29)
mmbC’s options
for integrating
existing local
government paper
and packaging
collection services
are non-negotiable
and amount to
essentially a “take-
it-or-leave-it” offer
that municipalities
are required
to individually
commit to or reject.
multi-mateRial bC anD loCal GoveRnments8
led the province by raising local recycling rates from 40% in 2006 to 75% in 2011. according to
the mayor, “…it appears that mmbC has offered a financial incentive of between 50 and 60% of
what they themselves have identified as the ‘average program costs.”118
in addition, municipalities have identified financial concerns regarding one-sided termination
allowances and lack of inflationary cost accommodation.
the extent of response about mmbC’s offers indicate not only concerns about integrating local
government programs into the new system, but raise concerns about whether mmbC is willing to
allocate enough funding for contractors– public or private – to provide effective services.
mmbC is governed by a board of directors drawn from large private sector corporations, whose
interests and priorities do not necessarily coincide with the desire of local governments and citizens
for effective, convenient recycling programs.129 Without greater public oversight and ongoing
consultation, the core imperative for an industry run organization like mmbC is likely to be cutting
costs, rather than cutting the amount of waste products going to landfills or maximizing recycling.
many b.C. municipalities are concerned that could lead to backsliding in recycling programs,
undermining years of public investment and progress in waste reduction. local governments are
concerned that they have invested significant resources into their waste and recycling programs
and that their citizens rely on high standards.
>o ther Contract Concerns
unilateral right to terminate or amend contracts
mmbC’s master services agreement and statements of Work listed online, give mmbC sweeping
rights to terminate or amend their contracts. a clause such as this is very difficult for local govern-
ments to support. Communities already receiving curbside collection service have come to depend
on reliable services and these clauses undermine that stability and certainty.
Contamination Penalties
onerous financial penalties for contamination are one of the biggest financial risks for local governments
in the mmbC offers. in the context of recycling, contamination occurs when unacceptable material is
placed in a recycling container or bin. mmbC requires that the contamination rate must not be over 3%,
or contractors can face penalties of up to $5,000 per load. several communities have expressed concern
about this point, saying that established programs regularly go over a 3% contamination rate, and
that 3% may not be a realistic objective. the threat of high penalties clawing back already inadequate
mmbC financial incentives has been a significant concern for some local governments.13 this is one
of the primary reasons the City of Prince George rejected mmbC’s offer, with city staff estimating that
the costs of contamination penalties could amount to $2 million and potentially exceed the amount
provided by mmbC as a financial incentive for a recycling program.14
11 supra note 3,letter to the board Chair and Waste Committee Chair of the Greater vancouver Regional District (GvRD)
12 the initial three member mmbC board is comprised of the vice President of unilever Canada, a vice President from
loblaw Companies, ltd and an internal mmbC managing director.
Columbia institute 9
undermining effective blue box programs?
the structure and funding model of the new recycling system also raises concerns about the continued
viability of blue box programs. PPP is currently collected by local governments across b.C. at the expense
of local governments, who own the materials after pick up. local governments sell these materials
to subsidize recycling collection and education. the revenue from more valuable, readily recyclable
materials is important to the financial viability of blue box programs, which also often collect materials
with less resale potential and provide revenue for recycling education, an important component of
effective recycling programs.
under the new system, mmbC will have control over collection, and also full ownership of valuable
resources (like newsprint) that are currently managed by municipalities. Producers will not only be
financially responsible for the costs of managing these products, but will also be physically responsible
for the operational infrastructure related to collection of them. there are concerns that without effective
regulation and oversight, mmbC’s focus on minimizing recycling collection and processing costs for
industry will result in less effective recycling services for the public.
For example, mmbC is requesting that glass be separated from paper and packaging in curbside
programs. mmbC is allowing for a transition period of up to 18 months for glass, but this will be a major
change for recycling pick up in many cities. local governments that currently collect glass at curbside
have major concerns with the exclusion of glass, including:15110
1. that glass will continue to be put in the blue box and drive up contamination rates
2. that glass will move from the blue box to the garbage bin, where it will be landfilled and
result in financial and penalties for local governments in jurisdictions with materials bans at
their landfills
3. that it will result in the back-slipping of programs that have successfully diverted recyclable
materials.
>Problems meeting Recycling Regulation goals
targets unclear
local governments have identified concerns over the 75% recovery rate identified within the
Regulation. mmbC must implement their program by may 2014 and must reach a 75% recovery
rate of PPP within a reasonable time frame. However, the meaning of the recovery rate goal of
75% is unclear. neither the Regulations nor mmbC’s stewardship plan explain if the 75% is to be
applied to the aggregate of all materials or is required for all individual types of materials. Further,
14 Charelle evelyn, “City turns down recycling offer,” Prince George Citizen, august 27, 2013: http://
www.princegeorgecitizen.com/article/20130827/PRinCeGeoRGe0101/308279993/0/princegeorge/
city-turns-down-recycling-offer
15 see for example City of abbotsford, “Provincial Packaging and Printed Paper Recycling Program,” Council Report no.
enG 41-2013 https://abbotsford.civicweb.net/Documents/DocumentDisplay.aspx?iD=34936
multi-mateRial bC anD loCal GoveRnments10
if the 75% target applies to the aggregate, it is not known if this will be calculated by weight or
by volume.16 111
a ubCm policy paper from 2012 suggests that recycling rates should “focus on specific material
categories as opposed to overall packaging composite,” and that it is important that regardless
of rates, “the program should cover all areas that local governments are currently servicing.”17 112
no guarantees of reduced packaging
municipalities and other commentators have also raised concerns that the design of the program
is not sufficient to realize intended goals of reducing product packaging. b.C.’s ePR model for
products and packaging is not based on individual producer responsibility. instead, the steward-
ship agency (mmbC) becomes the regulated party. this reduces the incentive for companies to
use less packaging – one of the purported goals of ePR programs.
as one expert commentator has noted, “over the past five years, british Columbians have paid
almost $500-million in eco-fees on various products that do nothing to drive innovation, efficiencies
or recycling. Without incorporating recycling costs directly into the price of products, stewards are
neither motivated nor encouraged to find innovative ways to reduce both waste and costs.”18113
bC local governments are aware of this danger, and have called for the ministry to intervene in
the negotiations and strengthen regulations to ensure that any stewardship program actually has
the objective of reducing packaging.19114
not enough focus on industrial, commercial
and institutional (iCi) recycling
several local governments have identified concerns over the product stewardship program’s focus
on residential collection rather than industrial, commercial and institutional (iCi) collection.20
115 the
iCi sector generates more printed paper and packaging than the residential sector and improving
iCi diversion could have more impact on waste reduction in b.C. this is especially the case given
that much of mmbC’s initial focus is on transferring administrative control over existing residential
services rather than expanding the actual scope and scale of recycling in b.C.
16 ubCm policy paper #2, “Packaging and Printed Paper Product stewardship”, ubCm 2012 Convention, september 23,
2012, page 6
17 ibid.
18 Rob Cook, “ePR: ontario versus british Columbia; ontario suddenly jumps ahead,” solid Waste and Recycling, June
2013: www.solidwastemag.com/news/epr-ontario-versus-british-columbia/1002482762/
19 ubCm policy paper #2, “Packaging and Printed Paper Product stewardship”, ubCm 2012 Convention, september 23,
2012, page 4
20 supra note 15
Columbia institute 11
local governments have led the way on recycling in bC, and most support the principles of
expanded recycling, zero waste, reduced packaging and producers bearing responsibility for the
full life-cycle of their products. However, many are clearly concerned about the structure and
implementation of b.C.’s new recycling system, and whether it will effectively move towards these
goals and respect the experience and investments of municipalities and offer them a fair deal.
limited consultation, coupled with a problematic pricing structure and seemingly one-sided terms
and conditions, has left many local governments concerned about their ability to participate in
the new system and maintain historic levels of service, much less expand and improve recycling.
municipalities and other observers have also pointed to a lack of clarity about targets and how they
will be met, along with concerns that mmbC is out of sync with the Recycling Regulation’s stated
objectives of applying economic pressure on the producers to encourage better recovery rates and
lower volumes of printed paper and packaging. these concerns have been compounded by the
short time frame municipalities have been given to evaluate and accept or reject mmbC’s offers.
a number of municipalities and municipal bodies are calling on the Province to intervene, and
institute a process that is collaborative with local governments.21
116 the result could be more effective
recycling services for b.C. residents, without imposing new costs and risks for municipalities.
21 Richard stewart, mayor of Coquitlam, bC, letter to minister mary Polak, bC minister of environment, re: Re: multi-
material bC Packaging and Printed Paper stewardship Plan, august 1, 2013; District of mission, Highlights of the
Regular Council meeting, august 6, 2013: http://www.mission.ca/wp-content/uploads/Highlights-2013-08-06.pdf;
vincent lalonde, letter from vincent lalonde, Chair of the metro vancouver Regional engineers advisory Committee
(ReaC), to mr. David lawes, Director of the environmental standards branch, ministry of environment , July 20, 2013
P a R t 4
Conclusion
multi-mateRial bC anD loCal GoveRnments12
the Columbia institute fosters individual and organizational
leadership for inclusive, sustainable communities. We nurture
strong local leadership, and support community leaders with
cutting-edge research on emerging issues through our Centre
for Civic Governance.
www.columbiainstitute.ca
1200 – 1166 alberni street
vancouver, b.C. v6e 3Z3
604.408.2500
info@columbiainstitute.ca
Interoffice
Memorandum
TO: MAYOR & COUNCIL
FROM: DAVID POLLOCK, MUNICIPAL ENGINEER
SUBJECT: CURBSIDE AND DEPOT RECYCLING - PACKAGING & PRINTED PAPER (PPP) UDPATE
DATE: AUGUST 09, 2013
CC: JIM RULE, FRANK QUINN, KIM DAY
Council is aware of the adoption of a Stewardship Plan for Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP)
developed by Multi-Materials British Columbia (MMBC) and approved by the Province in April 2013.
Written and verbal staff reports have been brought to Council and MMBC made a presentation to
Committee of the Whole in February 2013.
The Stewardship Plan and proposed implementation has been extensively reviewed by local
governments both in Metro Vancouver and throughout the Province. While Metro Vancouver and its
member municipalities fully support the principles of Extended Producer Responsibilities (EPR) and
recognize the importance of having the Stewardship Plan implemented to further the goals of
increased recycling and diversion out of the solid waste stream, there are a number of significant
concerns about the Stewardship Plan, particularly the lack of detail with respect to service levels,
multi-family collection, the lack of a transition plan and overall implementation.
The Plan has three basic components:
1. Collection of recyclables – curbside as well as multi-family.
2. Depot
3. Processing
MMBC have set a deadline of September 16, 2013 for local governments to indicate whether or not
they wish to participate in the curbside collection and has issued pricing information and sample
contract documents to all local governments. There are a number of areas of concern pertaining to
MMBC’s contractual approach including the price per tonne, penalties for contamination, restrictive
clauses on labour and personnel, termination, and accountability.
Staff from Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities have had extensive dialogue with MMBC
albeit with little success. The Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC) sent a letter to the
Ministry of Environment expressing concerns on the Stewardship Plan and its implications for local
governments; in addition, the Metro Vancouver municipalities collectively sought a legal opinion on
the MMBC contractual approach. Copies of both documents are attached for perusal. The main
points of the correspondence are:
1. While MMBC has the legal authority to act in accordance with the Provincially approved plan
it cannot use the plan implementation process to expand its rights under the plan
2. MMBC should not set contractual terms unilaterally
3. Local government have significant concern around the market-clearing price (the annual per
household contribution to cover curbside collection) and the terms of an agreement between
local governments and the producers
4. MMBC is in a conflict of interest and shouldn’t set costs
5. Principles of pricing should be established rather than simply setting prices
6. Prices are affected by whatever level of service is required
7. MMBC should not have the authority to demand local governments accept MMBC contract
terms as a condition of participating in the MMBC PPP system – rather it should be a
negotiated settlement between all parties.
8. The timeline for local governments to accept MMBC’s proposal for curbside collection is too
short to have full understanding and resolution of the local government concerns.
Representatives from Metro Vancouver and member municipalities have recently met with MOE staff
as well as a joint meeting with MOE and MMBC, expressing concern around the issues as stated
above. Local government continue to promote working collaboratively to discuss alternatives that
are conducive to meeting MMBC’s obligations by their May 2014 deadline, while satisfying the local
government concerns, including the implementation of a viable transition plan. There has been no
formal response to the recommendation put forth by local governments to date.
It is staff’s intention to continue to gather information on the MMBC plan and implementation and
bring a report forward on September 09, 2013 for Council’s consideration.
David Pollock
Municipal Engineer
Engineering Department
DP:dp
Att: Letter to MOE from MV REAC Chair
Legal Opinion from Dentons Canada LLP
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: February 04, 2013
and Members of Council FILE NO: E06-017-005
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Council Workshop
SUBJECT: Packaging and Printed Paper Recycling in British Columbia - Extended Producer
Responsibility Program
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In May 2011 the BC Recycling Regulation was amended to include the collection and recycling of
Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP) which obligates the industry to assume Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR) role for the materials defined as PPP. A not-for-profit agency, Multi-Material
British Columbia (MMBC) was established to develop a Stewardship Plan for PPP to comply with the
Provincial regulation and a Stewardship Plan for PPP was subsequently prepared and submitted to
the Province on November 19, 2012 with the intent of commencing the PPP program
implementation in May 2014.
The Stewardship Plan addresses the collection, post-collection, processing and commodity
marketing of PPP throughout BC with the goal of increasing the PPP recycling rate from the current
estimated rate of 50-57% to 75%.
Recycling services in the District, both collection and processing are currently provided by Ridge
Meadows Recycling Society (RMRS) under a partnership agreement with the District. The RMRS also
operates a recycling depot adjacent to the Metro Vancouver Transfer Station.
A representative from MMBC is scheduled to present to Council on February 18, 2013.
The intent of this report is to provide some background on the proposed PPP Stewardship Plan
prepared by MMBC and potential implications or changes to the District.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
THAT the report “Packaging and Printed Paper Recycling in British Columbia - Extended Producer
Responsibility Program” be received for information.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The BC Recycling Regulation falls under the Environment Management Act and in May 2011 was
amended to include the collection and recycling of Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP) which
obligates the industry to assume Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) role for the materials
defined as PPP. A not-for-profit agency, Multi-Material British Columbia (MMBC) was established to
develop a Stewardship Plan for PPP to comply with the Provincial regulation.
A PPP Stewardship Plan was subsequently prepared and submitted to the Province on November 19,
2012 with the intent of commencing implementation of the PPP program in May 2014.
Current Recycling System in the District
The RMRS currently provides multi-stream curbside collection of recyclable materials to
approximately 23,000 single-family homes, approximately 5,500 multi-family apartment units as well
as 178 commercial businesses. Residents also have the option of dropping recyclable materials off
at the Depot. Approximately 5,000 tonnes of PPP materials are processed by RMRS in all the
operations which equates to approximately 45% of the total annual recyclable tonnage.
The trucks collect recycling once a week and deliver the materials to the Recycling Depot on River
Road where they are sorted and processed before being sold as commodities to businesses such as
ABC Recycling for aluminum, Canadian Fibre for cardboard as well a number of others. Recyclable
materials in District parks and streets are collected by District staff and brought to the Recycling
Depot for processing.
Multi-Material British Columbia (MMBC)
MMBC is a not-for-profit agency established under the BC Society Act formed to develop, submit and
implement a Stewardship Plan for PPP in BC, governed by a Board of Directors comprised of the
Retail Council of Canada, the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers, the Canadian
Restaurant and Foodservices Canada, the Food and Consumer Products of Canada, Loblaw
Company Limited, McCain Foods, Overwaitea Food Group and Tim Hortons.
The Stewardship Plan addresses the collection, post-collection, processing and commodity
marketing of PPP throughout BC with the goal of increasing the PPP recycling rate from the current
estimated rate of 50-57% to 75%.
MMBC Stewardship Plan
MMBC submitted their proposed Stewardship Plan for all of BC to the Province on November 19,
2012, a copy of which is attached in Appendix A. There are a number of components to the plan:
collection, post-collection and processing, and streetscapes. Each section will be addressed
individually.
Collection
MMBC proposes to enter into financial agreements with qualified collectors for a single-family
or multi-family curbside PPP recyclables program. The Stewardship Plan states that where a
municipality, Regional District or First Nation currently operates a single-family or multi-family
curbside PPP recyclables program they will have the first refusal on whether they will continue
the recycling collection program, or not. Should the local government decline then they will be
removed from any further participation in the collection process and MMBC will tender the
collection services to other contractors. Upon expiration and renewal of the recycling
collection contracts local governments would have the opportunity to compete for the contract
but not exclusively.
A financial incentive or Market Clearing Price (MCP) will be offered to the local government or
qualified contractor, the value of which is unknown at this time. MMBC is currently
researching PPP collections systems costs to develop an appropriate MCP.
The Stewardship Plan addresses residential PPP only, and the MCP will be based upon that
only. If a local government chooses to provide enhanced services it would do so at its own
cost.
The level of service is a concern as the Stewardship Plan states that the collection will be no
more than weekly, no less frequently than bi-weekly. The District currently collects on a weekly
schedule and it is hoped that the proposed MCP when established reflects the current level of
service.
Post-Collection and Processing
MMBC will contract directly with qualified contractors or organizations for post-collection and
processing including receiving PPP from collection vehicles; collecting from depots where
required; handling and sorting the materials; processing the recyclables or sending them to
downstream processors, marketing the processed, managing the residual materials and
reporting to MMBC on the quantities received and marketed.
In the District the RMRS currently operates the Recycling Depot in Albion at which they collect
and process the recyclable materials for sale to various commodity markets.
Unlike the curbside collection, local governments are not guaranteed first right of refusal – any
qualified contractors will be eligible to open up a post-collection and processing facility in the
District. However, assuming the District & RMRS are successful in securing the curbside PPP
collection the availability of local PPP recyclables feedstock for other contractors would be
extremely limited unless they contracted to process PPP recyclables from outside the District.
An as–yet undetermined MCP will be offered by MMBC to any qualified depot operator,
including local governments but the MCP is only available for residential PPP recyclables. Any
Industrial, commercial, institutional (ICI) PPP tonnage would be deducted by applying a
reducing factor to the total PPP processed. Processors will be paid for processing based upon
dollars per tonne marketed and dollars per tonne disposed to a maximum percentage of
revenue.
MMBC would receive the commodity revenue but the approved processor will be able to retain
a portion of the revenue above the specified floor price.
On January 18, 2013 MMBC issued a Request for Expression of Interest (REOI) for post-
collection services and the District in conjunction with RMRS will be submitting confirmation of
our intent to seek selection as a qualified party to then respond to a Request for Proposal
(RFP).
Streetscapes
For public areas such as parks and streets that meet the criteria for reasonable access MMBC
will offer a financial incentive or MCP – as for the curbside collection local governments will
have the right of first refusal, after which MMBC would tender the streetscape collection to
qualified contractors. Should the streetscapes collection be issued to a contractor then MMBC
and the local government would have to reach agreement on the management of the garbage
component of the streetscape system.
MMBC has confirmed that the District meets the population and density thresholds to be
eligible for streetscape collection. It is considered likely that festivals in municipal parks would
be eligible. A pilot project will be undertaken to determine the MCP for streetscape.
It is noted that at this time there are a number of unknowns within the Stewardship Plan, such as the
collector/processor relationship, the actual MCP and service levels and how multi-family households
will be addressed.
Timelines
MMBC has indicated the following timeline for tasks, pending approval of the Stewardship Plan itself.
Quarter One, 2013:
1. Undertake research into PPP collection system costs to develop MCP financial
incentives
2. Develop collector and processor qualification standards
3. Issue the REOI fir primary processors
Quarter Two, 2013:
1. Offer MCP to collectors
2. Qualify curbside, multi-family and depot collectors
3. Implement the FRP for primary processors
Quarter Three, 2013:
1. Identify qualified processors
Quarter Four, 2013:
1. Calculate producer fees
The planned implementation date for the program is May 19, 2014.
b) Desired Outcome(s):
The goal of the PPP Stewardship Plan is to facilitate the increased diversion of recyclables from the
currently estimated 50-57% up to 75% in a reasonable time frame.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The goal of the PPP Plan is in alignment with the District’s goals of sustainability.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Assuming that RMRS secures the curbside collection and is approved as a processor there should be
little difference to the typical customer. The one caveat is the level of service funded – currently the
curbside collection is weekly, but the MCP may reflect a bi-weekly pickup and that may be
considered a negative result.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
The RMRS has an excellent working partnership with the District and the proposed PPP changes are
not seen as having any impact on that relationship. The Operations Department will continue to
manage the RMRS vehicle fleet and the Engineering Department will continue to liaise with MRMS
on the management of the recycling functions.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The intent of the PPP Stewardship Plan is that the proposed MCP will cover the cost of the collection
and processing so there should potentially be a reduction in the annual costs on the District’s
residential property taxes but as previously stated the value of the proposed MCP is still under
review. The PPP Stewardship Plan only addresses residential PPP which represents some 45% of
the total annual recyclable tonnage processed through the RMRS depot so there will still be costs
attributable to the recycling function.
g) Alternatives:
The District and RMRS have the option not to participate in the PPP Stewardship Program.
CONCLUSIONS:
Under the BC Recycling Regulation MMBC will assume the responsibility for residential PPP collection
and processing throughout BC. The general principle of the PPP Stewardship Plan is supportable in
that it promotes the increased diversion of residential recyclable materials but there are a number of
details that are still unknown at this time. Local governments will continue to work with MMBC to
clarify the outstanding issues such as the values of the various MCPs, the levels of service, issues
around multi-family collection, and how the plan may be adjusted if required at some point(s) in the
future.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: David Pollock PEng,
Municipal Engineer
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn PEng. MBA,
General Manager, PW&DS
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
DP/dp
APPENDIX A
MMBC
Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Plan
November 19, 2012